COMMENTARY : Winfield Deal: Much to Gain, Little to Lose

A colleague, Mike Penner, wrote in the Orange County edition of The Times Saturday that the Angels’ apparent acquisition of Dave Winfield represented a perfect fit in that neither Winfield nor the Angels seem to be sure if they are coming or going.

There is great truth in that, but also in this:

The acquisition of Winfield--if it becomes reality--represents a low-risk proposition for the Angels, who have much to gain and little to lose.

Just two years ago, at 36, Winfield had one of his finest seasons, batting .322 with 25 home runs and 107 runs batted in. He is an acknowledged leader and clubhouse presence, attributes the Angels lack. An internal spark, perhaps, of the type Manager Doug Rader claims has been missing.

The intangibles, of course, become relevant only if Winfield produces, and there are mixed views regarding his ability to rebound from the back surgery that put him on the disabled list for the entire 1988 season, and from what many scouts claim has been a loss of bat and foot speed.

Winfield is batting .213. He was 0 for 22 in late April and reduced to a platoon role by the New York Yankees in early May. A gamble, certainly. But what did it cost the Angels in contrast to the potential rewards?

Mike Witt had dropped so far out of the Angel plans and expectations that they opted to trade him while knowing that Kirk McCaskill’s elbow is ailing and he will have to miss a start or two.

Witt’s role was strictly that of a middle man, and it is impossible to believe he would have regained his starting promise and effectiveness in what had become a doubting and hostile Anaheim environment. In addition, his market value had declined in proportion to his declining victory totals.

Tim Raines? Lenny Dykstra? Von Hayes? Ellis Burks? Ivan Calderon? The asking price for each was much more than Witt. Rob Deer? Who needs another 150 strikeouts in a lineup that led the American League in strikeouts last year?

Yes, Mike Port, the Angels’ general manager, may have procrastinated in making a major trade. His timidity may be as glaring as his club’s anemic offense.

It can be said, perhaps, that he should have packaged the inconsistent Devon White and the sometimes fragile McCaskill in pursuing a run-producer in his prime. That he should have given up White for the Cleveland Indians’ Joe Carter last winter instead of pulling out of that trade because Robin Yount’s indecision left Port uncertain that he would have a center-field replacement for White.

All of that, however, is irrelevant now, when Winfield is the best Port can do for Witt in a tardy attempt to bolster a lineup that ranks near the bottom of most of the league’s offensive categories.

Will Winfield report? Probably. He lives in Beverly Hills and wants to play four or five more years without the abuse he has experienced from Yankee owner George Steinbrenner.

But it is likely that he will first ask an arbitrator to provide the respect that Steinbrenner failed to again by refusing to consult Winfield regarding the trade.

He will ask the arbitrator to invalidate the trade on the basis that his 10-and-five status--10 years in the majors and the last five with the same team--gives him veto rights and supersedes any other trade clause in his contract. Then he will seek to put the trade back together by asking the Angels to extend a contract that expires at the end of the season, which is the real issue here.

A child-support case in Houston threatens to put a serious drain on Winfield’s savings. He has a gun at the Angels’ head. Is it loaded?

Are there bullets left in his bat? The Angels have paid a small price for this ballistics test and may be ready with a follow-up deal to dislodge the outfield logjam.

Winfield alone, of course, won’t enable the Angels to catch the Oakland Athletics, but he represents an intriguing and missing dimension--in the clubhouse and on the field. Besides, they were at Witt’s end anyway.