 |
|
|
| |
« Rays Never Serious About Bonds | Main | Odds and Ends: Spiezio, Pavano, Gross, Jackson »
Garret Anderson Enters Contract Year
One 2009 MLB free agent who's not getting a ton of attention yet is lifetime Angel Garret Anderson. The Angels are faced with a tough decision - $14MM for '09 or a $3MM buyout. So Tony Reagins will need to ask himself if he'd sign Anderson to a one-year, $11MM deal. PECOTA says he'll be worth less than $2MM in '09.
Finally free of injuries, Anderson had a big second half in '07. This year, the Angels will wisely give him a break by rotating him through the DH spot on occasion. As Mike DiGiovanna writes in the above-linked article, the Angels' decision on Anderson will be especially tough if he has a good but not great season (something similar to his last three).
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e200e5509acee08834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Garret Anderson Enters Contract Year:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
Faced with a tough decision? No, $3MM buyout, decision made. He's long been overrated and is in decline, bye.
Posted by: teeball | February 27, 2008 at 09:27 AM
It's a tough decision because he's been with the team for the last 13 years. It's called respect and loyalty.
From a business side (and I agree with this), you cut him loose. thank him for the
Posted by: bseballcrzy17 | February 27, 2008 at 10:38 AM
(cont.)
time he's put in, and let him try to sign somewhere else.
he's becoming a waste of money, and we have plenty of younger, cheaper outfielders that could do the same thing as he does.
Posted by: bseballcrzy17 | February 27, 2008 at 10:39 AM
If you can get him to agree to a full time DH role you sign him for one more year. Besides being a very clutch hitter he is a good person, great with the young guys and the face of the franchise.
Posted by: Burtis | February 27, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Can you buyout a player and still resign him? The $3m buyout plus maybe a $3m one year deal should be sufficient.
Posted by: BringBackTheThrill | February 27, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Agreed with Bseballcrzy17 completely. He was definitely a consistent threat for some time. A guy i guess you can say that's been slept on in the past. But yeah he does need to be weeded out and have one of the youngsters take over.
Posted by: Jafu82 | February 27, 2008 at 12:03 PM
He's not "perfect," but he's "perfectly good." $11MM doesn't sound unreasonable, and the next year they can offer him something smaller. The guy deserves a shot a remaining an Angel for his career, and he's not going to get much of a chance elsewhere by then.
Posted by: FineHamAbounds | February 27, 2008 at 12:03 PM
For the right amount he is a fine player. $11m is not that amount though.
I'm afraid GA will be a casualty of the numbers game. The Angels just have too many OF's. If GMJ plays well (pre-All Star break last year) I bet he is moved. The Angels could also move Willits to a team that needs a young, cheap lead-off hitter. That might open the door for GA to stay. Again, I doubt that will happen.
GA is a very good hitter. His numbers get killed because he refuses to take a walk. On the positive side he does hit for a decent average and has always possessed good extra base power. He isn't a superstar but he is a good player.
For all the talk about his age check out what he did last year after the all-star break. He was arguably a top 10 hitter. I think the guy still has something in the tank.
Posted by: bjsguess | February 27, 2008 at 12:51 PM
It really just depends on how he performs this year. If he's on the DL for 1/3 of the season (like last year) then you let him go. If he stays healthy, resign him for a cheap (3-5 million) one year deal as a full-time DH, or a rotating DH with Vlad.
Either way, he needs to stay off of the field and spend more time in the batter's box.
I'd take GMJ or Anderson in the field any day.
Posted by: bseballcrzy17 | February 27, 2008 at 12:57 PM
I agree with the sentiment that if he remains an injury risk, he probably is not worth the 11 mill to the angels. But, the second half of last year was the first time in a while he was considerably healthy, and look at what did in 286 at bats: 305 average, 13 homers, 65 rbis, in a healthy season, he would probably double to about 550 to 570 atbats, and that is 130 rbis right there. That type of production is certianly worth 11 million. However, I think if he manages to get about 450 to 500 at bats and approaches 100 rbis, due to the loyalty he has had to the angels, theyw ill remain loyal to him. But my main point is that if Anderson produces like he did in the second half last year, he will be one of the best cleanup hitters in the game.
Posted by: bravesbeast | February 27, 2008 at 01:32 PM
finally an article on the Angels! keep 'em coming
Posted by: ff2715 | February 27, 2008 at 01:52 PM
GMJ can't be moved: NTC. The only reason to keep GA at this point is sentimentality... he's a life long Angel and holds many of their all-time offensive records. But that OF is too crowded with too many injury risks. It will be hard to see him in another uniform.
Posted by: gutterbumber | February 27, 2008 at 02:19 PM
They should give him $1 million for every ball he's ever dove for.....that would be a whopping total of zero.
GA with 130 RBIs... now that's a pipe dream, even with Hunter, Vlad, and the two jackrabbits in the lineup.
I'm just curious here, but has anyone ever heard of him being linked to PEDs? He had a huge power drop-off in 2004 and has never come close to matching his 2000-2003 numbers, healthy or not.
Posted by: 1quik6 | February 27, 2008 at 02:22 PM
I don't think he's a PED candidate, although you can never be sure. His power dropoff in '04 was the product of an arthritic back... which I imagine would be harder to admit to than using steroids.
This is why I call him Garret OldManderson.
Posted by: gutterbumber | February 27, 2008 at 02:29 PM
Whoa whoa Garret Anderson top 10 hitter? One of the best clean up hitters? You guys must be really desensitized to offense over in LA. And please don't use RBI as an offensive stat, because it's a terrible one.
He hits for pretty good average and sometimes good power, but his OBP is awful. For his career, he's a basically an average hitter with a couple good years and as a LF, that's bad.
He's not going to go back into form this year because impatient hitters like him decline sharply with age, even if his injuries are gone.
Posted by: Victor | February 27, 2008 at 03:20 PM
just another victim of the home run derby champ curse. all his power went to crap, just like pudge after he went on his tear, and just like bob abreu.
Posted by: bucs_lose_again | February 27, 2008 at 03:24 PM
Well, I must admit, when you look at more specific categories, Anderson is not just an absolute monster. He hit .284 with runners on, had a .262 with RISP, and a .194 average with RISP and 2 outs. Not Terrible, but not among the leagues best. I guess you could say that with vlad and figgins in front of him, that has just as much to do with his RBI totals as it does with him driving the runners in. I still think Anderson has always been a consistient run producer when healthy, and if he puts up numbers like he in the second half of last year over a full season, he would be worth 11 million.
And btw, i may have accidentally implied, but never said he would drive in 130, i was just putting his second half in terms of a full season.
Posted by: bravesbeast | February 27, 2008 at 03:45 PM
That curse is no joke. I think Ken Griffey and Ryan Howard are the only winners to avoid the dinger nosedive. But, Howard did drop from 58 to 47 HR last year. If he maintains this rate of decline (11 fewer HR each year), he'll only hit 36 this year. Shoot,by 2011, he'll only hit 3!!! The Phillies must have this same intel, that's why they won't offer him a big contract.
I know it's off topic, but GA is about as boring as it gets.
Posted by: 1quik6 | February 27, 2008 at 03:46 PM
"He's not "perfect," but he's "perfectly good." $11MM doesn't sound unreasonable, and the next year they can offer him something smaller."
It does sound unreasonable when considering the current state of the Angels' outfield. They already have too many good outfielders (Guerrero, Hunter, Matthews, Anderson, Rivera, Willits). There is literally ZERO need for him on that team. I seriously doubt that he would outproduce anyone in that outfield with maybe the exception of Matthews and Willits. Considering that, I think the team would be far more benefitted by letting Anderson go, and using that cash to persue a star third baseman or shortstop (which ever one Brandon Wood doesn't play).
Accepting the option would be an incredibly dumb mistake for LA after the Hunter and Matthews signings.
Posted by: scribbletone | February 27, 2008 at 04:48 PM
"$11MM doesn't sound unreasonable"? After how much he's underperformed the last few years, he ought to be paying the Angels $11M to come back. Good God.
Posted by: ColonelTom | February 27, 2008 at 10:47 PM
As an A's fan it would be such a shame to see GA play for anyone but the Angels. I'd rather him just hang it up if he isn't re-signed.
Posted by: Droptop | February 27, 2008 at 10:49 PM