Master Index of Archived Threads


Torii Hunter to the Angels

Frayed Knot Nov 22 2007 04:55 AM

... for somewhere north of $80mil over 5 years ($16+/per) This (along with Glavine I suppose) is the first major FA team-switch of the winter. * He turns 33 at mid-season '08 * .324 career OBA And now what to do with Gary Mathews Jr.? That's a lot of cash to pay for two REAL GOOD CF gloves who are good, though hardly great, offensive players who now become somewhat less valuable if moved to a corner position.

smg58 Nov 22 2007 06:41 AM

I'm not sure what happens with Matthews either. But all the teams known to have a need for a CF still need one, with Hunter off the market. I bet the Angels are thinking he's dealable.

metirish Nov 22 2007 09:55 AM

Seems like a crazy deal, from the LA Times...5 years $90 ] Hunter, who has excellent speed, instincts and athletic ability, will play center field for the Angels, and Manager Mike Scioscia said Matthews would rotate through the corner outfield spots, and right fielder Vladimir Guerrero and left fielder Garret Anderson would rotate through the designated hitter spot. ] Scioscia says he is confident that Matthews will accept the switch. "We want Gary Matthews, there was no happier guy in the clubhouse when we clinched the division," Scioscia said. "He has the drive to put a ring on his finger. It's not going to be a huge adjustment for Gary. I'm sure we'll get a positive response. He'll do whatever it takes to win. I'm sure he'll be on board with it."

Edgy DC Nov 22 2007 10:08 AM

Eighteen bucks a year.

metirish Nov 22 2007 10:23 AM

Hunter needs a new agent.

A Boy Named Seo Nov 22 2007 10:36 AM

smg58 wrote: I'm not sure what happens with Matthews either. But all the teams known to have a need for a CF still need one, with Hunter off the market. I bet the Angels are thinking he's dealable. I think you're right and I think JC Lunchpail's Baltimore/Tejada thing looks more likely today. They'd be just a tad younger and maybe better in both CF and SS and add Jon Garland. Okay work, I'd say.

smg58 Nov 22 2007 11:37 AM

Matthews has a no-trade clause, I just found out. So either they know he'd agree to something, or they're fine with the rotation thing. Hunter is younger than Vernon Wells but he's a better overall player, so this is where the market is. If we needed a CF, I'd have paid this much for him.

Elster88 Nov 22 2007 12:09 PM

18 million a year for Hunter?! That's 9 million per i. The free agent world has gone a little crazy again.

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2007 04:38 AM

smg58 wrote: Hunter is younger than Vernon Wells but he's a better overall player, so this is where the market is. If we needed a CF, I'd have paid this much for him. ??? ... Wells is the younger player (by some 2-1/2 years) and, despite coming off a bad 2007, is the better player with the better upside IMO. Hunter to me has always been a somewhat more consistant version of Mike Cameron: similar fielders and sluggers with Hunter having a 20 pt edge in BA while Cameron has the same edge in OBA and is the better base-stealer. ]Matthews has a no-trade clause, I just found out. So either they know he'd agree to something, or they're fine with the rotation thing. Moving him to a corner while having the Vlad/Garret Anderson duo split the remaining slot/DH is certainly an option - not to mention that a defensive alignment of Mathews / Hunter / Vlad would be outrageous defensively (even tho I've always thought Vlad to be over-rated w/the glove) . It's just that many thought they over-paid Mathews to begin with and if he's no longer going to be a CFer for the remaing years of his deal then that's likely to become even more true. What all these deals (Wells, Mathews & Hunter) have done is to make the Beltran signing - particularly since it started at age 28 - look real good.

smg58 Nov 23 2007 08:43 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: ="smg58"]Hunter is younger than Vernon Wells but he's a better overall player, so this is where the market is. If we needed a CF, I'd have paid this much for him. ??? ... Wells is the younger player (by some 2-1/2 years) and, despite coming off a bad 2007, is the better player with the better upside IMO. Hunter to me has always been a somewhat more consistant version of Mike Cameron: similar fielders and sluggers with Hunter having a 20 pt edge in BA while Cameron has the same edge in OBA and is the better base-stealer. I meant to say that Hunter is older but the better overall player. I apologize for the typo, but given Hunter's defense, the infrequency with which Wells plays up to his potential, and the fact that Hunter has put up comparable overall numbers over the last few years in a less friendly park, I'd still take Hunter.

smg58 Dec 17 2007 01:49 PM

I read somewhere (wish I could remember where) that the Hunter pickup leaves little to no role for Juan Rivera in the Angels' outfield. I wonder what the going rate on Rivera is, as he'd make a very good fit here.