Would you if you were Dombrowski????

[Jonesy]

Offer Porcello in a deal to get you Roy Halladay?

[thewave84]

Absolutely, but I think it would take more.

[Jonesy]

I would Because Halladay is not that old, and Verlander and Jackson are young still. And a 1-2-3 of Halladay, Verlander and Jackson is pretty damn good. The added bonus that V. Wells has to come with him is even better, cause now he can play left fieild.

And yes it would take more, But Porcello is a good starting point. Just add what ever it takes. Larish, perry, Thames, etc......

[JOliver]

I would do Jackson, Miner and Ramirez. IN A HEARTBEAT!

But leave Porcello alone.

[The Truman Show]

Vernon Wells should not be viewed as a positive. He is not a good player whatsoever. He's a pretty poor defender, in CF anyway, and he hits about as well as 2009 Magglio.

Having to absorb Wells would kill any deal for me anyway. But even still, Porcello is absolutely untouchable in my mind. The only player in the game I would trade him for is Pujols.

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by JOliver

I would do Jackson, Miner and Ramirez. IN A HEARTBEAT!

But leave Porcello alone.

Why Jackson? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?

[will the thrill]

18 mill per with 4 and a half years left? You could trade for Doc Gooden from '84 and I wouldn't want Wells included. He has at least passed Maggs in OPS in the last month with a shiny .727

[spikesglaring]

No thanks. Porcello is young, cheap and very talented. We do not have the farm system depth to even consider this trade a possibility.

[Lbh24]

Originally Posted by will the thrill

18 mill per with 4 and a half years left? You could trade for Doc Gooden from '84 and I wouldn't want Wells included.

What if you got to party with him?

[InfanteIago]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

Vernon Wells should not be viewed as a positive. He is not a good player whatsoever. He's a pretty poor defender, in CF anyway, and he hits about as well as 2009 Magglio.

Having to absorb Wells would kill any deal for me anyway. But even still, Porcello is absolutely untouchable in my mind. The only player in the game I would trade him for is Pujols.

Porcello is a solid 20 year old pitcher right now but there are a lot of guys I would trade Porcello for in a deal. You mentioned Pujols, I would add

Hanley Ramirez
Chase Utley-maybe
Nick Markakis
Joe Mauer
Matt Kemp
Ryan Braun
Evan Longoria
Carl Crawford
Adam Jones
Brian McCann

That's just a list of position players and I could probably add a few more and that's not including any pitchers.

[Edman85]

If I were to trade Porcello, it would be for somebody who I had more than 1.5 years of control over.

[ballmich]

No, I wouldn't. But I'd consider it if we had a window to sign Halladay to an extension first. But even then, I'm not willing to tack on the entire minor league system in the deal. They can pick another prospect or two, but none of our top guys.

[ballmich]

Originally Posted by Edman85

If I were to trade Porcello, it would be for somebody who I had more than 1.5 years of control over.

Exactly.

[InfanteIago]

Originally Posted by ballmich

No, I wouldn't. But I'd consider it if we had a window to sign Halladay to an extension first. But even then, I'm not willing to tack on the entire minor league system in the deal. They can pick another prospect or two, but none of our top guys.

If the Tigers farm system is as weak as people think wouldn't the Tigers be getting the best of the deal?

[Tram&Lou]

Just a thought . . .

Couldn't DD simply trade for Halladay, give up Porcello and Perry + whatever else. That would be an awesome threesome for this season (Verlander, Jackson, Halladay) and see where that takes us for this year.

And then in the offseason unload Halladay and get some prospects back to replace the ones we gave up.

Essentially your getting Halladay for this year and still not selling the farm?

[ballmich]

Originally Posted by InfanteIago

If the Tigers farm system is as weak as people think wouldn't the Tigers be getting the best of the deal?

Not necessarily. A few guys have developed this year and moved the needle a little bit. But it's still heavily weighted on a couple of high end prospects, in my opinion. Sizemore. Streisby. Avila. Weinhardt. Satterwhite. Crosby. Iorg. Not to mention, most of these guys project to fill significant near-term voids on the major league roster. Polanco. Laird. Rodney. Lyon. Everett.

Most of the other guys, I wouldn't have a problem with dealing.

I don't think that anyone is saying the cupboards are bare.

[ToledoTigerFan]

The farm system exists for a reason. The Tigers have a ton of money invested in the farm system. At some point, they're going to have to start having faith in their drafting and development. It's the cheapest method of talent acquisition there is.

So, my answer is "no". Keep Porcello.

[pyrotigers]

No. Porcello's ceiling is probably to be Roy Halladay. Now, it's unlikely he reaches that ceiling (not a personal thing, it's unlikely any pitching prospect does) but he's already proven to be a competent MLB pitcher and considering the age and contract situations it is not a move I'd make.

[Jonesy]

Originally Posted by ballmich

No, I wouldn't. But I'd consider it if we had a window to sign Halladay to an extension first. But even then, I'm not willing to tack on the entire minor league system in the deal. They can pick another prospect or two, but none of our top guys.

Halladay has a blanket No Trade Clause. Which means Almost anyone who trades for him will be signing him to an extension.

No. Porcello's ceiling is probably to be Roy Halladay.

Look I like Porcello don't get me wrong. He probably will never be Halladay. The Guy is a machine.

I would still do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Truman Show]

Originally Posted by InfanteIago

Porcello is a solid 20 year old pitcher right now but there are a lot of guys I would trade Porcello for in a deal. You mentioned Pujols, I would add

Hanley Ramirez
Chase Utley-maybe
Nick Markakis
Joe Mauer
Matt Kemp
Ryan Braun
Evan Longoria
Carl Crawford
Adam Jones
Brian McCann

That's just a list of position players and I could probably add a few more and that's not including any pitchers.

Ok, I understand Hanley, Mauer, Longoria, and a few others. Nick Markakis? Carl Crawford? You must have a pretty unimpressed idea of Porcello's long-term potential if you'd make those deals.

[InfanteIago]

Originally Posted by The Truman Show

Ok, I understand Hanley, Mauer, Longoria, and a few others. Nick Markakis? Carl Crawford? You must have a pretty unimpressed idea of Porcello's long-term potential if you'd make those deals.

Porcello only makes 30 starts a year. Markakis is only 25, very solid career numbers thus far, corner outfield that bats lefthanded. Detroit doesn't have anything like that on their team or in their farm system. Crawford is 28 who's also just hitting his prime. I would love to see what people were saying about Bonderman when he was in Detroit at the age of 21.

[84 Lives!!!]

Yes and no.

Yeah, I'd LOVE to have a dominating 1-2-3 of Halladay-JV-Edwin for this year and next. It'd put us in go-for-broke status and DD would then ALSO have to trade for Hawpe. Possible? Porcello-Perry-Crosby-Sizemore for Halladay? Wilkin-Strieby-Satterwhite for Hawpe? I'm just guessing at the packages it would take to get these two guys...

IF DD were to swing a trade for Halladay, and feel compelled to then also go for Hawpe or similar... That's a 2-year window to try and win everything... with a damned HUGE advantage based on superior pitching with the Halladay-JV-Edwin trio. We'd be like the '90's Braves.

But...

No. If Wells was required to be included in that trade... it's a deal-breaker for me. Or they have to take Marte and Brandon Douglas instead of Crosby & Sizemore. AND they'd have to pay at least 1/2 of the remainder of his contract, if not more. And DD/ Ilitch would have to be willing to accept the extra salary as part of the cost of obtaining Halladay. And then waive him.

And also no: I think I would rather bet on a JV-Edwin-Crosby-Porcello long-term future, with Sizemore, Iorg, Avila, Perry, & others included in that picture...

Rather than the short-term 1 1/2 year window with Halladay...

But to me... it's a tough call. I could go either way.

[eastside billee]

I'm saying no. I've been one in the past to trade tomorrow for today every time.
But in this instance I say no. If the Tigers can play 1/2 a year and be in 1st, I'm betting they can play another 1/2 and stay in first without Halladay. However, I have concerns
that Porcello will not be able to pitch the 2nd 1/2 the way he did the 1st.

[sportz4life]

Against my better judgemnt I said yes, for two reasons.

1. He is great, far better than Porcello is now and I embrace the chance to win everytime.

2. Next year if we deem him unsignable, you will be able to spin him off for nearly as much or more than you paid for him.

[KleShreen]

I love Porcello, and everyone in the Tigers organization...but you are silly if you would not give up Porcello, Zumaya, Crosby, and Ramirez for Halladay.

[will the thrill]

if Halladay was younger, like Miguel was compared to Maybin, you do it everytime, but Porcello is a baby, and with our offense, adding Haladay doesn't guarantee us anything this year.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Man, Halladay has a lot of innings on that arm. I was tempted but voted "No".

[TonyJM]

No...

(1) As Ed pointed out, we'd be losing a ton of control and in doing so, likely sacrifice a bunch of future wins at a high price -- both financially and in prospects.

(2) Halladay is significantly better than Porcello this year...But I don't think (A) the difference is that much greater than the difference between a cheaper bat and one of our starting outfielders -- or -- (B) the difference is that much greater than a cheaper starting pitcher and our fifth starter this season.

This is, of course, making assumptions about the nature of the trade market that I can in absolutely no way back-up...But in short, I'd think there was equal or better short term value on the trade market for the Tigers than replacing our number 3 starter with Halladay. Obviously, not trading Porcello is much better in terms of long-term value.


-Tony

[InfanteIago]

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

Man, Halladay has a lot of innings on that arm. I was tempted but voted "No".

People will be saying that about Porcello when he's 26 or 27 though.

[Netnerd]

One of my reasons for wanting to keep Porcello is old-school: I'd like to follow another one of our finer prospects through his years of maturing, ala Verlander. Halladay would be a veteran upgrade right now, but I'd like to see if Porcello can become a Halladay-level pitcher through the next few years.

Sorry, no strategy or anything to add to the thread. Said "explain Why Not," so I did!

[berneree]

Originally Posted by KleShreen

I love Porcello, and everyone in the Tigers organization...but you are silly if you would not give up Porcello, Zumaya, Crosby, and Ramirez for Halladay.

You would only trade this much for Halladay with a 4yr/$40 million contract. For the present Halladay of 1.5 years.....you give up Porcello and Zumaya only.

My answer....I wouldn't give up these 2 for Halladay.

[laverty]

Yes was my response...

Watched Andrew Miller's outing last night and again realized that there are NO untouchables in the Bigs...

[Elevate]

Originally Posted by Netnerd

One of my reasons for wanting to keep Porcello is old-school: I'd like to follow another one of our finer prospects through his years of maturing, ala Verlander. Halladay would be a veteran upgrade right now, but I'd like to see if Porcello can become a Halladay-level pitcher through the next few years.

I voted NO for pretty much this same sentiment.

[Ghostface]

only if they take willis, robertson, magglio, and guillen.

[djhutch]

Very good question. It's tempting, no doubt `cuz Halladay is so good, & the Cabrera deal has worked so well for us. I just think the package would be too much. Porcello is just too good so young.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by InfanteIago

People will be saying that about Porcello when he's 26 or 27 though.

Well, let's worry about that in 6 or 7 years, OK?

[Tramlou]

Nope, for this reason

Originally Posted by Edman85

If I were to trade Porcello, it would be for somebody who I had more than 1.5 years of control over.

[Scottwood]

I would have to see who else was in the deal. But, a straight Porcello for Halladay swap would be very enticing. I imagine they would also want Ryan Perry and a couple position prospects, as well.

[TigersFan81371]

I'm not sure. It could work out. It could backfire. The uncertainty of it all scares me!

[Antrat]

I would only give up Porcello for Halladay if Halladay would sign a five year extension as part of the deal.