Trumbo

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sjddaj. Show sjddaj's posts

    Trumbo

    I don't remember the details of the articles or his availability.  But, as the season was winding down there were a couple of articles written about the possible availabilty of Trumbo since the Angels also have Pujols.

    I initiially thought this would be great.  He is young, great power, we need a 1B, and we have plenty of flexibility to get this done.  Since then I haven't heard anything though.

    What happened with this?

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    Guess the Angels never really want to trade him.  Before last year trading deadline, the Angels were seeking help for the bullpen, and most medias brought up the name of Trumbo.  So it sounded like the Angels was not the one wanted to trade him, but most sport experts thought Trumbo could be a good trade bait to get a good reliever since the Angels have other guy that can play in the OF.

    But for now, I strongly think that the Angels will not even try to trade him since Vernon Well still struggles as well Hunter could walk away from the club.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to sjddaj's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't remember the details of the articles or his availability.  But, as the season was winding down there were a couple of articles written about the possible availabilty of Trumbo since the Angels also have Pujols.

    I initiially thought this would be great.  He is young, great power, we need a 1B, and we have plenty of flexibility to get this done.  Since then I haven't heard anything though.

    What happened with this?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    And why would they want to give up  great young power hitting player? FYI, he plays 3B given that Pujols is at 1B as well as 1B and OF. Keep dreaming.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Trumbo

     

     

    The Angels will keep Trumbo.  But it looks like they will let go of Haren and Santana.  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from sjddaj. Show sjddaj's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    ADG - I was just going by what was written.

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    I agree with Joe. I am intrigued with Trumbo, but at what cost? I am on the Trumbo "needs to do it again" band wagon

    I saw an interesting article on Haren, that the Angels would pick up the option, for $15m, and then turn around and trade him sending along $3.5M. Could the RS entice the Angels with prospects for Haren and Trumbo?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Trumbo

     

    I have a feeling that both Haren and Santana will rebound in 2013.  

     

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree with Joe. I am intrigued with Trumbo, but at what cost? I am on the Trumbo "needs to do it again" band wagon

    I saw an interesting article on Haren, that the Angels would pick up the option, for $15m, and then turn around and trade him sending along $3.5M. Could the RS entice the Angels with prospects for Haren and Trumbo?

    [/QUOTE]

    I like Haren in a trade more than a FA.  

    1-If LA is going to let him go, they have no bargaining position.  Let them pay the $3.5M and give them a B-level prospect.  

    2-This means we only have a one-year commitment for $12M.  This ties in well with the timeline of our other prospects.

    3-And he the incentive to perform well.

    4-He still had a respectable 2012, with a 4.33, and a 3.74 K/W.  And he finished strongly in his last 13 starts with a 56/14 K/W.  In his last 9 starts, he had a Lee-esque 42/5 K/W.

    4-If he does perform well, this gives us the option of making him a qualifying offer after 2013.

    The absolute downside if his arm falls off in ST, is $12M.  Virtually every other pitcher will have more downside.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree with Joe. I am intrigued with Trumbo, but at what cost? I am on the Trumbo "needs to do it again" band wagon

    I saw an interesting article on Haren, that the Angels would pick up the option, for $15m, and then turn around and trade him sending along $3.5M. Could the RS entice the Angels with prospects for Haren and Trumbo?

    [/QUOTE]

    I like Haren in a trade more than a FA.  

    1-If LA is going to let him go, they have no bargaining position.  Let them pay the $3.5M and give them a B-level prospect.  

    2-This means we only have a one-year commitment for $12M.  This ties in well with the timeline of our other prospects.

    3-And he the incentive to perform well.

    4-He still had a respectable 2012, with a 4.33, and a 3.74 K/W.  And he finished strongly in his last 13 starts with a 56/14 K/W.  In his last 9 starts, he had a Lee-esque 42/5 K/W.

    4-If he does perform well, this gives us the option of making him a qualifying offer after 2013.

    The absolute downside if his arm falls off in ST, is $12M.  Virtually every other pitcher will have more downside.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes agree. Btw, Haren was on the DL mid season, and his last 9 starts as you say were more in line with his previous season numbers. EVen his velo, while never great, was back to 90-91 post DL stint

    I would be curious if this scenario could be expanded to include Trumbo? Defensively, he is obviously a DH, and positionally, he should be at 1B. I think the Angels have soured on him in the OF or 3B.

    The Angels do have bargaining position, as I would assume 8-10 teams would be in on Haren for $12M  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    PS - His salary for batting .268, hitting 32 HRs and driving in 95 runs was a whooping $500,000. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to ADG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sjddaj's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't remember the details of the articles or his availability.  But, as the season was winding down there were a couple of articles written about the possible availabilty of Trumbo since the Angels also have Pujols.

    I initiially thought this would be great.  He is young, great power, we need a 1B, and we have plenty of flexibility to get this done.  Since then I haven't heard anything though.

    What happened with this?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    And why would they want to give up  great young power hitting player? FYI, he plays 3B given that Pujols is at 1B as well as 1B and OF. Keep dreaming.

    [/QUOTE]


    First of all, he is hardly "great."  On a good, day, he is Mark Reynolds Lite.

     

    Second, he played all of 8 games at 3B last year, making 4 errors against 5 assists.   The experiment was deemed a failure in early May, after he only made 5 starts at 3B.  It was as if Scioscia's goal was to get him eligibility in Yahoo! Fantasy Leagues for the new postion.

     

    Beyond that, he is a free-swinging power hitter with a career .300 OBP, meaning he makes outs 70% of the time.  I would prefer Dayan Viciedo if my goal was a young, free-swinging undisciplined right-handed power hitter...

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

    [/QUOTE]

    Runs scored, just like RBIs, can be a function of the lineup, but his OBP has to be weighed against the SLG.  That's why they created OPS.  His OPS is .808.  I'm not that impressed by a 1B with an .808, that has a terrible strike zone.  My guess is that the league has been catching up to him, as evidenced by his bad second half.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

    [/QUOTE]

    Runs scored, just like RBIs, can be a function of the lineup, but his OBP has to be weighed against the SLG.  That's why they created OPS.  His OPS is .808.  I'm not that impressed by a 1B with an .808, that has a terrible strike zone.  My guess is that the league has been catching up to him, as evidenced by his bad second half.

    [/QUOTE]


    He is not good enough defensively to play first, either.  I don't see how he is a fit at all, with Papi, who is a superior offensive player, as the full time DH for the next two years. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

    [/QUOTE]

    Runs scored, just like RBIs, can be a function of the lineup, but his OBP has to be weighed against the SLG.  That's why they created OPS.  His OPS is .808.  I'm not that impressed by a 1B with an .808, that has a terrible strike zone.  My guess is that the league has been catching up to him, as evidenced by his bad second half.

    [/QUOTE]


    He is not good enough defensively to play first, either.  I don't see how he is a fit at all, with Papi, who is a superior offensive player, as the full time DH for the next two years. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Not sure that a superior Papi will even be with the Sox next year...the sides are reportedly far apart on a contract for 2 years.  He becomes a FA if not signed by Friday.  That said...if the Sox finished last with Papi, they can certainly finish last without him...and regardless of how bad of a 1B the kid is...he is better than Papi who plays on a one way street.  That would free up an extra position for the Sox and let them DH and rest players without losing their bats.  One also has to wonder if the difficulty of running the bases after a HR will strike the speedy Papi again this year if he signs with the Sox...an injury that Trumbo might be able to avoid.  Hard for Papi to be superior to anyone while on the DL.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

    [/QUOTE]

    Runs scored, just like RBIs, can be a function of the lineup, but his OBP has to be weighed against the SLG.  That's why they created OPS.  His OPS is .808.  I'm not that impressed by a 1B with an .808, that has a terrible strike zone.  My guess is that the league has been catching up to him, as evidenced by his bad second half.

    [/QUOTE]


    He is not good enough defensively to play first, either.  I don't see how he is a fit at all, with Papi, who is a superior offensive player, as the full time DH for the next two years. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Not sure that a superior Papi will even be with the Sox next year...the sides are reportedly far apart on a contract for 2 years.  He becomes a FA if not signed by Friday.  That said...if the Sox finished last with Papi, they can certainly finish last without him...and regardless of how bad of a 1B the kid is...he is better than Papi who plays on a one way street.  That would free up an extra position for the Sox and let them DH and rest players without losing their bats.  One also has to wonder if the difficulty of running the bases after a HR will strike the speedy Papi again this year if he signs with the Sox...an injury that Trumbo might be able to avoid.  Hard for Papi to be superior to anyone while on the DL.

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't kid yourself, Ortiz isn't going anywhere.  Beat reporters are a little bored right now, and yes, David Ortiz is superior offensively to Mark Trumbo.  He was actually having a better offensive season than the guy who ended up winning the Triple Crown before he got hurt.  He is probably better than Trumbo defensively as well, but it doesn't matter, because neither will be playing first base on a full time basis for the Sox next year. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Trumbo

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to traven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm not sure why everyone is so high on Trumbo.

    1-He had a 153/36 K/W, making it difficult to predict long-term success.

    2-Probably as a result of the 36 walks, he only scored 66 runs, and only 65 the year before.  That is a very low level of scoring for an offensive position.

    3-Possibly as a result of his poor strike zone, he ended the season with a .228/.275/.379/.654 over the final three months, with a 92/15 K/W.

    4-He ended the dismal 2nd half with an incredible 29/2 K/W in the final month, with a .214 and 2 HRs.

    [/QUOTE]

    He hit 32 HR and had 95 RBIs and you are worried about how many runs he scored?  Seems to me that runs scored depend on the hitters success batting after he does.  Also seems like you are looking for some sort of written guarantee that he will succeed...although given the Sox track record with FAs that might not be a bad idea.

    [/QUOTE]

    Runs scored, just like RBIs, can be a function of the lineup, but his OBP has to be weighed against the SLG.  That's why they created OPS.  His OPS is .808.  I'm not that impressed by a 1B with an .808, that has a terrible strike zone.  My guess is that the league has been catching up to him, as evidenced by his bad second half.

    [/QUOTE]


    He is not good enough defensively to play first, either.  I don't see how he is a fit at all, with Papi, who is a superior offensive player, as the full time DH for the next two years. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Not sure that a superior Papi will even be with the Sox next year...the sides are reportedly far apart on a contract for 2 years.  He becomes a FA if not signed by Friday.  That said...if the Sox finished last with Papi, they can certainly finish last without him...and regardless of how bad of a 1B the kid is...he is better than Papi who plays on a one way street.  That would free up an extra position for the Sox and let them DH and rest players without losing their bats.  One also has to wonder if the difficulty of running the bases after a HR will strike the speedy Papi again this year if he signs with the Sox...an injury that Trumbo might be able to avoid.  Hard for Papi to be superior to anyone while on the DL.

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't kid yourself, Ortiz isn't going anywhere.  Beat reporters are a little bored right now, and yes, David Ortiz is superior offensively to Mark Trumbo.  He was actually having a better offensive season than the guy who ended up winning the Triple Crown before he got hurt.  He is probably better than Trumbo defensively as well, but it doesn't matter, because neither will be playing first base on a full time basis for the Sox next year. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I do agree that neither will be playing 1B next year for the Sox.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share