In an e-mail to reporters (including DiGiovanna), Dan Haren says he expects to be dealt before Friday evening, when the Angels have to make a decision on his $15.5MM option for 2013. "I have had just a bit of dialogue with the Angels about my situation, but I’m kind of getting the feeling that I'll be traded," Haren wrote. "I have no specifics on teams, but that's the vibe I'm getting. It's a little bit disappointing that I won't get to pick where I want to go, but I'm the one who signed on for the option year."
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#4FQ7b6SuHZ0ZSxDv.99
So it looks like Haren will get traded -- no surprise. Angels will likely eat 3.5M of his contract (buyout amount) so basically, a team will pay Haren 1yr/12M. I'd jump on that if I am the Jays.
In an e-mail to reporters (including DiGiovanna), Dan Haren says he expects to be dealt before Friday evening, when the Angels have to make a decision on his $15.5MM option for 2013. "I have had just a bit of dialogue with the Angels about my situation, but I’m kind of getting the feeling that I'll be traded," Haren wrote. "I have no specifics on teams, but that's the vibe I'm getting. It's a little bit disappointing that I won't get to pick where I want to go, but I'm the one who signed on for the option year."
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#4FQ7b6SuHZ0ZSxDv.99
So it looks like Haren will get traded -- no surprise. Angels will likely eat 3.5M of his contract (buyout amount) so basically, a team will pay Haren 1yr/12M. I'd jump on that if I am the Jays.
I want in...willing to give up a decent spect even to make it happen. That way, we can end the bidding soon.
I am probably one of the few who doesn't want Haren. His velocity has dropped to much for me and I don't want to tie up to much of our budget in someone who will be a #3-4 without much upside.
I'm not intimately familiar with the Royals' farm system, but it seems to me that the Angels didn't get a whole lot back for Santana. Can't see them getting much more than that for Haren given his age, contract, and troubling decline.
__________________ "Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent." '13 Shark CI Tracker: 48 gms, 19-23-6 (SJ-Opponent-National/Market feed)19 SJ feeds in HD Sorry, I am not taking signature requests at this time.
I'm not intimately familiar with the Royals' farm system, but it seems to me that the Angels didn't get a whole lot back for Santana. Can't see them getting much more than that for Haren given his age, contract, and troubling decline.
The troubling decline isn't so troubling if you believe he may have pitched hurt in June and July. Fangraphs did an article on it and his whole season was ruined by those months. Up across the board.
The troubling decline isn't so troubling if you believe he may have pitched hurt in June and July. Fangraphs did an article on it and his whole season was ruined by those months. Up across the board.
But you still cant ignore the fact he was throwing 87 which went along with the trending decline the last 3 years.
He's not one of those pitchers that relies on overpowering you. I'd consider him to be a finesse pitcher with deception on his pitches.
That's not to say I'd offer much for him.
For me its more the fact that if we have a $100 million budget, do you want to tie up $12 million in Haren or would you rather tie up $12 million in Jackson/Sanchez?
I'm not intimately familiar with the Royals' farm system, but it seems to me that the Angels didn't get a whole lot back for Santana. Can't see them getting much more than that for Haren given his age, contract, and troubling decline.
He'll get more but it won't be a lot. Santana had no market, and Royals got him at a way overpaid price (likely would have made 5-8M on the FA market). Haren wasn't as bad as Santana, better track record and for 12M, that's not bad. Even if Haren hit the market, he is looking at 10+ per.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19
For me its more the fact that if we have a $100 million budget, do you want to tie up $12 million in Haren or would you rather tie up $12 million in Jackson/Sanchez?
12M for Haren over Jackson. Would take Sanchez over Haren though. He was mainly hurt from his June and July month which was attributed to a back injury. He is not a guy that relies on his velocity much just as Halladay and I think both of them will bounce back.
The one concern you would have is that the back injuries are worrisome.
For me its more the fact that if we have a $100 million budget, do you want to tie up $12 million in Haren or would you rather tie up $12 million in Jackson/Sanchez?
I dont think the Jays are working on a budget. I do think they will save money on the cap where money can be saved though.
I'd love Haren and Sanchez. That would pretty much solve the starting rotation.
For me its more the fact that if we have a $100 million budget, do you want to tie up $12 million in Haren or would you rather tie up $12 million in Jackson/Sanchez?
It's a tough one, no doubt. Quite recently, tough, Haren was one of the top pitchers in the game - his upside and experience far outstrip what either Sanchez or Jackson bring to the table. If he can be even close to his former form, I think his presence does a lot more for a young rotation that could have benefitted from his stability and example last year.
It's obviously a shorter-term play than the other two, and carries some risk. But if Anthopolous is also able to acquire another young arm of the sort we've been discussing, I think that Haren's added experience would be all the more important to that staff. Imagine a guy Morrow, Romero and (for argumet's sake) Anderson could really learn from!
That said, I won't be upset if it's Jackson or Sanchez instead, it's far from an easy decision (leaving aside whether either of those two would actually want to sign here, and for how much!).
It's a tough one, no doubt. Quite recently, tough, Haren was one of therop pitchers in the game - his upside and experience far outstrip what either Sanchez or Jackson bring to the table. If he can be even close to his former form, I think his presence does a lot more for a young rotation that could have benefitted from his stability and example last year.
It's obviously a shorter-term play than the other two, and carries some risk. But if Anthopolous is also able to acquire another young arm of the sort we've been discussing, I think that Haren's added experience would be all the more important to that staff. Imagine a guy Morrow, Romero and (for argumet's sake) Anderson could really learn from!
That said, I won't be upset if it's Jackson or Sanchez instead, it's far from an easy decision (leaving aside whether either of those two would actually want to sign here, and for how much!).
My response would be, can you (or anybody) name me any former top 20 pitcher who "lost" his stuff or velocity and then managed to regain it back?
Only trade for Haren if you know for sure you can get him locked up to more than just one year. The Angels can get a better prospect if this is possible. Similar to what happened with when we traded Halladay.
If not, I am fine just trying to sign him, though will very disappointed if AA is not involved in any capacity.
The dude is legit. I am willing to bet anyone (I don't know what exactly) on here he has a better year than Jackson/Sanchez.
For me its more the fact that if we have a $100 million budget, do you want to tie up $12 million in Haren or would you rather tie up $12 million in Jackson/Sanchez?
Haren over Jackson, but Sanchez will likely get closer to $14 Million or so, possibly more. And it's entirely possible to sign/get both of them then trade for our other holes by getting cost-effective younger players who might cost more though trade than getting a #4 SP...If somehow AA signs 2 FA Starters, I would try and trade for a guy like Altuve, or Miguel Martin Prado (whoops, too much Dexter lately lol) or even Daniel Murphy (maybe a huge deal for him and Niese lol - I wish)
Also, I saw on the last page guys talking about the draft. As far away as it is, it's obviously too early to know who will be considered top 10 picks, especially from HS players, but a name we could probably keep an eye on is Oscar Mercado, a SS. Personally, I wouldn't mind taking a flier on Karsten Whitson, who I think the Rockies took top 10 out of HS in 09? Him and Austin Watson are both names that went first round out of HS (or were projected there, forget where Watson ended up going) that are more than just your typical signable college guys.
Haren over Jackson, but Sanchez will likely get closer to $14 Million or so, possibly more. And it's entirely possible to sign/get both of them then trade for our other holes by getting cost-effective younger players who might cost more though trade than getting a #4 SP...If somehow AA signs 2 FA Starters, I would try and trade for a guy like Altuve, or Miguel Prado or even Daniel Murphy (maybe a huge deal for him and Niese lol - I wish)
Point remains 12 out of a 100 million is a large chunk for someone who is not a key piece.
Point remains 12 out of a 100 million is a large chunk for someone who is not a key piece.
When you have guys making less than market value, you can afford to have 1 or 2 slightly overpaid players, and in this market, at this point in time, we're going to have to overpay for players to come here. $12M for Haren through trade is better than $13-14 he'd cost us to sign him on the open market, if we could attract him at all.
My response would be, can you (or anybody) name me any former top 20 pitcher who "lost" his stuff or velocity and then managed to regain it back?
I'm not overly concerned. He doesn't need to regain significant velocity to be a very effective pitcher, and that should be taken care of just by recovering from his injury. I'd wager he'd be every bit as effective "pitching" at 90-91 as Jackson or Sanchez would be "throwing" at 94. He was an Ace very recently, but the Jays wouldn't be looking for him to bring Ace stuff: just to be a steady #3 who can teach the younger arms what it takes to be a great pitcher and pro.
He also represents cost certainty: you know how much you're going to pay him, whereas the market for Sanchez or Jackson could potentially go north of $14 million (or even more) if enough teams get into the bidding.
When you have guys making less than market value, you can afford to have 1 or 2 slightly overpaid players, and in this market, at this point in time, we're going to have to overpay for players to come here. $12M for Haren through trade is better than $13-14 he'd cost us to sign him on the open market, if we could attract him at all.
I doubt we are in on him, he is clearly a declining player and we likely wont want to pay a player for what he used to be.
If $12 million was such a bargain why are the Angels looking to offload him for nothing while also paying up a couple million?
I doubt we are in on him, he is clearly a declining player and we likely wont want to pay a player for what he used to be.
If $12 million was such a bargain why are the Angels looking to offload him for nothing while also paying up a couple million?
For the Angels, he would cost 15.5M and they need the money to re-sign Grienke. Not a bargain at 12M either but it's reasonable. Angels also need to re-stock their farm system and while they won't get any great pieces back, a decent mid-level piece or two still helps.
lol - I wish)
