Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Is FSU Really The ACC's Most Valuable Team?

One More Time With Mike Napoli And The Vernon Wells Trade

Word is that Tony Reagins had a pretty good idea the Blue Jays would send Mike Napoli to the Rangers after getting him in the Vernon Wells trade. What does this mean? Does it mean anything?

Nov 10, 2011 - We wouldn't keep going back to the Vernon Wells trade if it weren't so absurd. It was absurd at the time, and, somehow, it only looks more absurd ten months later, with Mike Napoli having terrorized opposing pitchers with the Rangers, and with Wells having completed one of the most disappointing seasons since the summer of 1816. The newest nugget to cause something of a stir appeared in a Sunday column by Peter Gammons, reading:

About a year after former general manager Tony Reagins confided that he had a pretty good idea that when he traded Mike Napoli to Toronto that the Blue Jays would likely flip him to Texas [...]

One of the many criticisms of Angels GM Tony Reagins at the time was that he allowed Napoli to land with a division rival. Now, according to Gammons, Reagins had a hunch that was the way things would play out after he sent Napoli to Toronto. It wasn't a guarantee, but Reagins understood it to be the likelihood that, by moving Napoli in the Wells deal, he would be paving the way for Texas to get its hands on the slugger.

Now, the rest of this post is going to operate under the assumption that Gammons is correct. Gammons might not be correct. Who knows? I guess Reagins knows, but I don't know. If this is wrong, then, okay, nevermind. If this is right, then proceed.

What does it mean that Reagins figured Napoli would end up with the Rangers? What does it add to the story that Reagins shipped Napoli to the Jays while knowing that the Jays didn't have much use for him, but that the Rangers did?

The most popular interpretation I've seen is that this is just further evidence of how little Reagins and the Angels' front office thought of Napoli as a player. That they weren't worried about Napoli joining the Rangers because they didn't think he was very good. So Mike Napoli could go to Texas. Who cares? How much could he possibly do?

Here's the thing about that, though: we don't need any further evidence of how little Reagins and the Angels' front office thought of Napoli as a player. There's no room for further evidence of how little Reagins and the Angels' front office thought of Napoli as a player. Because the Angels traded Mike Napoli, along with Juan Rivera, for Vernon Wells, and almost all of Vernon Wells' contract.

That says everything about how Napoli was valued. Here's what the Angels would've needed to give the Blue Jays in order to land Wells and his contract:

 

That's it. Nothing. Maybe a low-level minor leaguer, just because the commissioner's office frowns on players being given away. But the Angels didn't need to include Napoli and Rivera. They did that because they wanted to. They did that because they wanted to clear payroll space, and didn't care to look into other possible ways.

The Angels basically handed Mike Napoli to the Blue Jays. There is no more illuminating indication of how little he was valued. It doesn't say anything new that Reagins assumed Napoli would land with the Rangers; we already knew the Angels didn't think Napoli was worth much. That was established by the original trade.

It's also worth pointing out that, while Reagins figured Toronto would send Napoli to Texas, he figured that would be a trade, and a trade that returned equal value. The Rangers would add Mike Napoli, but lose something else. If Reagins didn't think much of Napoli, it wouldn't matter. On the off chance that Reagins thought Napoli could be something, then he would've figured the Rangers would lose something of value to get him. It's not like the Rangers were going to add Napoli for free.

All in all, I'm not sure this new information adds anything. I guess it adds some color, and it makes Tony Reagins appear less naive, but in terms of the Angels' valuation of Mike Napoli, it doesn't add anything we didn't already know. The Angels didn't care for Mike Napoli. The Angels didn't care for Mike Napoli one bit. That's just part of what makes the whole thing so amazing.

Do you like this post?

Wbc_029_medium

Jeff Sullivan

Editor

I started blogging about the Seattle Mariners at Leone For Third in December of 2003, and I joined SBN and founded Lookout Landing in January 2005. I can see outside from my room, which is good... Read full bio


Comments

Display:

The blank space actually undersells it

Because the Angels could have given the Blue Jays LESS than nothing to get Wells, since his contract was such an albatross.

I'd rather know a little about a lot than a lot about a little

by Sportszilla on Nov 10, 2011 10:07 AM EST reply actions  

I think it shows how badly new blood was needed

Scoscia is a great manager, but he whiffed terribly on a player that was a key reason the Angels finished in second. I get that Napoli’s 2010 wasn’t a great season, with career highs in strikeouts and OBP, but his OPS+ was still 115, and, as mentioned, Vernon Wells’ contract is so bad that he could’ve been had for some guy struggling in Cedar Rapids.

Napoli looks even better because he plays at the Arlington Space Center, but still, the whole thing reeks like a ball of garbage descending on New New York.

R.I.P. Nick Adenhart - Always an Angel

by Kernel on Nov 10, 2011 10:48 AM EST reply actions  

Napoli's OPS was higher on the road in 2011.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=napolmi01&year=2011&t=b#hmvis

Well then... I would like to see this Jeff Sullivan pornagraphy.

by ghostofErikThompson on Aug 11, 2010 10:35 PM PDT

by Feliz es bueno on Nov 10, 2011 12:42 PM EST up reply actions  

There’s some difference between thinking he can’t help your team and thinking he can’t help any team, but, yeah, it’s too thin to really care about.

Game's the same, just got more fierce.

by Sam Miller OCR on Nov 10, 2011 11:21 AM EST reply actions  

One Mo' Time!

Reagins gave up Naps so cheap!
We gonna sell away!
Trade all our players fa’ free!
Oh yeah!
One Mo’ Time!

/end auto-tune

Scioscialist Party of America - Redistributing your defense since 2000.

by Commander_Nate on Nov 10, 2011 11:47 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

Which begs the question, why not get Wells for a bag of balls....

then trade Napoli to another team for some value…. I think maybe they were drunk when they did that trade. I can’t think of how a sober person could ratiuonalize the deal they made.

Baseball's hard, guys. I mean, it really is. You can love it but, believe me, it don't always love you back. It's kind of like dating a German chick, you know?

by Buttermaker on Nov 10, 2011 1:07 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Yahoo_full_count Yahoo_fantasy_baseball

Anaheim, CA, USA; Los Angeles Angels first baseman Mark Trumbo celebrates after hitting a home run against the Toronto Blue Jays at Angel Stadium of Anaheim.  The Angels won 6-2. Credit: Kelvin Kuo-US PRESSWIRE

The Angel Who's Improved

Los Angeles, CA, USA; Los Angeles Dodgers catcher A.J. Ellis gets brushed back by a pitch as Colorado Rockies catcher Ramon Hernandez catches the ball at Dodger Stadium. Dodgers won 11-4. Credit: Jayne Kamin-Oncea-US PRESSWIRE

A Decade Of Patience, Patience

CHICAGO, IL: Danny Duffy #23 of the Kansas City Royals leaves the game against the Chicago White Sox in the first inning with an injury at U.S. Cellular Field in Chicago, Illinois.  (Photo by David Banks/Getty Images)

The Royals And Pitcher Development