What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Hot Stove - 2009 Edition (2 Viewers)

Brandon Jones DFAed by the Braves in favor of Eric Hinske.

Jones was pretty highly regarded a few years ago but his development stalled. He just turned 26 so he's not a prospect anymore but I suspect there are worse players on some 40 man rosters.

 
They non-tendered Garko in December.Pushing Ishikawa and Velez to bench roles is addition by subtraction.
ah, okay then. I know Garko had a rough stay in SF, but dang that guys still young, and getting paid next to nothing, I would think they may have wanted to try him out a bit more then what they did. Huff is basically an older (albeit a bit more proven) Garko :thumbup:
Garko was arbitration eligible so he would have gotten a raise, but he still would have been cheaper than what they're going to pay Huff.Sabean probably thinks Huff is grittier or something :bag: He's not a terrible signing but I really don't understand the reasoning behind acquiring Garko and then releasing him after 120 PAs in SF.
I like the Huff signing. Anything that Sabean can do to bring in more offense is a good thing.
 
They non-tendered Garko in December.Pushing Ishikawa and Velez to bench roles is addition by subtraction.
ah, okay then. I know Garko had a rough stay in SF, but dang that guys still young, and getting paid next to nothing, I would think they may have wanted to try him out a bit more then what they did. Huff is basically an older (albeit a bit more proven) Garko :shrug:
Garko was arbitration eligible so he would have gotten a raise, but he still would have been cheaper than what they're going to pay Huff.Sabean probably thinks Huff is grittier or something :cry: He's not a terrible signing but I really don't understand the reasoning behind acquiring Garko and then releasing him after 120 PAs in SF.
I like the Huff signing. Anything that Sabean can do to bring in more offense is a good thing.
Huff, quite frankly, sucks. He's had one above average year over the past 5 and he was abysmal last year. And his glove has always sucked.Garko had a tough time of it last year, but I'd take the cheaper 29 year old as a better gamble to rebound then the more expensive 33 year old. I definitely don't see how Huff is much of an upgrade offensively, other then having a little more pop. He's not really a good hitter. Doesn't really make a lot of sense to me but much of what Sabean has done doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They non-tendered Garko in December.Pushing Ishikawa and Velez to bench roles is addition by subtraction.
ah, okay then. I know Garko had a rough stay in SF, but dang that guys still young, and getting paid next to nothing, I would think they may have wanted to try him out a bit more then what they did. Huff is basically an older (albeit a bit more proven) Garko :shock:
Garko was arbitration eligible so he would have gotten a raise, but he still would have been cheaper than what they're going to pay Huff.Sabean probably thinks Huff is grittier or something :bag: He's not a terrible signing but I really don't understand the reasoning behind acquiring Garko and then releasing him after 120 PAs in SF.
I like the Huff signing. Anything that Sabean can do to bring in more offense is a good thing.
Huff, quite frankly, sucks. He's had one above average year over the past 5 and he was abysmal last year. And his glove has always sucked.Garko had a tough time of it last year, but I'd take the cheaper 29 year old as a better gamble to rebound then the more expensive 33 year old. I definitely don't see how Huff is much of an upgrade offensively, other then having a little more pop. He's not really a good hitter. Doesn't really make a lot of sense to me but much of what Sabean has done doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Fair to say he adds a solid veteran presence to a team with some very young guys though? I think it is a good thing. We'll see. I'm not saying Sabean is a genius. But I think Huff will be good for that clubhouse.
 
Adam LaRoche to D-Backs for one year. Didn't he turn down a 2 years deal from the Giants? I think I'd rather have him than Huff at this point.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huff, quite frankly, sucks. He's had one above average year over the past 5 and he was abysmal last year. And his glove has always sucked.Garko had a tough time of it last year, but I'd take the cheaper 29 year old as a better gamble to rebound then the more expensive 33 year old. I definitely don't see how Huff is much of an upgrade offensively, other then having a little more pop. He's not really a good hitter. Doesn't really make a lot of sense to me but much of what Sabean has done doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Fair to say he adds a solid veteran presence to a team with some very young guys though? I think it is a good thing. We'll see. I'm not saying Sabean is a genius. But I think Huff will be good for that clubhouse.
It's hard for me to say who is a leader or not, since I'm obviously not in the clubhouse. The guy might be loved by his team mates where ever he goes. That's not the type of stuff we as fans usually are aware of.But I'm pretty sure I remember him getting on the radio (apparently drunk) and calling Baltimore a sh*tty town or something and saying that studying film of opposing pitchers was "bullsh*t", basically mocking his team mates for doing it. Not to mention, he was criticized for phoning it in the past few seasons with the O's, so I'm not sure his work ethic/lead by example skills are really up there. As a Yankee fan, I would see quotes from him on a regular basis after they played the O's and he mostly seemed like a whiner to me.So, I don't know if his team mates consider him a leader (they all might love him for all I know) and I have no doubt that he was led to the slaughter a little bit by some radio shock jocks, but no, he doesn't really seem like a veteran leader to me. He's not a cancer or anything, but I think if I was specifically looking for vet leadership for a young team, I'd probably look elsewhere. Just because a guy is a veteran, doesn't automatically give him veteran leadership skills.ETA: Someone above said that adding Huff is addition by subtraction because it move Ishikawa and Velez to the bench (and probably Fred Lewis). While that's probably true for Velez (though I doubt he would have been a starter anyway, so I don't think the Huff signing impact him too much), I don't see how it's true for Ishikawa. The projections I'm seeing have both hitters in the same area OPS wise, but Ishikawa's defense is so far superior to Huff's that I would bet his defense (and perhaps base running) would make him the clearly more valuable player. Huff is basically going to have to hit like he did in 2008 for this to make sense - which he definitely could but considering that his 2008 year seems like an outlier over the past 5, I don't know if it's a great bet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still cant believe Damon has so little interest on the market. And I think the Yankees are crazy not resigning him. They can get him real cheap probably (like 1yr, $7m). Sure hes terrible in the field but his bat makes up for it. Not only that when Johnson inevitably gets hurt they can then slide Damon to DH and play Gardner in LF anyway. What happens if Johnson gets hurt now? Wholl play DH? Besides that it also keeps Gardner on the bench as pinch-runner extraordinaire which is his only asset to a ML team anyway IMO.

 
Northern Voice said:
Hinkse's not terrible.
I never said he was. Hinske is a pretty good fit for the Braves given Glaus' and Chipper's health concerns.
Hinske was one of my favourite Jays 3B's in Ricciardi's musical chair of very slight upgrades at the position.(Hinske -> Koskie -> Hillenbrand -> Glaus -> Rolen -> Encarnacion?)
Why did you dislike Rolen? Rolen was my favourite of that group. Hinske was prob my least favourite of that group. Guy was terrible in the field, and the absolute opposite of clutch. Whenever the Jays needed a hit, you could count on Hinske for a strikeout. I'd rank them Rolen > Hillenbrand > Glaus > Koskie > Encarnacion > Hinske
 
Northern Voice said:
Hinkse's not terrible.
I never said he was. Hinske is a pretty good fit for the Braves given Glaus' and Chipper's health concerns.
Hinske was one of my favourite Jays 3B's in Ricciardi's musical chair of very slight upgrades at the position.(Hinske -> Koskie -> Hillenbrand -> Glaus -> Rolen -> Encarnacion?)
Why did you dislike Rolen? Rolen was my favourite of that group. Hinske was prob my least favourite of that group. Guy was terrible in the field, and the absolute opposite of clutch. Whenever the Jays needed a hit, you could count on Hinske for a strikeout. I'd rank them Rolen > Hillenbrand > Glaus > Koskie > Encarnacion > Hinske
I think NV was listing them chronologically
 
Northern Voice said:
Hinkse's not terrible.
I never said he was. Hinske is a pretty good fit for the Braves given Glaus' and Chipper's health concerns.
Hinske was one of my favourite Jays 3B's in Ricciardi's musical chair of very slight upgrades at the position.(Hinske -> Koskie -> Hillenbrand -> Glaus -> Rolen -> Encarnacion?)
Why did you dislike Rolen? Rolen was my favourite of that group. Hinske was prob my least favourite of that group. Guy was terrible in the field, and the absolute opposite of clutch. Whenever the Jays needed a hit, you could count on Hinske for a strikeout. I'd rank them Rolen > Hillenbrand > Glaus > Koskie > Encarnacion > Hinske
I think NV was listing them chronologically
my bad. The sauce has gotten to my head :(
 
shadyridr said:
I still cant believe Damon has so little interest on the market. And I think the Yankees are crazy not resigning him. They can get him real cheap probably (like 1yr, $7m). Sure hes terrible in the field but his bat makes up for it. Not only that when Johnson inevitably gets hurt they can then slide Damon to DH and play Gardner in LF anyway. What happens if Johnson gets hurt now? Wholl play DH? Besides that it also keeps Gardner on the bench as pinch-runner extraordinaire which is his only asset to a ML team anyway IMO.
LinkReport: Tigers may try to sign left-handed veteran Johnny Damon

By Scott Warheit

January 14, 2010, 7:31PM

During the Major League Baseball winter meetings, the Detroit Tigers could not shed payroll fast enough.

Just a few months later, and the Detroit Tigers seemingly are in a buying mood. Quite the turnaround for a team that couldn't afford to keep fan favorite Curtis Granderson.

But, after signing closer Jose Valverde to what could be a three-year, $23 million deal, the Tigers may look to add another veteran to their roster, according to SI.com's Jon Heyman:

January 14, SI.com: Tigers could be in play for Damon, who hits .363, slugs .550 and has a .961 OPS at pitcher-friendly Comerica Park.

The "Damon" Heyman referenced is, of course, Johnny Damon, whose tenure with the Yankees came to an end thanks to, wait for it, the arrival of Curtis Granderson.

Damon, 36, could play left field for the Tigers, shifting Carlos Guillen to designated hitter. He also is a left-handed bat in a lineup void of lefties.

He hit .282 with 24 home runs and 12 stolen bases for the Yankees last season.
 
WTF was the point of trading Granderson & Jackson if they were gonna sign Valverde to such a horrible deal and then sign Damon (although I dont see his deal being too bad but it remains to be seen).

 
Huff, quite frankly, sucks. He's had one above average year over the past 5 and he was abysmal last year. And his glove has always sucked.Garko had a tough time of it last year, but I'd take the cheaper 29 year old as a better gamble to rebound then the more expensive 33 year old. I definitely don't see how Huff is much of an upgrade offensively, other then having a little more pop. He's not really a good hitter. Doesn't really make a lot of sense to me but much of what Sabean has done doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Fair to say he adds a solid veteran presence to a team with some very young guys though? I think it is a good thing. We'll see. I'm not saying Sabean is a genius. But I think Huff will be good for that clubhouse.
It's hard for me to say who is a leader or not, since I'm obviously not in the clubhouse. The guy might be loved by his team mates where ever he goes. That's not the type of stuff we as fans usually are aware of.But I'm pretty sure I remember him getting on the radio (apparently drunk) and calling Baltimore a sh*tty town or something and saying that studying film of opposing pitchers was "bullsh*t", basically mocking his team mates for doing it. Not to mention, he was criticized for phoning it in the past few seasons with the O's, so I'm not sure his work ethic/lead by example skills are really up there. As a Yankee fan, I would see quotes from him on a regular basis after they played the O's and he mostly seemed like a whiner to me.So, I don't know if his team mates consider him a leader (they all might love him for all I know) and I have no doubt that he was led to the slaughter a little bit by some radio shock jocks, but no, he doesn't really seem like a veteran leader to me. He's not a cancer or anything, but I think if I was specifically looking for vet leadership for a young team, I'd probably look elsewhere. Just because a guy is a veteran, doesn't automatically give him veteran leadership skills.ETA: Someone above said that adding Huff is addition by subtraction because it move Ishikawa and Velez to the bench (and probably Fred Lewis). While that's probably true for Velez (though I doubt he would have been a starter anyway, so I don't think the Huff signing impact him too much), I don't see how it's true for Ishikawa. The projections I'm seeing have both hitters in the same area OPS wise, but Ishikawa's defense is so far superior to Huff's that I would bet his defense (and perhaps base running) would make him the clearly more valuable player. Huff is basically going to have to hit like he did in 2008 for this to make sense - which he definitely could but considering that his 2008 year seems like an outlier over the past 5, I don't know if it's a great bet.
I was under the impression that Huff was a good guy in the clubhouse. Not sure where I gained that though. You could very well be right. I'll have to keep tabs on this during the season. Might be a nice sub-plot to revisit once in a while.
 
Arizona is reportedly buying out the last year of Eric Byrnes' contract to make room for LaRoche. His next career on TV is pretty secure but he seems like the kind of guy who'll want to give the game another go.

 
WTF was the point of trading Granderson & Jackson if they were gonna sign Valverde to such a horrible deal and then sign Damon (although I dont see his deal being too bad but it remains to be seen).
Why is the Valverde deal so bad? $14 million for 2 years plus an option for a 3rd year at $9 mill? Is that so bad? Not sure.Dombrowski and Leyland both said more than once that the Tigers were not having a fire sale but the media ran with it since Granderson and Jackson were moved for younger players with more manageable contracts. The truth could be somewhere in the middle. Granderson can't hit lefties and has probably peaked. Edwin Jackson is pretty good but they got a lot back from Arizona for him imo. I think Dombrowski wanted to get rid of Granderson while he still had value.Damon would be a great move for Detroit. Filling the badly needed leadoff spot. A .363 ave, .550 slugging perc, and .961 OPS in Comerica Park is no joke! ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Arizona is reportedly buying out the last year of Eric Byrnes' contract to make room for LaRoche. His next career on TV is pretty secure but he seems like the kind of guy who'll want to give the game another go.
injuries pretty much derailed this guys career? right?Id take a shot putting him in LF if I was the Yanks
 
Northern Voice said:
Hinkse's not terrible.
I never said he was. Hinske is a pretty good fit for the Braves given Glaus' and Chipper's health concerns.
Hinske was one of my favourite Jays 3B's in Ricciardi's musical chair of very slight upgrades at the position.(Hinske -> Koskie -> Hillenbrand -> Glaus -> Rolen -> Encarnacion?)
Why did you dislike Rolen? Rolen was my favourite of that group. Hinske was prob my least favourite of that group. Guy was terrible in the field, and the absolute opposite of clutch. Whenever the Jays needed a hit, you could count on Hinske for a strikeout. I'd rank them Rolen > Hillenbrand > Glaus > Koskie > Encarnacion > Hinske
I think NV was listing them chronologically
Yeah chronologically. Rolen was obviously the best for his glove alone. Glaus was fun to watch. He'd go out with a huge wad of chew in his mouth and either strike out or hit it 450 feet. Every single one of these guys seemed to be better before they came to the Jays and better again after they left but Rolen certainly never cheated the team in terms of effort.
 
WTF was the point of trading Granderson & Jackson if they were gonna sign Valverde to such a horrible deal and then sign Damon (although I dont see his deal being too bad but it remains to be seen).
Why is the Valverde deal so bad? $14 million for 2 years plus an option for a 3rd year at $9 mill? Is that so bad? Not sure.Dombrowski and Leyland both said more than once that the Tigers were not having a fire sale but the media ran with it since Granderson and Jackson were moved for younger players with more manageable contracts. The truth could be somewhere in the middle. Granderson can't hit lefties and has probably peaked. Edwin Jackson is pretty good but they got a lot back from Arizona for him imo. I think Dombrowski wanted to get rid of Granderson while he still had value.Damon would be a great move for Detroit. Filling the badly needed leadoff spot. A .363 ave, .550 slugging perc, and .961 OPS in Comerica Park is no joke! :yawn:
looking at valverde's stats youre right. he has a good whip, good era, strikes out a lot of guys, and has a lot of saves. i just dont know if i trust him with a 3 yr deal
 
Interesting Valverde note: His fastball last year clocked higher than it has in any of the previous 5 years, and he's more or less been throwing it harder and harder each year, while at the same time getting the walks down.

That's the good news. The bad news is that fangraphs has him down for being worth $3M last year, and $3.5M the year before. Clear violation of the sabrmetric axiom of not paying for saves.

 
It looks like the A's and Padres have a deal in place with the A's acquiring 3B Kevin Kouzmanoff for OF's Scott Hairston and Aaron Cunningham.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../SPF01BJ16Q.DTL
Does this help or hurt Jake Fox?
I don't think Fox was going to see much time at 3B anyway.
Kouzmanoff is the antithesis of the typical Moneyball player. I guess it makes sense because the A's had too many OF and not enough 3B
 
It looks like the A's and Padres have a deal in place with the A's acquiring 3B Kevin Kouzmanoff for OF's Scott Hairston and Aaron Cunningham.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../SPF01BJ16Q.DTL
Does this help or hurt Jake Fox?
I don't think Fox was going to see much time at 3B anyway.
Kouzmanoff is the antithesis of the typical Moneyball player. I guess it makes sense because the A's had too many OF and not enough 3B
I don't think this is the case. The "Moneyball player" is a term that I feel has grown to be used incorrectly. It doesn't refer to a guy with a high OBP or a guy that doesn't steal bases or whatever.It originally referred to players whose skill set was undervalued. In order to compete, Beane had to find things that players did well that other teams didn't care much about. His theory is that teams overpaid for things like speed, closers, etc...he would allocate his smaller resources on the stuff that slipped between the cracks.

However, these days all GMs sign guys based on OPS and more specific stats. So Beane has had to move on to other areas that are undervalued. He now tries to get players who others don't value as highly, not necessarily based on a specific stat but rather on a stat that is considered "unimportant" or at least more unimportant than others.

 
It looks like the A's and Padres have a deal in place with the A's acquiring 3B Kevin Kouzmanoff for OF's Scott Hairston and Aaron Cunningham.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../SPF01BJ16Q.DTL
Does this help or hurt Jake Fox?
I don't think Fox was going to see much time at 3B anyway.
Kouzmanoff is the antithesis of the typical Moneyball player. I guess it makes sense because the A's had too many OF and not enough 3B
I don't think this is the case. The "Moneyball player" is a term that I feel has grown to be used incorrectly. It doesn't refer to a guy with a high OBP or a guy that doesn't steal bases or whatever.It originally referred to players whose skill set was undervalued. In order to compete, Beane had to find things that players did well that other teams didn't care much about. His theory is that teams overpaid for things like speed, closers, etc...he would allocate his smaller resources on the stuff that slipped between the cracks.

However, these days all GMs sign guys based on OPS and more specific stats. So Beane has had to move on to other areas that are undervalued. He now tries to get players who others don't value as highly, not necessarily based on a specific stat but rather on a stat that is considered "unimportant" or at least more unimportant than others.
What exactly is it that Kouzmanoff does that is undervalued by other GMs?His defense is above average, but nothing spectacular. He rarely walks. He has average to below average power for a corner infielder. He doesnt hit well in the clutch, etc.

This seems more of a position based trade than anything. Chavez will be lucky to ever get 200 ABs again, so the A's needed a 3B all while having an abundance of OF'ers.

This trade makes the A's better this year. Not by a lot, but it does help them. Long term, SD seems to make out getting Hairston for 2 years and Cunningham for 6.

 
What exactly is it that Kouzmanoff does that is undervalued by other GMs?
Sorry, I was more countering the opinion that there is a specific set of skills that Beane historically goes after year after year. I think people remember Moneyball and think the A's are all about getting high OBP guys, when the reality is that they simply went after those guys because they provided more value to the team than their salaries would indicate.
 
He's been a 2.7-2.8 WAR player over the last few years.The most undervalued players, now, are guys who can defend. And hence, the new "Moneyball" teams are Oakland, Boston, Seattle, Tampa, etc. etc.Ironically enough, with guys who aren't as good at the plate, it's going to be correct a lot more often for the A's to bunt, steal bases, etc., anathema to the old slug-and-run-slow "Moneyball" teams of old.

A’s Acquire Kevin Kouzmanoffby R.J. Anderson - January 15, 2010 - Share this ArticleThe one residual effect from Moneyball that I admire the most about Billy Beane is how significant he remains in baseball pop culture. Anytime he makes a signing, trade, or draft selection, everyone – even his grandmother – takes two looks at the transaction. That notion is in overdrive with his latest move.As recently as 24 hours ago, the Athletics’ third base depth chart featured: the always-injured Eric Chavez; the more-than-svelte Tommy Everidge (now Mariners’ property); and not-really-a-third-baseman-at-all Jake Fox. Tonight the order looks a bit different as the A’s acquired Kevin Kouzmanoff and Eric Sogard from the Padres for Scott Hairston and Aaron Cunningham.Let’s get the obvious out of the way: Kouzmanoff is everything that the Moneyball caricature of Beane disliked. He rarely walks (4.9% career) and expands his strike zone often. A raw offensive line of .261/.308/.435 causes him to appear as a below average batter, although our park adjustments have him in the black over the last three seasons combined. Kouzmanoff’s offensive game is more pop-based than a 13-year-old’s diet. The park he’s moving from isn’t much friendlier than the one he’s frantically fleeing and he’s moving to the American League. Don’t expect too much of an upswing. Kouzmanoff’s value comes from his position and ability to defend the position better than the average. Give him credit for consistent WAR values, if nothing else, as he’s been worth 2.7 or 2.8 WAR for each of the past three seasons. He’ll probably be worth 2.5-3 wins next year as well and has three seasons of team control remaining.Sogard, on the other hand, walks like crazy. He turns 24 in May and plays second base while batting lefty. In 2008 he walked in nearly 13% of the time in High-A and 11% in 2009 at Double-A. He’s not a power hitter and Marc Hulet pegged him as the left-handed part of a platoon or future utility player.In exchange, the Athletics give up two seasons of Hairston and six of Cunningham. Both are right-handed outfielders with Hairston holding the ability to play a Major League quality center right away. Hairston was acquired from the Padres just last July and his run with Oakland can’t be described much kinder than “awful”. Hairston held a .279 wOBA in 248 plate appearances with the A’s, which was probably in the 1% percentile of unlikely results given his .390 wOBA in 216 plate trips with San Diego.The A’s have a loaded outfield already: Coco Crisp, Ryan Sweeney, Rajai Davis, and Travis Buck. Clearly they have the means to go with a three-centerfielder outfield already, and Hairston was not going to DH with Jack Cust returning. This leads to Cunningham. His status as the most desirable outfield prospect within the system was in danger with Michael Taylor sitting near. Cunningham turns 24 years old in just three months and he has nothing to prove at the Triple-A level anymore (an .899 OPS through nearly 460 plate appearances).Acquired in the Dan Haren trade, Cunningham was blocked by Matt Holiday last year and seemingly lacked opportunity to break into the Athletics’ lineup this season as well. It’s silly to say that Beane sold high on Cunningham. Instead, it seems he sold before Cunningham lost too much of his previous luster. Whether the A’s simply held low evaluations of Cunningham nowadays or he was lost in a numbers game is a mystery.This move improves the Athletics in 2010, but not enough to make a serious push for the division. Kouzmanoff for Hairston is fine, it’s the other two pieces that I’m unsure of. Unless I’m missing something or too optimistic on Cunningham, I think the edge has to go to San Diego here.
 
His defense is above average, but nothing spectacular.
To be fair, I believe he did have the highest fielding percentage for any 3B in NL history last season. His glove went to Cooperstown. Now you can argue how accurate a barometer fielding percentage is in terms of how good a fielder actually is, but I'd say most people will classify that feat as better than "above average."I agree with most everything else you said, however.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RockNRolen said:
the moops said:
His defense is above average, but nothing spectacular.
To be fair, I believe he did have the highest fielding percentage for any 3B in NL history last season. His glove went to Cooperstown. Now you can argue how accurate a barometer fielding percentage is in terms of how good a fielder actually is, but I'd say most people will classify that feat as better than "above average."I agree with most everything else you said, however.
I really dont know much about his fielding except what I have seen from fielding bible and UZR. Both place himwell above average for 2009 (fielding bible 11th, UZR 7th). But his 2007 and 2008 numbers place him roughly league average.
 
WTF was the point of trading Granderson & Jackson if they were gonna sign Valverde to such a horrible deal and then sign Damon (although I dont see his deal being too bad but it remains to be seen).
Selling high? I think Dom's afraid of Jackson going bad like his recent longer term pitching signings, I think he's part right but I don't think Jackson will go nearly as far south as Willis, Bonderman, and Robertson. Grandy's got a lot of flaws in his game that at this point it's safe to say can't be corrected. The problem with selling him is that he is the type of player that every team should have, the fans love him and there's great reason for that, he's just limited a bit as a ball player, which is unfortunate because it's always more fun to root for the good guys.I don't think the shedding payroll tag put on the Tigers was ever a fair one, that's not Illitch's style, if it were then Maggs would not have gotten his AB's last year.
 
Kevin Kouzmanoff home/away splits the last three yearsIn SD - .661, .658, .743Away - .778, .803, .823
However, the park he is moving to isn't that much more of a hitter's park. And it is in the AL.
Very true on both counts. However, those splits tell me there was a mental issue hitting at home that amplified the effects of hitting in a pitchers park. Maybe some room for some upside if he mentally checks in at home in Oakland.
 
Rumor was the Twins could have had Kouzmanoff for Glen Perkins.

That would have been a great trade for Minnesota, but of course Bill Smith can't pull the trigger.

This guy holds on to mediocre prospects like they were family.

 
Pineiro to the Angels - 2 years $16mil

:goodposting:

This signing baffles me. I know the Angels lost Lackey & Escobar (although Escobar's been absent awhile), but their rotation is still pretty sound (Weaver, Kazmir, Santana....after that you have a mix of youngsters and journeymen types which is fine). They pay a bunch of money to a very inconsistent, probable #4 or #5 starter? I dunno, I guess pickings were slim.

Also Papelbon reupped for one year with the Red Sox. He has one more year of arbitration before hitting free agency, and I have a feeling the Red Sox are not going to sign him to a multi year extension for big bucks.

 
Pineiro to the Angels - 2 years $16mil:confused:This signing baffles me. I know the Angels lost Lackey & Escobar (although Escobar's been absent awhile), but their rotation is still pretty sound (Weaver, Kazmir, Santana....after that you have a mix of youngsters and journeymen types which is fine). They pay a bunch of money to a very inconsistent, probable #4 or #5 starter? I dunno, I guess pickings were slim.Also Papelbon reupped for one year with the Red Sox. He has one more year of arbitration before hitting free agency, and I have a feeling the Red Sox are not going to sign him to a multi year extension for big bucks.
Lackey to Pineiro and Guerrero to Matsui aren't upgrades. Coupled with Figgins to Izturis/Wood and the curious signing of Fernando Rodney, I don't think the Anaheims have had a very good offseason.They're still a decent team and divisional champs until somebody proves they can beat them, but the AL West could be hard fought this year.
 
Take it FWIW but Jerry Hairston says he thinks the Yankees have been waiting for Damon's price to drop and that they'll eventually sign him at a discounted rate.

 
Phillies resign Joe Blanton for three years (last arbitration & first two free agent years) $7M/$8.5/$8.5.

It's a fair deal if he continues as a reliable innings eater. But it's really hard to see him significantly outperform the contract. I think it's more likely he'll get hurt or lose some of that tiny margin keeping him from being very hittable.

 
Royals putting together a juggernaut in the ALC

Royals Reach Agreement With Rick Ankiel

By Tim Dierkes [January 21 at 10:58pm CST]

The Royals reached an agreement with outfielder Rick Ankielon a one-year, $3.25MM deal, tweets Yahoo's Tim Brown. The contract has a second-year mutual option worth $6MM. Back on December 10th, ESPN's Jerry Crasnick tweetedthat Scott Boras wanted three years and "big money" for Ankiel, but ultimately he settled for an unsurprising contract.

Ankiel will try to rebuild value in Kansas City after slipping to a .231/.285/.387 line for the Cardinals in 2009. The 30-year-old's maladies included a sore Achilles tendon, a deep shoulder bruise, and a groin strain. The shoulder injury, suffered in May, came from a headfirst collision with a wall and lingered most of the season.

A converted pitcher, Ankiel has experience at all three outfield positions but predominantly played center field. He'll join Scott Podsednik and David DeJesus in the Royals' outfield, with Jose Guillen presumably serving as designated hitter.

 
Pineiro to the Angels - 2 years $16mil:fishing:This signing baffles me. I know the Angels lost Lackey & Escobar (although Escobar's been absent awhile), but their rotation is still pretty sound (Weaver, Kazmir, Santana....after that you have a mix of youngsters and journeymen types which is fine). They pay a bunch of money to a very inconsistent, probable #4 or #5 starter? I dunno, I guess pickings were slim.Also Papelbon reupped for one year with the Red Sox. He has one more year of arbitration before hitting free agency, and I have a feeling the Red Sox are not going to sign him to a multi year extension for big bucks.
Pineiro's a pretty good #4. If he can average 1 BB/9 and a 60% GB rate again, he's well worth it.
 
Pineiro to the Angels - 2 years $16mil:fishy:This signing baffles me. I know the Angels lost Lackey & Escobar (although Escobar's been absent awhile), but their rotation is still pretty sound (Weaver, Kazmir, Santana....after that you have a mix of youngsters and journeymen types which is fine). They pay a bunch of money to a very inconsistent, probable #4 or #5 starter? I dunno, I guess pickings were slim.Also Papelbon reupped for one year with the Red Sox. He has one more year of arbitration before hitting free agency, and I have a feeling the Red Sox are not going to sign him to a multi year extension for big bucks.
Pineiro's a pretty good #4. If he can average 1 BB/9 and a 60% GB rate again, he's well worth it.
I think it was a good signing.
 
Pineiro to the Angels - 2 years $16mil:fishy:This signing baffles me. I know the Angels lost Lackey & Escobar (although Escobar's been absent awhile), but their rotation is still pretty sound (Weaver, Kazmir, Santana....after that you have a mix of youngsters and journeymen types which is fine). They pay a bunch of money to a very inconsistent, probable #4 or #5 starter? I dunno, I guess pickings were slim.Also Papelbon reupped for one year with the Red Sox. He has one more year of arbitration before hitting free agency, and I have a feeling the Red Sox are not going to sign him to a multi year extension for big bucks.
Pineiro's a pretty good #4. If he can average 1 BB/9 and a 60% GB rate again, he's well worth it.
I think it was a good signing.
Angels were wise not to overpay for Lackey, Figgins, Bay or Holliday. They still are the favorites in the AL West IMO and are not locked into any ridiculous contracts. They are in a position to take advantage of any bargains that may turn up. Like M. Cabrera if Detroit flounders and he becomes available. Overpaying for guys like the one's mentioned above are what the Mets do not the Angels.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top