Will Richards be back this year?

[Farmbuildingfan]

I knew missing only one start was absurd optimism.

I was hoping he would be out only six weeks, but I am now wondering if we have to wait until next year.

 

,

[Troll Daddy]

DFA his butt!

[Stradling]

14 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

DFA his butt!

Why?  What possible reason could there be for this to be the best option?  

[fan_since79]

15 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Why?  What possible reason could there be for this to be the best option?  

Maybe because he might not return for a year or two, or when he does return make a couple starts then disappear once again?

He might be more trouble than it's worth at this point. The guy is made of glass.

Edited May 21, 2017 by fan_since79

[Stradling]

5 minutes ago, fan_since79 said:

Maybe because he might not return for a year or two, or when he does return make a couple starts then disappear once again?

He might be more trouble than it's worth at this point. The guy is made of glass.

Yes, but releasing him is not the best option.  

[tdawg87]

He will definitely return this year. But then he'll go right back on the DL with another injury after 4 innings. 

I'm done with him. He and Skaggs just can't get healthy, and they probably never truly will. Though I could see Richards finding a resurgence in a couple years as a reliever. 

[Brandon]

looks like he's recovering well with the thumbs up

[fan_since79]

12 minutes ago, Brandon said:

looks like he's recovering well with the thumbs up

Biceps cramps can be tricky, and are known to spread.

 

[Troll Daddy]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Why?  What possible reason could there be for this to be the best option?  

I wasn't 100% serious

Richards will be in his final year of Club control next season. It's a decision the FO will have to make ... it won't come cheap if he stays.

[tdawg87]

It's actually a fair discussion. Releasing Richards would probably save the Angels 8-9 million or so. But if they feel he can be healthy, he could end up getting extended for pretty cheap. 

[Angels#1Fan]

2 hours ago, Farmbuildingfan said:

I knew missing only one start was absurd optimism.

I was hoping he would be out only six weeks, but I am now wondering if we have to wait until next year.

 

,

I'll be very surprised if Richards pitches again this year.

I'm not sure what should be done though because he is fragile. Maybe see what happens with him the rest of this year and if he still can't go it might be time to cut bait.

It's a shame because of all of the unfulfilled promise.

[Stradling]

43 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

It's actually a fair discussion. Releasing Richards would probably save the Angels 8-9 million or so. But if they feel he can be healthy, he could end up getting extended for pretty cheap. 

I am thinking a contract that protects him and the Angels.  Something with a higher salary the first year, then club options, at below market value the next couple of years.  3 years, $34 million, where the first year is worth $10 million the last two are club option years worth $10 million and $14 million, something like that.   

[Ohtaniland]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I am thinking a contract that protects him and the Angels.  Something with a higher salary the first year, then club options, at below market value the next couple of years.  3 years, $34 million, where the first year is worth $10 million the last two are club option years worth $10 million and $14 million, something like that.   

Haven't we seen enough. 

[Stradling]

Just now, CALZONE said:

Haven't we seen enough. 

Not in my opinion.  If he is hurt and doesn't come back this year then fine, but if he is healthy enough to pitch down the stretch then there is zero harm in that type of contract.  It doesn't hurt future signings if he gets hurt next year.  However if he comes back and is very good like he is capable of when healthy it certainly helps your team.  Also, I am pretty sure he is Trout's best friend on the team.  

[Ohtaniland]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Not in my opinion.  If he is hurt and doesn't come back this year then fine, but if he is healthy enough to pitch down the stretch then there is zero harm in that type of contract.  It doesn't hurt future signings if he gets hurt next year.  However if he comes back and is very good like he is capable of when healthy it certainly helps your team.  Also, I am pretty sure he is Trout's best friend on the team.  

I could care less if he's Trout's best friend. In fact that alone worries me that the Angels may end up carrying him. He's injury prone and the Angels shouldn't get any deeper financially with Richards.

He made a huge career decision not to get surgery on his elbow hoping to cash in on Ace money. If all went well he would've been very rich. Unfortunately his injuries have continued and he'll never see that $100M+ payday.

We've had our share of bad luck contracts but this time we may have dodged a bullet. Cut bait and let some other team gamble on him. 

[Troll Daddy]

49 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I am thinking a contract that protects him and the Angels.  Something with a higher salary the first year, then club options, at below market value the next couple of years.  3 years, $34 million, where the first year is worth $10 million the last two are club option years worth $10 million and $14 million, something like that.   

 

[Stradling]

Just now, CALZONE said:

I could care less if he's Trout's best friend. In fact that alone worries me that the Angels may end up carrying him. He's injury prone and the Angels shouldn't get any deeper financially with Richards.

He made a huge career decision not to get surgery on his elbow hoping to cash in on Ace money. If all went well he would've been very rich. Unfortunately his injuries have continued and he'll never see that $100M+ payday.

We've had our share of bad luck contracts but this time we may have dodged a bullet. Cut bait and let some other team gamble on him. 

It isn't a bad luck contract as I described it.  It isn't a long term investment as I described it.  It is a one year commitment.  He has more potential at that cost than anyone available. Why do you care about him getting $100M payday other than you would have instantly hated him more?  When healthy, he is worth far more than $10 million a season.  

[Stradling]

5 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

 

Troll, pitchers with track records of injuries get long term contracts all the time, The lefty the Dodgers resigned last off season Rich Hill got nearly $48 million guaranteed over three years, they also signed Kazmir, who has a track record of injury got about the same.  In my scenario he is guaranteed one year.  Take your silly "takes" and memes and go find another place to take a dump.  

[Troll Daddy]

6 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Troll, pitchers with track records of injuries get long term contracts all the time, The lefty the Dodgers resigned last off season Rich Hill got nearly $48 million guaranteed over three years, they also signed Kazmir, who has a track record of injury got about the same.  In my scenario he is guaranteed one year.  Take your silly "takes" and memes and go find another place to take a dump.  

It's not my fault your take sucks balls. He's not a free agent ... you can offer him arbitration in the off season if you like. You don't offer a extension to a pitcher who's hurt and could possibly need TJ surgery.

Even a idiot like myself knows this. 

 

[Ohtaniland]

39 minutes ago, Stradling said:

It isn't a bad luck contract as I described it.  It isn't a long term investment as I described it.  It is a one year commitment.  He has more potential at that cost than anyone available. Why do you care about him getting $100M payday other than you would have instantly hated him more?  When healthy, he is worth far more than $10 million a season.  

I no longer trust that Garrett Richards will ever be truly healthy. I've seen enough of his pussified pitch counts on his comeback tours. This morning I caught some of the NYY / TB game and watched Chris Archer (same age 28) hit the 100+ pitch count for his 19th straight start. I'm done waiting for Richards to become a reliable pitcher. He will always be a ticking time bomb.

[Tank]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

I am thinking a contract that protects him and the Angels.  Something with a higher salary the first year, then club options, at below market value the next couple of years.  3 years, $34 million, where the first year is worth $10 million the last two are club option years worth $10 million and $14 million, something like that.   

i wouldn't pay that much until he's healthy. i think any contract offer to him has to include an IP clause of some kind, where he meets a minimum level in order for a performance bonus to kick in. i wouldn't sign him without that.

[Inside Pitch]

19 hours ago, Farmbuildingfan said:

I knew missing only one start was absurd optimism.

I was hoping he would be out only six weeks, but I am now wondering if we have to wait until next year.

Relax, he's starting on Thursday.  Also... Barbaro is starting on Wednesday.

15 hours ago, CALZONE said:

I no longer trust that Garrett Richards will ever be truly healthy. I've seen enough of his pussified pitch counts on his comeback tours. This morning I caught some of the NYY / TB game and watched Chris Archer (same age 28) hit the 100+ pitch count for his 19th straight start. I'm done waiting for Richards to become a reliable pitcher. He will always be a ticking time bomb.

LOL...   So when other than this year have you seen his pussified pitch counts?   Certainly not last year when he threw 615 pitches in his 6 starts.   You didn't see it in 2015 either when he was coming back from the knee injury -- he hit 100 pitches in his very first start and averaged more than 100 over his first 9 starts.   He had two 99 pitch starts and one 98 pitch start during that run.   On the season he made 32 starts and topped 98 pitches 25 times..  Overall he threw 3250 pitches -- tell me what that averaged out to?  

For his career, Richards has averaged 98.5 pitches per start, Archer 99.6....    

As always -- good to see the facts supporting your hyperbole.

[Ohtaniland]

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

Relax, he's starting on Thursday.  Also... Barbaro is starting on Wednesday.

LOL...   So when other than this year when have you seen his pussified pitch counts?   Certainly not last year when he threw 615 pitches in his 6 starts.   You didn't see it in 2015 either when he was coming back from the knee injury -- he hit 100 pitches in his very first start and averaged more than 100 over his first 9 starts.   He had two 99 pitch starts and one 98 pitch start during that run.   On the season he made 32 starts and topped 98 pitches 25 times..  Overall he threw 3250 pitches...    Tell me what that averaged out to?  Ironman Archer started 33 games last year -- He threw 98 or more pitches 26 times -- overall he threw 3409 starts...     

For his career, Richards has averaged 98.5 pitches per start, Archer 99.6....    

As always -- good to see the facts supporting your hyperbole.

Would his return require more pussified pitch counts? He threw 76 pitches this season and poof. I've seen enough. Time to move on from him. 

[Inside Pitch]

3 minutes ago, CALZONE said:

Would his return require more pussified pitch counts? He threw 76 pitches this season and poof. I've seen enough. Time to move on from him. 

Just pointing out you were talking out your ass.... like always.    Maybe it's time to change the name to AceVenturaZone.  

[Lou]

 

1 hour ago, CALZONE said:

Would his return require more pussified pitch counts? He threw 76 pitches this season and poof. I've seen enough. Time to move on from him. 

So every pitcher that gets injured in his first start of the year should be put on a pussified pitch count? Might want to let Noah Syndergaard know. He only lasted 38 pitches before going on the DL. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by Lou