5th starter
Angels need another starter. Washburn will probably be expensive. Paul Byrd is a perfect fit for a one year contract, just like he was last year. Problem is, Byrd will probably get a 3 year deal from someone.
I think I've found the guy. You want someone who is not getting much attention, would probably take a one year deal, and can pitch. I don't know if he's looking for a deal, or plans on retiring. He's a bit of an A-hole, at least to reporters, but he's also a certified Angel killer, and it would be nice not to have to face him anymore.
I speak of Kenny Rogers.
His projection in Angeltown:
201 IP 216H 56 BB 105K 19HR 4.24 ERA
I think that projection is reasonable. He's pitched as well or better for the last 2 years, and with David Wells and Jamie Moyer still around, he's young for a lefty.
Come on, Mr. Stoneman, take a gamble.
posted by Chone Smith @ 1:31 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
okay, i'll bite...ARE YOU CRAZY?? Ok, a bit dramatic, but really, why THIS GUY? I'm not totally into "chemistry" nor am i a sabermetric junkie ( think that erstad should not hold up kotchman anymore), but here, with this guy, it would be like having jose guillen pitching one day and then causing mischief in the four intervening days between starts!
how about fifth spot competition? saunders, bootcheck and weaver. all would most likely equal the numbers of most any fifth starter to be picked up via free agency. and for league minimum!
I'm probably wrong on one thing about Rogers - I've since heard he's seeking a multiyear deal and there are enough teams spending out there that he just might get it.
Rogers should be a bit above average, and he's reasonably durable. Bootcheck is no good, Weaver and Saunders - it doesn't hurt to give them more seasoning.
Angels will probably need one or both at some point in the year, you never know who is going to get hurt but you have to prepare for injuries.
Rogers was not a disruptive player until last year. Before I signed him I'd try and get Scioscia to give him a phone call - Mikes the one who has to deal with him. If Scioscia gives a thumbs up and Rogers takes a one year deal, I'm for it.
If it takes a 2 year deal, back to the drawing board.
i don't know that the three guys couldn't do at least league average...and really, isn't that all we should expect from them? IF we get some decent offensive production, then the fifth day starter should do okay.
I do like the thought of Roger's numbers in the rotation, though. I will admit that he's still got that Moyer-esque talent of befuddling hitters...
No way. Not only is it crazy, the Angels would never hire a troublemaker like Rogers. The Angels are all about keeping a great image and they have certain "standards" with the guys they pick. Even though M. Ramirez is throwing himself at the Angels, the Angels want to stay away from those kinds of players. This makes the team more attractive to other potential playes who don't want to deal with egotistical maniacs.
Standards? I think the Angels, like rest of MLB hold a similar view to Groucho Marx:
"These are my principles. And if you don't like them, I have a couple of others I could show you."
They'd sign anyone they believe can help them
Standards? I think the Angels, like rest of MLB hold a similar view to Groucho Marx:
"These are my principles. And if you don't like them, I have a couple of others I could show you."
They'd sign anyone they believe can help them win.
I loathe Rogers. Even before the camera incident. He is overrated. At any rate, the Angels rarely take the obvious option. My guess is they'll end up going with one of the young guys, while probably bringing in some low quality marginal major league on his last legs on a minor league deal with an invite.
Post a Comment
<< Home