Have Angels Again Given Their Fans the Thumb?

Down, Angel fans. Control your excitement.

The Angels signed a pitcher Thursday. His name is Ismael Valdes, a two-time Dodger reject, a one-time Cub failure. Angel fans are sitting down now, logging on to the Internet, going to their chat rooms. They will not be happy.

If you are wondering where Valdes, who has a history of blister problems and a shower altercation with Eric Karros in his illustrious past, fits into the Angels rotation, General Manager Bill Stoneman has one answer.

Stoneman’s answer: “I don’t really like calling guys No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 4 or No. 5 starters, particularly when you look at our rotation. Whoever is pitching that night is the No. 1 starter.”

Our translation: “I don’t really like calling guys No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 4 or No. 5 starters, particularly when you look at our rotation. Whoever is pitching that night is the No. 5 starter.”

This feels a little like Kent Bottenfield in reverse.

When the Angels proudly announced the acquisition of Bottenfield, a surprising all-star pitcher in 1999 but a mediocre pitcher the rest of his career, Stoneman said the Angels were convinced Bottenfield was ready to replay 1999. Turns out Bottenfield probably is a mediocre pitcher who lucked into one good year. He didn’t last the season in Anaheim.

Now Stoneman has proudly announced the acquisition of Valdes, who bombed out with the Cubs in 2000 and also with the Dodgers. Instead of a replay of his last season, Stoneman says the Angels are hoping Valdes can go back for his future, can be the pitcher he was in 1996 and 1997.

There can be no question that the Angels and their ownership, Disney, will not spend money. The way things are, you can’t blame them. But the fans want to see their team trying. Valdes doesn’t seem much like a try.

It is Disney money, not our money, but does anybody at Disney wonder what the fans will say today? Disney makes movies about nursery rhymes. What, you haven’t watched “Mother Goose Goes Hollywood,” a 1938 Disney production?

So allow us to take a liberty or two with a nursery rhyme.

“Little Jack Horner [substitute here Bill Stoneman] sat in a corner eating his Christmas pie. He stuck in his thumb and pulled out a plum [substitute here Valdes] and said ‘What a good boy am I.’ ”

It is all the Angels seem able to do. Stick in their thumb and hope to pull out a plum. Bottenfield was no plum.

If Ramon Ortiz has grown up as a pitcher, if Jarrod Washburn and Scott Schoeneweis stay healthy, if skinny Matt Wise matures, if another bargain-basement acquisition, Pat Rapp, does anything, then maybe Stoneman will have pulled out another plum.

But it seems the fate of the Angels will be always left up to luck, to that thumb pulling out that plum.

Valdes and Stoneman describe Valdes’ 2-4 record and 5.37 ERA with the Cubs and his 0-3, 6.08 record with the Dodgers and his paltry 107 innings pitched as an aberration, a single year of bad luck and bad health.

“There was a little shoulder tendinitis,” Stoneman says, “then he came up with a hamstring problem. For the first time in his career, he had something bothering him other than the blisters.”

Oh, yeah, the blisters. Valdes always has problems with the blisters. Someone seriously asked Valdes Thursday during a conference call if he had ever dunked his pitching hand in a bucket of brine. That’s what the Angels do now. They get pitchers and then look for home remedies.

Valdes is cheap. He’s signed for only one year. So how bad can it be, you wonder?

Here’s the problem.

Valdes has a history of being a clubhouse distraction. In April of 1997 Karros and Valdes exchanged shoves in the shower. Karros felt Valdes was not properly serious about preparing for his starts.

What the Angels did not have last year were any clubhouse problems. Thank Manager Mike Scioscia for that, certainly, as well as a concerted effort by everyone to avoid the ugliness of 1999.

Can the Angels stand a moody, lackadaisical person in their midst? Should they have to?

Scioscia, who worked with Valdes when he was a Dodger coach, says he is excited about the signing and thinks that any stories about his clubhouse problems are exaggerated.

And Scioscia will go even further. Scioscia says that if Valdes is healthy, if Valdes stays in shape and in a good mood, that Valdes will be as good as any of the big free-agent pitchers who signed this year, the ones the Angels didn’t pursue.

“Pitchers changed teams,” Scioscia says, “big-name guys changed teams. But that still left a lot of teams trying to upgrade their pitching. It becomes more and more difficult. Because of the circumstances around Ismael, he’s not considered a sure thing like [Rick] Reed or [Andy] Ashby. You look at [Mike] Hampton, [Denny] Neagle, [Mike] Mussina, any pitcher out there who was a big-name free agent and [Valdes] can pitch at that caliber if he’s right.

“Not everyone is going to be able to sign those top guys. Somebody is left looking for pitching. That’s where we were.”

That’s where the Angels always seem to be. Hoping for a plum on the thumb. But often getting a pie in the face.

*

Diane Pucin can be reached at her e-mail address: diane.pucin@latimes.com