Sign in to follow this  
JAHV

Angels Interest in Will Smith and Tony Watson

105 posts in this topic

8 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

Panik needs a high BA to have a decent OPS.   Two seasons under .700 OPS since 2016

Focus on signing Lowrie or Moose, plus Ottavino to two year deals.    Keep all of the Rondons at least into July. 

Panik really isn't all too different than what we have in Fletcher. Both will have their BA/OBP/OPS heavily swayed by whatever their BAbip winds up being. 

Fletcher has the upper-hand on defense, control, cost, and options, but both are really pretty similar. That could give both teams reason to explore a trade though. The Giants are retooling, the Angels are trying to win now without destroying their future. The Giants basically hit 'reset' on Joe Panik and get the same thing for cheap and less control, the Angels get a 'proven' version of Fletcher that is a little more limited with versatility but brings a lefty-bat and some track record. 

One for one, that deal does not make sense for the Angels. But if the deal was something like Panik, Watson, and Smith for I dunno, Fletcher, Brennon Lund, and Jake Jewell it makes more sense. Or Panik/Watson for Fletcher + Castillo. Not exactly what I would pursue, but I am interested in Watson and Smith and it isn't too difficult to see something like this be an option.

Edited by totdprods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, angelsnationtalk said:

Would throwing in Calhoun or maybe a Cozart work in some form? If so, how?

How about Barria instead instead of Marsh?

I don't see how the Giants would want Cozart or Calhoun.

Maybe Barria would work instead of Marsh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I don't see how the Giants would want Cozart or Calhoun.

Maybe Barria would work instead of Marsh.

Great! So let's trade Barria, Hermosillo, Castillo, and then some low end prospect for Smith, Watson and Bumgarner...

If only that would actually work...... It never would

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NeverOver said:

If they do trade for Will Smith I could see something like Leonardo Rivas plus one or two lower-tier types or perhaps something like Alex Ramirez plus ??? Something from our #15-25 range plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I'd rather not trade prospects for 1yr of a reliever at this point.  

I can appreciate that perspective, particularly when you consider that Eppler rarely re-signs relievers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I'd rather not trade prospects for 1yr of a reliever at this point.  

Will Smith might be worth doing so. Seems like he’d be a solid shot at an extension or re-sign candidate since he started in this org and has age on his side. He could trend into a truly dominant arm for the next few seasons. It’s a gamble though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, totdprods said:

Will Smith might be worth doing so. Seems like he’d be a solid shot at an extension or re-sign candidate since he started in this org and has age on his side. He could trend into a truly dominant arm for the next few seasons. It’s a gamble though. 

I'd rather take a flier on Allen or Holland on a 1yr deal and then sign Smith in the off season.   Unless Eppler feels like he's getting a deal, but I feel like Zaidi would pluck a nice underrated prospect from our system.  Like Stiward or Hector Yan.  It's just not worth it to me considering that Billy has shown the ability to get a Robles or Petit or David Hernandez off waivers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys we have now are likely better than the leftover crop of FA relievers.  I'd be OK starting the season with 1 of either Smith or Watson, to go with Bedrock, Buttery, Anderson, Pena and whoever fills out the last couple of roster spots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

It sounds like the stuff about The Giants relievers has been greatly exaggerated. 

Don’t hold your breath for this one. 

Confirmed by the Angels or Giants?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

do you think this kinda stuff leaks for leverage purposes or is it merely random?  

Sometimes it’s for leverage but often it’s just a matter of the media getting incomplete information. 

I think often that reporters get little slivers of information and then “the internet” grows them into much more. 

This entire thread came from one sentence at the bottom of a story that said simply the Angels have been in constant contact with the Giants about these two relievers. That could mean a lot of things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Sometimes it’s for leverage but often it’s just a matter of the media getting incomplete information. 

I think often that reporters get little slivers of information and then “the internet” grows them into much more. 

This entire thread came from one sentence at the bottom of a story that said simply the Angels have been in constant contact with the Giants about these two relievers. That could mean a lot of things. 

So we're not getting Bumgarner?  

thanks Jeff.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • AngelsWin.com Ad-free Membership Options