Tigers 2009-10 offseason thread

[Zumayas arm]

Originally Posted by SpartanBoiler

The blockbuster that stalled « The Detroit Tiger Weblog

"Thank you God"

[Truman Capote]

The essentials of the deal (Edwin + Curtis for Scherzer, Jackson, Coke, and Dunn) would've constituted somewhere near fair market value for the two. Scherzer is a more valuable asset than Jackson, for sure. Austin Jackson and two bullpen arms might be close to Granderson, depending on what you think about Jackson or Coke. I'll even be generous, assume that Coke could move to the rotation, and say that the other side of the deal is slightly above fair market value for Curtis and Edwin.

However, since the Tigers don't actually HAVE to trade those two, it would be dumb to trade them for "slightly above fair market value at best." It would be really dumb, even. If the Yankees replaced Dunn with Phil Hughes, then it's actually worth considering.

Acquiring Max Scherzer would be totally awesome though, so if they can find a way to deal Jackson and something else on the side for Scherzer, they should do it.

And for the 5 billionth time, trading Curtis or Edwin has nothing to do with money. None whatsoever.

[PRStoetzer]

The Tigers signed free agent LHP Brad Thomas prior to their trade of Clay Rapada yesterday.

Tigers sign free-agent lefty, trade Rapada to Rangers | detnews.com | The Detroit News

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

Replace Wilk with Crosby and sure.

I thought Crosby was going to be a bullpen guy.

[ErnieMcCracken]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

The essentials of the deal (Edwin + Curtis for Scherzer, Jackson, Coke, and Dunn) would've constituted somewhere near fair market value for the two. Scherzer is a more valuable asset than Jackson, for sure. Austin Jackson and two bullpen arms might be close to Granderson, depending on what you think about Jackson or Coke. I'll even be generous, assume that Coke could move to the rotation, and say that the other side of the deal is slightly above fair market value for Curtis and Edwin.

However, since the Tigers don't actually HAVE to trade those two, it would be dumb to trade them for "slightly above fair market value at best." It would be really dumb, even. If the Yankees replaced Dunn with Phil Hughes, then it's actually worth considering.

Acquiring Max Scherzer would be totally awesome though, so if they can find a way to deal Jackson and something else on the side for Scherzer, they should do it.

And for the 5 billionth time, trading Curtis or Edwin has nothing to do with money. None whatsoever.

I can roll with this trade as is.

[Truman Capote]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

I thought Crosby was going to be a bullpen guy.

Not unless he has some serious setbacks along the way.

[Truman Capote]

Anyway, that 3 way deal isn't happening. Pretty much the only team interested now is the Dbacks. The Yanks don't want to go any higher than Kennedy, Jackson, Coke, and Dunn, and the Tigers are wanting more too.

Unless Phil Hughes gets involved, the Yanks are probably out of the running for Granderson.

[Western Reserve Spartan]

Twitter says that this deal has a chance again.

I hope not.

[Spartyon2001]

Originally Posted by Western Reserve Spartan

Twitter says that this deal has a chance again.

I hope not.

I don't understand why people are against moving Jackson & Granderson. As this team stands, they will not win more than 80 games. The only chance they have to become a better team is to fill positional holes by dealing these two. I understand people like Granderson because of his personality, but this team will not spend the money needed to fill the holes they have, so this is the only chance to do so. Sorry folks, but I am rooting for this deal.

[Western Reserve Spartan]

Originally Posted by Spartyon2001

I don't understand why people are against moving Jackson & Granderson. As this team stands, they will not win more than 80 games. The only chance they have to become a better team is to fill positional holes by dealing these two. I understand people like Granderson because of his personality, but this team will not spend the money needed to fill the holes they have, so this is the only chance to do so. Sorry folks, but I am rooting for this deal.

I'm not against moving Jackson.

The problem with what you said is that the deal as constructed fills no positional holes. They get one positional prospect and a bunch of young pitchers. Big deal. No holes have been filled.

You're rooting for the deal because you're one of the geniuses who thinks that baseball teams get better by clearing house every two years.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by Spartyon2001

I don't understand why people are against moving Jackson & Granderson. As this team stands, they will not win more than 80 games. The only chance they have to become a better team is to fill positional holes by dealing these two. I understand people like Granderson because of his personality, but this team will not spend the money needed to fill the holes they have, so this is the only chance to do so. Sorry folks, but I am rooting for this deal.

I have ZERO problems trading these guys from a baseball standpoint. Jackson is a solid pitcher but he's not going to be worth the money he will get in two years when Boras takes him into free agency. You will get a lot more for him by trading him now rather than next year.

As far as Granderson is concerned, He turns 29 during spring training. This team is not going to be realistically competitive again until 2011 or 2012. By then Granderson is going to be a 30 or 31 year old. That's not exactly the age you are looking for in a centerfielder as you are building a team that will be competitive for a 3-5 year stretch.

[scimini]

I also don't get the love affair with Jackson. He is a marginal #3 at best and will want to be paid more like a #2. If you can use him to acquire some talent then by all means.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by Western Reserve Spartan

I'm not against moving Jackson.

The problem with what you said is that the deal as constructed fills no positional holes. They get one positional prospect and a bunch of young pitchers. Big deal. No holes have been filled.

You're rooting for the deal because you're one of the geniuses who thinks that baseball teams get better by clearing house every two years.

Pitching is ALWAYS at a premium throughout the league. If you can stockpile young arms, you have the chips needed to go after veteran players in trades that will help your team.

[Spartyon2001]

Originally Posted by Western Reserve Spartan

I'm not against moving Jackson.

The problem with what you said is that the deal as constructed fills no positional holes. They get one positional prospect and a bunch of young pitchers. Big deal. No holes have been filled.

You're rooting for the deal because you're one of the geniuses who thinks that baseball teams get better by clearing house every two years.

I guess they have no issues with their current middle relief pitchers? IMO, this is the biggest positional hole on the team. I was sickened by the games they blew after Verlander, Porcello, and Jackson held the opponents to under two runs. Hell I even think Robertson had a decent game or two that the mid-relivers blew for him.

[sprtnbrn]

Originally Posted by scimini

I also don't get the love affair with Jackson. He is a marginal #3 at best and will want to be paid more like a #2. If you can use him to acquire some talent then by all means.

It reverts to a theory I've discovered in my auction keeper leagues. Generally your borderline keepers are slightly overpriced (and not as valuable) compared to what you perceive their value is. Inevitably if you let one go, he gets bid out at a lot less than you had him for. In this case, some Detroit fans feel Jackson is more valuable than he actually is. I liked trading for him because he was better than Joyce but conversely I have no problem trading him for the right price.

[Dr. Tailgate]

Lots of buzz that this deal is back on with momentum...

I pray to christ that it's not because the Tigers are flinching.

[Drugs Delaney]

Originally Posted by Spartyon2001

I don't understand why people are against moving Jackson & Granderson. As this team stands, they will not win more than 80 games. The only chance they have to become a better team is to fill positional holes by dealing these two. I understand people like Granderson because of his personality, but this team will not spend the money needed to fill the holes they have, so this is the only chance to do so. Sorry folks, but I am rooting for this deal.

And what positional holes get filled by this move?

It looks to me like they're replacing Curtis with a younger, right-handed, less talented versions of himself and then possibly upgrading Edwin Jackson slightly with Max Scherzer.

Then, they'd be getting a mediocre reliever in Phil Coke and Michael Dunn, who will likely be a situational lefty or a back of the rotation starter.

I don't see any positional holes being filled by this trade and they'd be giving up two of their biggest bargaining chips in the process.

[Drugs Delaney]

Originally Posted by Western Reserve Spartan

I'm not against moving Jackson.

The problem with what you said is that the deal as constructed fills no positional holes. They get one positional prospect and a bunch of young pitchers. Big deal. No holes have been filled.

You're rooting for the deal because you're one of the geniuses who thinks that baseball teams get better by clearing house every two years.

dammit. i'm slow.

[Truman Capote]

Originally Posted by Spartyon2001

I guess they have no issues with their current middle relief pitchers? IMO, this is the biggest positional hole on the team. I was sickened by the games they blew after Verlander, Porcello, and Jackson held the opponents to under two runs. Hell I even think Robertson had a decent game or two that the mid-relivers blew for him.

Bullpen is the strongest part of the organization, by far. They spent the entire 2008 draft on relievers.

The bullpen was most certainly not the problem in 2009.

[Spartyon2001]

Originally Posted by Western Reserve Spartan

I'm not against moving Jackson.

The problem with what you said is that the deal as constructed fills no positional holes. They get one positional prospect and a bunch of young pitchers. Big deal. No holes have been filled.

You're rooting for the deal because you're one of the geniuses who thinks that baseball teams get better by clearing house every two years.

Also, I do not feel this way, I just think this team as it stands will be third in the divison at best. Granderson is not going to get any better offensively, unless he starts taking roids. This team lacks speed, and youth, which needs to be addressed. Ramirez is fast, but may be a little rough defensively. The only way to improve on this is to let him see the field. More games have been blown from a break down of middle relief and lack of manufacturing runs, than the defensive catches made by Inge/Granderson.

[Drugs Delaney]

Originally Posted by Spartyon2001

I guess they have no issues with their current middle relief pitchers? IMO, this is the biggest positional hole on the team. I was sickened by the games they blew after Verlander, Porcello, and Jackson held the opponents to under two runs. Hell I even think Robertson had a decent game or two that the mid-relivers blew for him.

"positional" generally means players that play the field.

[ErnieMcCracken]

I want talent and the best players period. Filling positions and taking less talent in return does not make sense to me. A team and an organization can never have enough great players.

[Spartyon2001]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

Bullpen is the strongest part of the organization, by far. They spent the entire 2008 draft on relievers.

The bullpen was most certainly not the problem in 2009.

What drugs are you on? Minor, Fien, etc. were all shut down pitchers right? I will give you Lyon & somewhat Ni, but after those two .

[Drugs Delaney]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

I have ZERO problems trading these guys from a baseball standpoint. Jackson is a solid pitcher but he's not going to be worth the money he will get in two years when Boras takes him into free agency. You will get a lot more for him by trading him now rather than next year.

As far as Granderson is concerned, He turns 29 during spring training. This team is not going to be realistically competitive again until 2011 or 2012. By then Granderson is going to be a 30 or 31 year old. That's not exactly the age you are looking for in a centerfielder as you are building a team that will be competitive for a 3-5 year stretch.

Why not? Didn't seem to be a problem for the yankees key players

A Rod - 34
Jeter - 35
Rivera - 40
Teixeira - 29
Sabathia - 29
Burnett - 32

[Spartyon2001]

Originally Posted by Drugs Delaney

"positional" generally means players that play the field.

My bad I should have said areas of need.