Shows What I Know: Early Returns Say The Angels Were Correct to Pass on Cabrera
By Brian Kamenetzky | MLB, What I See, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, Column
In December, when the hot stove was raging and the Miguel Cabrera rumors were flying, I wrote that the Angels should pull the trigger. When Cabrera was eventually moved to the Tigers in a monster deal, I said that the Angels missed the boat. Five-plus months later, the Angels, due in no small part to their organizational depth in the face of a rash of injuries, are 26-20, 1.5 games up on Oakland in the AL West. This despite losing seven of their last 11. Meanwhile, the Tigers, at 17-27, are one of baseball’s worst teams and are suffering myriad problems. While he’s performed below expectations, Cabrera hasn’t really been the problem… but he hasn’t exactly elevated the Tigers, either.
No wonder my phone didn’t ring when Bill Stoneman stepped aside.
The names bandied about as potential getters for the young then-Florida slugger were many- Nick Adenhart, Brandon Wood, Howie Kendrick, Joe Saunders, Ervin Santana, Jeff Mathis. Not every name would have gone, but a healthy portion would have. The Angels decided it was too much to sacrifice for one player. Especially if it meant giving up both Adenhart and Santana.
Early returns say it was the right decision. Santana has turned it around to the point that even his bad outings, like the one he had this weekend against the Dodgers, keep his team in the game. The Angels have logged six wins from him, and six more from Saunders. The combination has helped keep the Angels afloat through the injuries presumptive staff aces John Lackey and Kelvim Escobar.
On the other end of things, Kendrick hasn’t been healthy, and Mathis has been outplayed by Mike Napoli, who in only 89 at bats has swatted 10 home runs. I still have plenty of reservations about Wood, who I don’t think will develop into a legitimate Big League star, and Adenhart is yet to make an impact (though he showed in a short stint this year that while there’s work to be done, the stuff is there if the seasoning isn’t). It’s possible that the Angels would have lost only one really meaningful part of their current success had they pulled the trigger, perhaps in the form of Santana or Saunders.
So why do I currently consider myself as having been on the wrong side of the debate?
The obvious place to start is pitching. Without Saunders or Santana in the rotation, the Angels would likely be looking up at
the A’s in the division. Without both, they’d definitely be well back. Now they’re in first place and with Lackey safely returned to the rotation, the Angels are rock solid on the mound.
It goes beyond that, though. Simply put, despite missing big parts of the O for long stretches in Kendrick and now Chone Figgins, despite a slow start from Garrett Anderson and a slumping Vlad Guerrero, the Angels are scoring runs, and doing so with far more variety than they did last season. They’re third in the AL in runs scored, third in stolen bases, third in hits. More importantly relative to previous seasons, the Angels are fifth in slugging (last season they were ninth), and eighth in homers (up from 12th in ‘07). That hardly makes them thumpers, but that with a little more than a quarter of the season gone the Halos have already gone deep about 1/3 as much as they did all of last year shows some improvement.
If Guerrero can get right (history says he will), with Anderson, Torii Hunter, and a more productive Casey Kotchman and a healthy Juan Rivera popping into the lineup, the potential is there for a more dynamic attack than the one the Angels have brought to the postseason in recent years, even without Cabrera’s extremely potent bat.
Not to say the Angels are a perfect offensive team, but they’re better, and with Kendrick and Figgins back in the mix, they’ll be better still. They might regret the Hunter signing in a few years, but right now, he’s made them better (defensively, too). But the big thing is that they’ve improved and still have the roster intact. This gives GM Tony Reagins the ability to pull the trigger on the next thing that comes around. Maybe it’s not for a player with the cache of Cabrera, but if help is available, the Angels still have the means to act.
I’m a huge believer in Miguel Cabrera’s skill, and think he’ll soon turn it around in Detroit and be a pillar in that lineup for years. For the time being, though, the Angels seem wise to have passed on him. Maybe it’ll look different in September, or down the road when Adenhart and Wood have either become stars at this level or are flipped in a later trade, but right now it’s Reagins 1, Kamenetzky 0.
Brian Kamenetzky hosts the Lakers Blog and Blue Notes: A Dodgers Blog for the LA Times.com. He’s a contributing writer to ESPN The Magazine and ESPN.com, and can be heard regularly on The Steve Mason Show on 710 ESPN radio in Los Angeles. Write him at bk@sportshubla.com.
Discuss:
8 Responses to “Shows What I Know: Early Returns Say The Angels Were Correct to Pass on Cabrera”
- 1 Pingback on May 21st, 2008 at 12:47 am
- 2 Pingback on Jun 1st, 2008 at 9:45 pm
- 3 Pingback on Jul 15th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Loading ...
Too small of a sample size to say not signing Cabrera was the right decision. Beyond that, the Tigers crappy record doesn’t mean much either.
RJC-
I disagree with you about Detroit- I think they’re in trouble (this from someone who picked them to go very deep into the playoffs). But regarding the deal, you’re right, it’s a small sample size for sure, which I acknowledge in the post. But right now, I’d say I was wrong. That could change, and certainly the landscape could look different 18 months, two years, etc. from now, and LAA could still regret it. On the other hand, the non-deal might look even better down the road? I was just going back to a column I wrote that was critical of Tony Reagins and looking to see (on May 20) if I was right or not. It’s not that trading for Cabrera would have sent the Angels into the toilet, but it’s hard to argue that right now they’d be better off.
Brian-
At 6.5 games back, I would argue that no one in the American League Central is any real danger. They’re 7th in the AL in Runs and Last in Pitching, both of which should should change dramatically as the season wears on. You can start to panic when you catch Jim Leyland at Cosco buying Marlboro’s in bulk.
RJC-
He doesn’t already? I guess you can do that when you’re rich (haha). You’re right, they’re not out of it, but the signs aren’t good for Detroit. They need to figure out a pitching situation quickly, and given how Verlander is struggling both with effectiveness and that his stuff is diminished, it’s tough to count on him. At some point, Kenny Rogers is going to hit the wall. And so on. They don’t need great pitching, just good. If Detroit can get to that point, they can make up the gap, and it’s not like they’re chasing the 27 Yankees. But the fundamentals don’t look good, and I’d be worried if I was a Tigers fan. It’s far from over, though. Lots of baseball left to play.
Cabrera’s early struggles *might* not mean anything (I sort of doubt it, myself); getting traded and extended to a big deal often seems to hurt players’ immediate performance thereafter. On the other hand, there are significant issues with Cabrera that are worth exploring:
1) He was forced off third base defensively because he couldn’t handle it.
2) Part of the reason for (1) was because he isn’t the most conscientious individual when it comes to conditioning.
3) Big, heavy, slow players tend to collapse rather quickly. That is, Big Papi is a significant exception to the rule. Think Mo Vaughn.
I agree with the others upthread who say we’ve got a small sample size alert on Cabrera’s performance with Detroit. But, it could be the beginning of a terrible relationship.