| Jump to bottom |
Jackson for Morrow
i agree with TD that Jackson for Morrow would be a terrible deal for the tigers. I think DD would agree too, so i think it would take significantly more than Morrow to get EJ.
One other thought on EJ: Everybody's talking about his fade during the second half, but first half wins mean just as much in the standings as those in the second half.
His stats for the year were still very good, and second half slides in a youngish player may not be a long-term issue. He's only been a full-time starter for two seasons.
Maybe with fewer innings in ST, some early hooks in the first half, an extra day of rest from time to time, and more experience, he won't have this problem in the future.
i think he has great stuff and, while he may not be quite as good as he was in the first half in '09, he's a valuable asset and one of the current pillars of the Tigers.
We can never forget the importance of starting pitching, especially when it's young and relatively cheap. With JV, EJ, RP and Bondy (he looked pretty good at the end of last year), the Tigers have a chance to beat anybody next year. I'm not saying it's going to happen, i'm just saying starting pitching is a huge part of this sport and dwarfs the importance of Inge's BA, or the expected difference between Polly and Sizemore.
Off season trades
i strongly suspect you're right, Will.
I still don't like it though, if Mr. I. then a couple of months later says there's no more money.
i understand why he wouldn't want to spend more. i'm sure the franchise is already in the red on an operating basis (although i haven't attempted to check on that). But the team, with about 4 or 5 obvious key holes, is now spending $18-mil. on what would be in the free market about a $4-mil guy, and is apparently now considering trading key, underpriced guys to fill the holes.
And while the tigers desperately needed offence (Cdn. spelling, sorry) late last year, even a hot Maggs doesn't hit for much power or get on base much.
Just really bugs me.
Off season trades
I agree completely, TD, on the Maggs thing. i just can't imagine how they let that thing vest. Even with his strong second half, he still wasn't playing like anything resembling an $18-mil player, when you consider lack of power, horrible defence, and lack of speed.
I've always liked the guy, particularly his approach at the plate and having the guts to stand up for what you believe in politically, even while working in a public job in a market that is certain not to appreciate your point of view.
But that money, as you suggest, could go a long way in this depressed UFA market. oh well. water under the bridge, i guess.
As for the various sources on the possible trades involving different Tigers' players, that's a good point, but i suspect it was a similar process with each.
BTW, I hadn't heard about the Inge stuff. Who allegedly wants him and that contract?
Off season trades
To be perfectly fair, TD, i think those reports about the Tigers trading off "undervalued" (according to their contracts) players such as Grandy and EJ were based on interviews with unnamed GMs and other suits from other teams, who presumably had held preliminary talks with DD and his gang.
So i'd say there's something to them, even if nobody important ends up getting traded.
as a journalist by trade and a baseball geek by hobby, i can easily imagine DD's GM-to-GM talks (or Avila or somebody else with one of his counterpart) and the subsequent reaction going something like this:
Other GM: "Well, DD, what's do u have for us on the block and what's on your off-season shopping list? you have some minor league arms and some mediocre young OFs, and i figure you might even be willing to move some undervalued, established studs such as Willis, Maggs, and Nate ... and I'm assuming you don't want to move any of your worthwhile guys, such as EJ, Grandy, JV, etc."
DD: "most of that's true, i probably could move willis if the right offer came along. but i wouldn't say anybody is off the table. We've got a tough economy in Michigan, and we really want to make the playoffs next year and beyond, so i wouldn't rule anything out, blah, blah, blah."
other GM guy: "Just so i'm clear DD, a guy such as EJ or Grandy isn't out of bounds."
DD: "Like i said, we need to get better .. playoffs, economy, blah, blah, blah ... Clete's potential, blah, blah, blah .. Matt Anderson, Seth Greisinger, blah, blah, blah."
other guy: "Well, that's interesting DD. We'll talk to our people, you talk to yours, blah, blah, blah, Grandy did hit only .249 this year, blah, blah, blah."
DD: "Sounds good, blah, blah, blah, Miggy a solid team guy, cultural differences, blah, blah, blah ... EJ on the all-star team blah, blah, blah."
other: "talk soon."
DD: "Crosby the next JV, blah, blah, blah. Yup, bye."
64 minutes later: ... other GM guy talking to beat reporters who cover his team, whom he wants to keep on his good side: "off the record, tigers surprised me when they said EJ, Grandy not off the table, blah, blah, blah."
52 minutes after that: on-line headline says tigers shopping Grandy, EJ, sources say, blah, blah, blah.
81 minutes later: Internet filled with columnists assessing whether Tigers trading key guys is the right move.
10 seconds after that: Tigertalk posters get outraged, begin weeks of debate.
Or, maybe it wasn't like that at all.
Off season trades
T-Dog, i agree with almost everything you wrote in your post from a little while ago, but one question about your quest for verification that there might be some type of sell-off: If a team were going to sell good players with good contracts for future assets, would the owner or GM announce that they were having a fire sale?
i think teams rarely do that, and for good reason -- it would make it harder to ensure you're getting maximum return, particularly in cases where there are only one or two bidders. you'd want to ensure, IMO, the legitimacy of the "walk-away" option, or at least the perception that that's an option. That's eliminated if you tell everybody you're in sell mode.
p.s. thanks Will S.
Make these moves DD!
i like Jackson a lot and hope he stays for a while, but i wouldn't lock up any pitcher until it's necessary, which is usually a year before they hit the UFA marekt.
Look what happened to Bondy and Nate, to cite two obvious examples.
Off-season trades
i think it's important to remain skeptical about any large organization's public comments.
The Tigers, particularly with a GM as shrewd and cautious as DD at the helm (i agree that some of the contracts he signed weren't either shrewd or cautious), are no exception.
For example, despite their recent protests, i think the tigers have clearly got the message out there that they're willing to trade a single valuable asset such as Grandy or EJ for multiple younger, cheaper assets. And i think it's true that they're willing to do that, if they can find the right match.
But what i'm getting at is that it's entirely possible that they're not really willing to trade EITHER of them (or somebody like Miggy for example), but in fact they really want to trade ONE of them in particular if they get teh right offer.
So why put it out there that it's either of them, or one of many when it's really just one of them on the block?
Because if you want to get maximum value for a guy you've targetted as a sell-high guy, you want the market to believe:
a) it's not that you've targetted the guy as a sell-high guy but that you have to cut costs and he's one of the assets that could bring multiple, cheaper pieces.
b) you want to increase demand by boosting the number of possible buyers, even if part of that market is false, because you have no intention of trading one of the guys that's out there. It's like the opposite of announcing that you must move a certain guy, which always makes it difficult to get top value.
I'm not saying that what i'm putting out there is true. I have no idea. But it's certainly possible.
So, to extend the idea, my best guess is that DD has decided he can get multiple pieces, including a decent, cheaper replacement in the rotation for EJ, whom he has decided may not be as good as his 2009 stats suggest.
so, if he decides that a guy like james McDonald could be just as, or almost as good as EJ in the coming couple of years, and he can pick up a SS such as Hu, and one other young piece, i think he'll do it.
And that perhaps floating Grandy's name out there is just part of a smokescreen to boost the maket for EJ.
Clear as mud?
In Related News...
While i found the comparison between Iorg and Concepcion ammusing, i would rather have heard Sparky compare Iorg to Chris Pittaro or Eddie Miller or ...
On a personal level, it's hard not to like Sparky, especially if you, like me, remember him as the face of the franchise during the best tigers' era of my life to this point.
but that comment just reminds me of two of his most obvious flaws as a manager: his fondness for listening to his own voice, without need for reflection or research; and his willingness to rush to judgment on players.
After getting burned a couple of times by his habit for falling in love with young players during the first half of his Tigers' career, particularly Pittaro who became a punch line among Tigers' fans and observers, Sparky seemed to spend the last half of his tenure with the team determined not to let it happen again.
So while he (and the front office) foolishly stuck with guys like Herndon, Bergman, and Lemon way beyond what was reasonable, they ignored what was a dismal farm system and were absolutely reluctant to give the few decent young guys they had (Laga, HoJo, the young lefty starter they got from Baltimore for Moreland) a decent shot. (maybe HoJo is a bad example, as they netted Walt Terrell for him).
Looking back on it, I'd say the Tigers blew an opportunity in the 1980s to be even better than they were. While i believe they won more games than anybody else during the decade, i think they should have won even more and certainly should have been able to win more than two division titles. Remember, they started the decade with an incredible stable of young talent: Thompson, Tram, Whitaker, Parrish, Kemp, Gibson, Rozema, Morris, Schatzedr, Petry, etc.
But after drafting or signing HoJo, Wilson, Garbey, and Laga a few years after that earlier group (1980ish), i don't remember them rearing and promoting a single above-average MLB player for the rest of the decade.
Henneman may be the only exception.
To be fair, they signed some key veterans such as Evans and made some very astute trades for guys such as Tanana, Nokes, g./W. Hernandez,
Perhaps i'm missing somebody, but it was an incredibly futile record on the minor league front, which i'd argue cost them what could have very well been a dynasty, whether they had used those good young guys as trade bait or replacement parts.
Didn't meant to go down memory lane to this degree when i started the email about Sparky and Iorg, but there ya go.
T-dog
i certainly agree with you on your comment about batting orders, Yoop. This thing about the ideal #2 hitter being a little second basemen or CF who can run a bit but not too much, hit behind the runner and "handle the bat" ... i get it, but to me, it's all overrated by the TV summaries of the occasional run that is "created" without the benefit of an actual line drive.
It's part of a nice story line for the TV guys, but there just aren't that many runs scored that way.
To me, the perfect #2 hitter is Pujols. He's also of course the perfect leadoff man, #3 hitter, #4 hitter, etc.
I love Grandy, my favourite Tiger, but i'd trade him for the right package. A good player who does a lot of things well. But he's approaching the end of his prime, is no longer cheap and is good, but not great.
Vitters, the young SS and Marmol might do it. With Cashner as well, that's hard to turn down. Not interested in Colvin though, unless he's a throw-in.
JJ Hardy Trade
i had the same reaction, Yoop.
Very surprised Brew Crew would take Gomez over Bowden.
I'd be very surprised if Gomez ever hits or walks enough to be an effective MLB OF.
JJ Hardy Trade
i had the same reaction, John.
i'm normally in DD's corner more than most on his site, but i can't imagine how he wouldn't/couldn't top that offer. Maybe the Brewers love Gomez. I think it's unlikely that he'll ever hit or walk enough to be an above-average MLB CF. Yes, he can catch and run like the wind, but i don't think they got enough back for a good player like Hardy: a 27-year-old SS who hits with power, gets on base and plays above-average D.
To me, this looks one-sided.
Would have been, in my view, a major addition for the Tigers to add Hardy. Now it's the rival Twins who benefit.
I also thought the Tigers should have gone hard after Hermida who was picked up by the Red Sox for almost nothing.
both would have fit very well in our lineup, IMO.
Red Sox get Jeremy Hermida
I'm disappointed that the Tigers weren't in on Hermida. As i've stated here a couple of times in recent weeks, I thought there was a fit between Detroit and Fla.
And to see that he was (a) traded so quickly and (b) traded for, according to Rotoworld's guy, two mediocre prospects makes me angry/confused.
i thought he'd fit our needs well of a cheap, lefty-hitting corner guy who can run some, play D, get on base pretty well, hit with some pop, and who has upside. And the guy is still just 25.
Perhaps DD believes there's just not $2-mil or so difference between Hermida and Clete. Or perhaps he accepted Smokes' assessment that Clete is a future HOFer.
Hardy
i think sometimes situations present themselves as golden opportunities (eg. the Cabrera deal for six -- really two --prospects) and a team needs to pounce, even if it's not the most obvious need to address.
I believe the Hardy situation is one of those.
i think he's a very good player who should be about to enter his prime and who may be very affordable, given that he had a bad, injury-plagued year. somebody will benefit from the fact that he's coming off a bad year and that he's on a low-payroll team with an excellent SS prospect waiting in the wings.
I hope it's Detroit. He'd be a major addition, in my view, even if it would be a low profile one.
Polanco
hardy for Nate?
IMO, not in a million years.
Hardy is a relatively young, inexpensive guy who's proven to be a decent fielder and a good hitter in his 3+ years in the bigs. he also provides power and a decent BA and OBA at a premium defensive position.
in short, he's a valuable asset.
Nate is a guy who's been slugged around for more than two years and has one of the league's worst contracts.
you'd have to pay somebody to take him.
Nate or Dontrelle for Pierre is not impossible, but Hardy would take actual assets.
Polanco
I agree with most of you wrote TD, but i'd like to comment on your point (which a lot of people agree with) about the need for more contact and how this relates to PP.
Maybe i'm just picking on your words (sorry if that's the case), but i don't think we need more contact. I think we need more runs scored, and contact doesn't necessarily lead to that.
OBA and OPS increases certainly lead to that, but i'm not sure why people think a fly out, a pop up, or a ground out is inherently superior to a strikout.
the obvious argument is that contact can advance runners. That's true. But it can also lead to inning-killing double-plays. And when the contact is made on the first or second or even third pitch in an AB, it can also lead to fewer pitches being thrown by the opposing pitchers, which allows starters to go further into games, which means less chance of facing the middle relievers, which is an offensive team's best chance to score.
Bottom line as it relates to 2010 Tigers: I like PP, but he's offensively overrated because he's never used his incredible hand-eye coordination to take pitches, thereby posting a top-notch OBP.
So, i agree with those who argue it's time to try Sizemore.
And i'll take big K, big OPS, lower BA guys such as Dunn, Darryl Evans, Swisher, pat Burrell, instead of low K, low OPS, high BA guys such as PP, Juan Pierre, etc.
i think the market suggests this argument is sound. Pierre hit well over .300 and has great speed, but the LAD can't give him away. Literally. Any prospect or bag of balls and full ownership of that contract, and he's yours.
| Jump to top |
