The Angels announced today that they have signed perennial Gold Glover and known saint Torii Hunter to their lineup, prompting inquisitive looks all around. While most of baseball won't argue that Hunter was one of the best free agents on the market, the move makes about as much sense as bringing Tofu for any vegetarians at your Raiders Tailgate party. The fact of the matter is that Hunter joins an already gluttoned outfield staff and will be expected to be the piece that completes the Angels World Series staff and bring back 2002.
Earlier this week, the Angels made the even more flabbergasting trade for Jon Garland, giving up an Orlando Cabrera coming off a career year (.301 BA, .345 OBP, .397 Slugging and only missing 7 games.) The Angels also have no suitable backup in the organization (short of the Cuisinart-versatile Chone Figgins, leaving the mediocre Maicer Izturis at third.) Many Angels fans thought this would lead to the announcement of the signing of a big bat (perhaps Miguel Cabrera, still the most fitting signing they could make,) but instead a rushed signing of Hunter is the deal that LA delivers. Angels General Manager Tony Reagins is committed this offseason to making any move that will bring the Angels closer to a championship, but the Hunter move leaves a lot of heads bleeding from the hand marks left.
So the story goes like this: Angels want another bat, so they look at free agents who had a great year last year. They see a guy who's just over 30 who might fill the role. They find one, zoom their sights in, and quickly sign him to a 5 year deal. Sound familiar? It is. They did the exact same thing last offseason with Gary Matthews Jr. After Matthews had a disappointing season last year, it made room for Reggie Willits to show his skills, and for the first couple months he made a Rookie of the Year case. Rather than letting the 4 man crew of Matthews, Willits, Garret Anderson, and Vladimir Guerrerro (remember him?) hold their own around the fence, the Angels signed Hunter for 5 years and 90 million, leaving Matthews and Willits riding in the middle seat of the proverbial Angels pickup truck. Meanwhile, (in addition to the aforementioned Shortstop FUBAR earlier in the week) the Angels could still use a catcher to move Napoli to a reserve role, where he should probably be anyway.
Why did the Angels make this move? How could the angels sign Hunter in a situation where he doesn't seem needed? First of all, Hunter does fit the angels batting scheme (able to play the base stealing/sac fly small ball game, and a #3 hitter to solidify Vlad) and he will bring a vocal leader to a clubhouse who has lacked a media-friendly star for a while. John Lackey and Vladimir Guerrero, while stars, lack any sort of media loving (Guerrero is very shy, and Lackey has about as many people skills as John Rocker's armpit.) The Angels may have had this money available due to the departure of Bartolo Colon (4 year, 51 million) and the owners being committed to a championship, but it also shows a distrust in its current players. Perhaps this is a precursor to making Vladimir Guerrero their full-time DH (where he spent most of last year,) but if not it moves Matthews to a 50 million dollar platoon role. If this is a precursor to a trade, the logical conclusion is that it has to be Matthews (and maybe someone else after his 2007 season) for a shortstop. Perhaps Carlos Guillen will want to keep playing Shortstop after being told by the Tigers he will move to First Base, and he would even fit the Angels scheme of "sign a 32 year old guy who hit around .300 last year so he must be good."
The bottom line is that the Angels are making a move that will hopefully add a bat to secure themselves as a dominant team, but this really isn't the bat they're looking for. Despite the fact that an otherwise shallow Free Agent market is rich in centerfielders (Hunter, Andruw Jones, Aaron Rowand, etc.) that doesn't justify adding another outfielder. A catcher or an infielder would have made much more sense, but this is another sign that the Angels are hoping that money will sign their problems. They don't seem to have learned from their last signing of an aging ~.265 BA hitter that one good year doesn't mean all that much. As much as I love Torii Hunter as a humanitarian and a guy, he just doesn't fit with the Angels.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
As with the Matthews signing last year, the biggest upside here is that the GIANTS DIDN'T SIGN HIM. :-)
Nice read. Would read from again! A++++
Yeah, I agree the Giants should have pursued Hunter, but on the plus side Andruw Jones is still on the market. He's a legitimate 3-4-5 hitter who should be cheap coming off a very bad season, whereas Hunter is probably overvalued due to coming off his best season. And Jones is a big enough star that Giants fans can latch on to him in a Barry-esque fashion if he gets back to his normal pace.
I would beg to differ here. I like Hunter and he has been a more consistent player than has Gary (HGH) Matthews has been. I had Matthews on my Roti Team and reaped the benefits. But he had a pedestrian season in 07.
I'm not saying they don't need MORE protection for VLAD. But the bottom line is they upgraded a position whether it makes sense economically may be another story.
They'll need to move Matthews or even void his contract if he is suspended. Not sure that the action will stand up to the strict scrutiny of Donald Fehr.
According to http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071126&content_id=2307264&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp the angels have Willits packaged in an offer for Cabrera, which is probably a good move in wake of the Hunter move, but it doesn't address Matthews as a 50 million dollar backup.
I don't argue that Hunter is a great player, hes certainly more consistent than Matthews, he's probably the best glove center fielder in the game, and his character is more exemplary than the aforementioned HGH scandal Matthews.
It'd be interesting to see if the Angels can void his contract. If they can, it's a hell of a move, and the Hunter move makes a lot more sense. But it's gonna be hard to move Matthews after his mediocre 2007 season without eating some of the contract themselves. Then again, the Angels payroll seems fully capable of this.
Post a Comment