Angels Sign... Gary Matthews Jr????

[DanGarion]

Talk about a waste of money. The guy played for the Rangers a hitter friendly park and didn't really do much of anything till he was 32... 10 million a year just seems like too much for this guy especially at this point of his career. I'm predicting he'll be hitting right around his career average in 2007 and fans will be disappointed once again with an Angels FA signing.

Angels agree to terms with Gary Matthews Jr.
By JOHN NADEL, AP Sports Writer
November 22, 2006

ANAHEIM, Calif. (AP) -- Gary Matthews Jr. reached a preliminary agreement Wednesday on a $50 million, five-year contract with the Los Angeles Angels following a career year with the Texas Rangers.

"It came down to the Angels and the Giants," Scott Leventhal, Matthews' agent, told The Associated Press. "The deciding factors were that he was so familiar with the American League, its pitching, the Western Division, and his roots in L.A. with his family."

ADVERTISEMENT
Matthews must pass a physical before the deal is completed.

Leventhal said Matthews made his decision Wednesday morning. Matthews also had been sought by the San Francisco Giants.

"They were right there," Leventhal said. "It was a very difficult decision. More than 10 teams kicked the tires. Everybody couldn't be more pleased."

San Francisco also was said to be offered $50 million over five years before the Angels matched that package.

Matthews, a 32-year-old switch-hitter, batted .313 with 102 runs, 44 doubles, 19 homers, 79 RBIs and a .371 on-base percentage as the Rangers' leadoff hitter. He became the third player in Rangers' history to hit for the cycle, doing so on Sept. 13 at Detroit.

"One of our objectives during this offseason was to improve ourselves in center field," Angels general manager Bill Stoneman said. "We believe Gary is a great fit for this ballclub. In addition to his outstanding play in center field, he has the versatility to lead off or hit deeper in the lineup."

Matthews was a first-time All-Star last season. Among his highlight-reel catches was one on a ball hit by Houston's Mike Lamb on July 1. Matthews sprinted, leaped and stuck his glove far over the 8-foot wall in center to make the catch. Even Lamb applauded after standing in the infield and watching the replay on the scoreboard.

Matthews blossomed after signing a minor league deal with the Rangers in 2004. He had been released earlier that spring by the Atlanta Braves, the team for which his father, Gary Matthews Sr., was an All-Star in 1979.

The younger Matthews had played for five teams (Chicago Cubs, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New York Mets and San Diego) the previous three seasons.

Matthews' parents live in Southern California. His father was nicknamed "Sarge," and he has been called "Little Sarge."

AP Baseball Writer Ronald Blum in New York contributed to this report.

[DaddyTorgo]

ugh. nice signing there artie moreno. guy MAY earn it for one year, possibly two, but by year 4 they will have dumped him off on the yankees in exchange for marginal+cheap prospects

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

ugh. nice signing there artie moreno. guy MAY earn it for one year, possibly two, but by year 4 they will have dumped him off on the yankees in exchange for marginal+cheap prospects

I think this might be the signing that finally signs Stoneman's departure.

[Fonzie]

No analysis needed here. Terrible signing.

[INDalltheway]

These recent signings are making the money the Cubs gave Soriano look good.

[Arles]

Wow, back to back mid-numbing signings at CF. I thought signing a 40-year old Stevel Finley to big money (at the time) was silly. But this may take the cake.

[Chief Rum]

This is a tough one to swallow, because there is a lot to doubt here. It is just way too much money for a player of this caliber. But this is the market this offseason. Teams are opening up their wallets, and when supply is limited and demand goes up, we all know what happens (well, those of us who paid attention in economics).

Apparently, the Giants offered Matthews the same deal, and Matthews only chose us because he's from SoCal. So we couldn't have gotten him any cheaper. And Pierre's ridiculous deal set a level for leadoff CFs, even if it's a ridiculous contract itself. I don't think Stoneman will be sending Colletti any Xmas cards this year.

This is a very dangerous contract because Matthews is so old for a player getting this contract, and he doesn't have the track record to back this deal. Paying this sort of money to him over the next five years could limit our options elsewhere for sometime, and that is frustrating.

That said, as an Angels fan, I need to put on my optimism hat as well. Matthews, IMO, is an upgrade over Figgins in CF. Not by much, but he is. I think his arm is better, and he's a more natural outfielder (Figgins is a natural 2B). Also, he has more pop and gets on base better than Figgins. So he looks like a defensive and offensive upgrade? Enough to be worth adding $10 M per year to the payroll? Of course not. But the fact he makes us better, at least in the short term, is a bright side.

I am sure you will say, "Well, that is based on last year, and that is probably a fluke given his history." Well, agree and disagree. Is he likely to hit .313 again? Doubtful. He never came close before. But everyone points out the previous years and yet fails to point out he never had much regular playing time before last year and that he never played for anyone more than three years straight. There is some potential for the possibility he has finally settled into the player he will be going forward, much like the previously mentioned Steve Finley did in his 30s.

Also, he hit well outside of Arlington last year, so I'm not sure I am ready to buy the Arlington-inflated view of his numbers.

So, is it a stupid deal? Hell, yeah. Could it bite us in the ass? Definitely. But I think we're going to need a little time before we automatically toss this one into the garbage bin, and see how he does next year. If Arte Moreno doesn't mind paying it, and it doesn't affect our other plans (including trading for a legit power hitter), then I am willing to play a little wait-and-see on this one as an Angels fan.

BTW, Gary, if you could ask your father for some power hitting advice, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

[Arles]

I disagree. You can find later gems like Eric Byrnes, Frank Thomas, Endy Chavez, Juan Encarnacion, Mark Grudzielanek, Kenny Lofton, etc .. after the first wave. It's a bit more risky on production, but the value is certainly there and mistakes at this stage don't stay on your payroll for 4-5 seasons.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Arles

I disagree. You can find later gems like Eric Byrnes, Frank Thomas, Endy Chavez, Juan Encarnacion, Mark Grudzielanek, Kenny Lofton, etc .. after the first wave. It's a bit more risky on production, but the value is certainly there and mistakes at this stage don't stay on your payroll for 4-5 seasons.

Well, there's no doubt it's not a bargain. I pretty much say that. It's not the brightest deal at all.

That said, I am willing to see how he plays for a bit before ripping into it further. And of the players you mentioned, none are upgrades over Figgins in all around game, IMO. What good does that do us? Obviously, the Big Hurt has a huge bat, but we need a CF. He can't help us there (he can't even help at 1B). Everyone else you list has some serious issues with them, from what I can see.

From the perspective of upgrading our team, Matthews does what none of those guys do: makes us better at a position of need. At way, way, way too high a price and with too much risk by far. But it's an upgrade.

[DanGarion]

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm both a Dodger and an Angel fan, and I'd like to see this signing improve the Angels but I just don't really see it. I just think that the upgrade he provides it would have been better to spend the money elsewhere like on a starting pitcher since Colon has basically turned into a sack of shit.

[IMetTrentGreen]

the jet stream to right center in arlington sure is making a lot of guys rich

[oykib]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

the jet stream to right center in arlington sure is making a lot of guys rich

It still amazes me that, as we move into 2007, the average person and many professionals do not seem to understand basic concepts like park factors and the lack of correlation year-to-year of certain stats.

[sterlingice]

Who's starting the "which is a worse signing: Gary Matthews or Juan Pierre" thread?

SI

[Vince]

I can't tell you how happy I am with both of those signings. The Giants were interested in both (even though we have Randy Winn, who is a decent CF but a terrible RF), and have now missed the boat on both. Looks like we'll get Dave Roberts, but he can't be nearly that expensive. Can he?

[SackAttack]

Dave Roberts is basically Juan Pierre only older and, sooner or later, slower.

But no, he won't cost you much more than the price of a bag of cracker jacks and a hot dog.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Dave Roberts is basically Juan Pierre only older and, sooner or later, slower.

But no, he won't cost you much more than the price of a bag of cracker jacks and a hot dog.

Yes and no. Yes about how he compares to Pierre. Definite no on how much he will cost. A lot of teams are looking at Roberts now as the top remaining option in CF, with Pierre and Matthews gone. He won't get their money, but I guarantee you he will get much more than he's worth.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Vince

I can't tell you how happy I am with both of those signings. The Giants were interested in both (even though we have Randy Winn, who is a decent CF but a terrible RF), and have now missed the boat on both. Looks like we'll get Dave Roberts, but he can't be nearly that expensive. Can he?

Notice my thrill in both regards. I love the fact that the two teams I can't stand are the one's that ended up with the players in question. I'm hoping that Sabean understands that striving for 75 wins is a stupid idea. Rebuild, for god's sakes - we have to.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Dave Roberts is basically Juan Pierre only older and, sooner or later, slower.

But no, he won't cost you much more than the price of a bag of cracker jacks and a hot dog.

He talks walks, and plays a better CF. Ceterus Paribus, I'd rather have Roberts than Pierre. In practice, I'd like neither on the Giants.

[Fidatelo]

Baseball is stupid. Why would anyone pay these clowns this kind of money? There has to be some kid in the minors that would provide only slightly less production for like 1/10th the price.

I can understand when teams with lots of money overpay stars or even above average players, but I don't get spending money on journeymen.

[IMetTrentGreen]

well it tends to be the same handful of teams that do this, the angels being one of them. plus, they are a tools over production type of franchise, so i doubt they care about arlington being an extreme hitters park.

but yeah, they have to have some kid that can play out there and hit .260.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Baseball is stupid. Why would anyone pay these clowns this kind of money? There has to be some kid in the minors that would provide only slightly less production for like 1/10th the price.

I can understand when teams with lots of money overpay stars or even above average players, but I don't get spending money on journeymen.

You're right. People say it's the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox who destroy baseball economically by paying a ton for the stars. You'll always have to cough up a lot of money to get premier players, but it's when you give $10 million a year to crap like Matthews and Pierre that everything gets fucked up royally. All of a sudden a bunch of marginal players think they deserve the same, and teams continue to overpay for whatever is left on the crap heap.

[Atocep]

The first couple contracts signed always set the market for that offseason. Baseball had its best year, by far, in terms of financial success so I'm not suprised that a lot of money is being tossed around. However, I am suprised that Matthews got this much. There is no way possible for anyone to justify this contract. This is what happens when a team goes into an offseason dead-set on spending a lot of money. Stoneman was outbid on Soriano and paniced. He promised they'd be players in free agency and missed out on his #1 guy.

Soriano set the bar for the position players. He and Lee were considered the best position players available and both were expected to get somewhere around 5 years and $60-$70 million. When Soriano got Beltran money agents everywhere probably started popping champagne.

Pierre really isn't that suprising. There's several teams out there that are in love with speed and are willing to overpay for it. There's a lot of people that view Pierre as the ideal leadoff hitter and I'm sure they see $45 million a good price for one.

What is sad is that people being paid quite a bit to make financial decisons for teams still don't understand simple things like OBP>BA and that Colorado (pre humidor) isn't the only ballpark that can inflate statistics.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

well it tends to be the same handful of teams that do this, the angels being one of them. plus, they are a tools over production type of franchise, so i doubt they care about arlington being an extreme hitters park.

but yeah, they have to have some kid that can play out there and hit .260.

I know I shouldn't respond, because you generally say things like this that don't make much sense or have any backing for it, and you dig the attention, but I will anyway.

Hmm, what other journeymen have we been overpaying for? If you mean Weaver, we gave him a one year deal, and by and large, the media applauded the move at the time. Erstad's deal was based on his importance to the franchise as a leader, and he had been just two years removed from perhaps the best leadoff hitter year in baseball history. Finley had a long history of power hitting and production when we signed him, and was never a journeyman. Colon and Vlad are stars and award winners, while Escobar is very far from being a journeyman. If you think Speier is a journeyman, you must think all relievers besides clsoers are, because he was one of the best in baseball. Cabrera may not be Jeter, but he's well above a journeyman player, with a solid bat for his position and a very good glove.

If you're referring to ancient history (Gaetti, Von Hayes, Dave Parker, etc.), that is two owners ago and the result of penny pinching that is no longer in place, so not sure how it is relevant to the franchise now.

It is true the Angels pay less attention to sabermetrics and more to tangible qualities you can see on the field, an approach I have had my issues with at times, but also essentially led to the 2002 WC.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

...so i doubt they care about arlington being an extreme hitters park.

Originally Posted by Atocep

What is sad is that people being paid quite a bit to make financial decisons for teams still don't understand simple things like OBP>BA and that Colorado (pre humidor) isn't the only ballpark that can inflate statistics.

It's called research, people.

Gary Matthews Jr. Home and Away with the Rangers from 2004-06

AVG/OBP/SLG/OPS

Home-- (.280/.352/.464/.816)
Away-- (.289/.349/.471/.820)

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

It's called research, people.

Gary Matthews Jr. Home and Away with the Rangers from 2004-06

AVG/OBP/SLG/OPS

Home-- (.280/.352/.464/.816)
Away-- (.289/.349/.471/.820)

My statement was about the ignorance of some GMs, in general. Not necessarily the Matthews signing. However, if you think that Arlington doesn't boost offensive totals there's a lot more evidence that says otherwise.


Arlignton's ballpark factor rank:

2003 - 5th
2004 - 2nd
2005 - 6th
2006 - 5th


Matthews had 2167 at bats playing like a 5th outfielder and 620 at a solid level. If I had to choose I would expect Matthews to revert back to his pre-2006 form.

[DeToxRox]

One name popped up to me when I heard this.

Beltre, Adrian.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by DeToxRoxDVHStyle

One name popped up to me when I heard this.

Beltre, Adrian.

At least he was young(27) and coming off of a 48 homer season. In an OOTP world, it would be just about time for Gary Matthews Jr. Jr. to show up in an ammy draft class.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

My statement was about the ignorance of some GMs, in general. Not necessarily the Matthews signing. However, if you think that Arlington doesn't boost offensive totals there's a lot more evidence that says otherwise.


Arlignton's ballpark factor rank:

2003 - 5th
2004 - 2nd
2005 - 6th
2006 - 5th


Matthews had 2167 at bats playing like a 5th outfielder and 620 at a solid level. If I had to choose I would expect Matthews to revert back to his pre-2006 form.

Where on Earth do I say that Arlington doesn't boost offensive output? Everyone knows it does.

My point was about Matthews, not Arlington. Matthews did just as well--actually slightly better--away from Arlington than he did at home. The lack of disparity in his home-away stats is an indication he can hit in any ballpark, not just Arlington.

And if you read my posts above, you will see, I, too, have very strong doubts about Matthews and how he will perform. I also say I don't think he will come anywhere near that average again, and that is very likely he will revert to his play from previous years.

My point to which you responded was the fact you and IMTG made an implication that the Angels didn't consider Matthews' playing half his games in Arlington and my noting that the stats don't support that Matthews was an Arlington-created wonder.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

My point to which you responded was the fact you and IMTG made an implication that the Angels didn't consider Matthews' playing half his games in Arlington and my noting that the stats don't support that Matthews was an Arlington-created wonder.

No, what I alluded to was Stoneman's ignorance of stats. I made no mention of Matthews being a ballpark creation. Anyone with half a brain could go to ESPN.com pull up his home and road splits and do some "research".

[tucker rocky]

Another marginal player that'll probably turn into a bust.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by tucker rocky

Another marginal player that'll probably turn into a bust.

QFT

SI

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

No, what I alluded to was Stoneman's ignorance of stats. I made no mention of Matthews being a ballpark creation. Anyone with half a brain could go to ESPN.com pull up his home and road splits and do some "research".

Maybe you should have done that before responding then.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Maybe you should have done that before responding then.

Are you ignoring the part where I said that wasn't what I was talking about on purpose? If I thought he was a ballpark creation I surely would have taken the time to do that. However, the point I was making was Stoneman and a lot of other GMs don't understand things such as small sample size, park factors, contract years, OBP, and a lot of other things.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Are you ignoring the part where I said that wasn't what I was talking about on purpose? If I thought he was a ballpark creation I surely would have taken the time to do that. However, the point I was making was Stoneman and a lot of other GMs don't understand things such as small sample size, park factors, contract years, OBP, and a lot of other things.

I know what you said. Despite that, when I brought up Matthew's stats, you still felt it necessary to point out to me how Arlington affects offense, which is specific to the Matthews argument, not your general point. You may have started making a general statement about GMs (something you didn't really clarify until called on it, BTW), but you chose to offer a specific response about Matthews. At that point, you open your argument to specific criticism on Matthew's stats and their relevance to your general argument about GMs like Stoneman and their lack of use of the statistics you mention.

You say you never called Matthews a ballpark creation, and yet you chose to lecture me on the offensive boosts of Arlington? Why then?

It also doesn't help that you imply I have "half a brain" later on, although I think that was just poor wording on your part and not meant to be the personal slight as it appeared.