When will Boras make his move to Ilitch?

**THECATMAC** · 02-03-2013, 04:32 PM

You know it will happen.....Soriano is probably sweating bullets right now...will Mike go into this season with a hodgepodge of closer's? He doesn't work that way when he knows how close he is. Mike can envision what has eluded him in the past, what a couple more million..... he will pull the trigger.

**bugmanson** · 02-03-2013, 04:34 PM

He signed with the Nats couple weeks ago
Nationals agree to terms with Rafael Soriano [UPDATED]

**THECATMAC** · 02-03-2013, 04:37 PM

Oh dam, I didn't hear that......my bad....

**PuNk42AE** · 02-03-2013, 05:10 PM

You can sub in Bourn for Soriano though.

**TheCouga** · 02-03-2013, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by PuNk42AE

You can sub in Bourn for Soriano though.

An outfield of Bourn, Jackson, and Hunter would be silly-good. I don't know that I'd have a problem with that. Garcia's not a sure thing, and Castellanos' maximum value is at 3B. If we trade the latter, we could get a pretty awesome SS or 2B.

**tiger337** · 02-03-2013, 05:34 PM

I don't think Bourn is a big enough name for Ilitch and Dombrowski probably won't want to go long-term with a 30-year old whose best asset is speed. I do suspect they are still looking for a closer though.

**Antrat** · 02-03-2013, 05:45 PM

I bet we'll end up with Prince Fielder.

**Scottwood** · 02-03-2013, 05:56 PM

I've always thought they might sign Brandon Lyon. He's still out there, but supposedly the Mets will sign him shortly.

**PuNk42AE** · 02-03-2013, 06:19 PM

Early ST rumor coming out is that Prince has learned a Curve this off-season. We shall see I guess.

**holygoat** · 02-03-2013, 09:07 PM

They need to sign Maybin first.

**zimm** · 02-03-2013, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by Scottwood

I've always thought they might sign Brandon Lyon. He's still out there, but supposedly the Mets will sign him shortly.

i've been thinking this for a while myself, but i have a hunch that if it were going to happen, it would have already.

**TheCouga** · 02-03-2013, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by tiger337

I don't think Bourn is a big enough name for Ilitch and Dombrowski probably won't want to go long-term with a 30-year old whose best asset is speed. I do suspect they are still looking for a closer though.

Possibly, but it's also possible Bourn's leverage could be dropping. I'd feel comfortable with a 4-year deal. I don't really see any team that NEEDS him right now. I mean, I guess Texas could still sign him. Or the Yankees, but if they haven't spent anything at this point, I'd think their budget crunch is for real. The Braves, Phillies, Reds, Nationals, Cardinals, Diamondbacks and both LA teams have their outfields taken care of. Oakland, Tampa, and Toronto won't overpay. I guess the Giants could hypothetically try to upgrade Gregor Blanco. If the Brewers upgrade, it will be at SP.

I can't think of anybody that's actually competitive this year that needs an OF other than the Rangers. Even the long-shots like the Pirates, Orioles, and Royals really don't have the money to bid big. If the Rangers decide they're not interested, he could become pretty cheap pretty fast.

**Nastradamus** · 02-04-2013, 12:19 PM

I wouldn't go 4 years, but I'd give him a big 1 year deal Adrian Beltre style.

**PuNk42AE** · 02-04-2013, 12:32 PM

So far Boras has been asking 5 years for 75M I believe. If he was to take a 1 year contract it would have to be a ton for Boras I bet. Don't forget with him you're losing your 1st round pick, but since you have the last Supp draft pick it isn't terrible if you do it.

**spikesglaring** · 02-04-2013, 01:28 PM

I would try going three years with a mutual option for the fourth year with Bourn & see if it's even plausible. He would improve this team dramatically.

**roarintiger1** · 02-04-2013, 01:37 PM

I would try going three years with someone else........just my opinion.

**ballmich** · 02-04-2013, 01:44 PM

Guys like Bourn are nice, if they come up through your system and are young plus cost controlled. As free agents, demanding long term contracts (not even factoring in the lost draft pick), they are a pretty terrible investment. He is an average to below average bat, and we won't get much bang for our buck defensively considering CF is already blocked and our OF defense is going to be pretty decent already with AJax, Hunter, and Dirks/Berry. This would be wasted payroll allocation, even if you don't think the team is working within a budget or some set of guidelines.

And if we are interested in Bourn, which I hope isn't the case, then you can't explain the apparent desire to trade Porcello due to his salary since he has a 1/$5.1MM contract -- and provides some critical depth at a position that could most handicap this team if a player were to go down with injury.

**Yoda** · 02-04-2013, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by roarintiger1

I would try going three years with someone else........just my opinion.

Who???

**tiger337** · 02-04-2013, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Yoda

Who???

Jose Canseco wants to make a comeback.

**Keepleyland2** · 02-04-2013, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by ballmich

Guys like Bourn are nice, if they come up through your system and are young plus cost controlled. As free agents, demanding long term contracts (not even factoring in the lost draft pick), they are a pretty terrible investment. He is an average to below average bat, and we won't get much bang for our buck defensively considering CF is already blocked and our OF defense is going to be pretty decent already with AJax, Hunter, and Dirks/Berry. This would be wasted payroll allocation, even if you don't think the team is working within a budget or some set of guidelines.

And if we are interested in Bourn, which I hope isn't the case, then you can't explain the apparent desire to trade Porcello due to his salary since he has a 1/$5.1MM contract -- and provides some critical depth at a position that could most handicap this team if a player were to go down with injury.

That Procello comparision is a bit off. $5 million for a long reliever is a bit much. Bourn will be paid to, and will, play everyday.

It's like if we had a $5 million bench player. Yeah it be nice insurance to have, but can a team like the tigers carry a guy at $5 million because he's nice insurance in case soemthing maybe could possibly happen? I think its a better idea to have a $1 million long reliever and use the extra $4 million elsewhere.

**Keepleyland2** · 02-04-2013, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by spikesglaring

I would try going three years with a mutual option for the fourth year with Bourn & see if it's even plausible. He would improve this team dramatically.

dramatically?

Dirks had a higher OBP and OPS than Bourn last year. Now is Dirks likely to regress a bit? Sure. But even a 100 point drop in OPS to .757 is still better than any Bourn season expect for 2011 when he went .766. Not sure Bourn's speed is that much of an asset to make us "dramatically" better.

**TheCouga** · 02-04-2013, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Keepleyland2

dramatically?

Dirks had a higher OBP and OPS than Bourn last year. Now is Dirks likely to regress a bit? Sure. But even a 100 point drop in OPS to .757 is still better than any Bourn season expect for 2011 when he went .766. Not sure Bourn's speed is that much of an asset to make us "dramatically" better.

We still have big gaps in LF and especially RF in Comerica Park, so having speedy outfielders at the corners is a big plus. Also (and especially if we trade Porcello), we have a starting rotation that gives up its share of fly balls. Having a staff of flyball/strikeout pitchers is a way to work around what is a lackluster infield defense, and is a strategy that would work even better if we had a crazy-good OF defense. Most of Bourn's value is on defense. Boars' asking price is insane right now, but if it drops, it might be worth it.

**RedRamage** · 02-04-2013, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by holygoat

They need to sign Maybin first.

Is he developing a breaking ball?

**roarintiger1** · 02-04-2013, 03:42 PM

While Bourn would make a few catches that others might not in left field and he might get the Tigers a few stolen bases, you still have to remember that he can't steal first base. As to who else that I would go after......I'm not sure the Tigers really need to go after any other outfield help. I can't really see the need to sign an expensive free agent and lose a first round draft pick.

**spikesglaring** · 02-04-2013, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Keepleyland2

dramatically?

Dirks had a higher OBP and OPS than Bourn last year. Now is Dirks likely to regress a bit? Sure. But even a 100 point drop in OPS to .757 is still better than any Bourn season expect for 2011 when he went .766. Not sure Bourn's speed is that much of an asset to make us "dramatically" better.

Most people do not believe Dirks is an every day player, and I include myself in that boat. I hope he proves me wrong though.

Bourn's WAR was 6.4 last season and has been consistently above four since he became an every day player. He would provide great defense in LF, which is very important in COPA. He would also give the team a boost in speed, which would be great from either the lead off or number nine spot in the lineup.

**spikesglaring** · 02-04-2013, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by roarintiger1

While Bourn would make a few catches that others might not in left field and he might get the Tigers a few stolen bases, you still have to remember that he can't steal first base. As to who else that I would go after......I'm not sure the Tigers really need to go after any other outfield help. I can't really see the need to sign an expensive free agent and lose a first round draft pick.

What are you talking about? He gets on-base at a slightly above-average clip & hits for a solid average.

**john doe** · 02-04-2013, 04:40 PM

Please, NO on Bourn, not worth the cost or the years. I'd go with Dirks.

**roarintiger1** · 02-04-2013, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by john doe

Please, NO on Bourn, not worth the cost or the years. I'd go with Dirks.

I agree... Bourn's 155 strikeouts last year scare me.

**DaYooperASBDT** · 02-04-2013, 06:32 PM

Time to dust off my crystal buffalo chip once again. The way the Tigers keep talking up Rondon, I think the Tigers will try to package
Rondon and Porcello, for a closer plus a so-so prospect. Most likely candidate would be the Orioles' Jim Johnson.

J.J. Putz is another possibility (his trade price would be much lower, I'm guessing just Rondon would do).

**Dan Gilmore** · 02-04-2013, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

Time to dust off my crystal buffalo chip once again. The way the Tigers keep talking up Rondon, I think the Tigers will try to package
Rondon and Porcello, for a closer plus a so-so prospect. Most likely candidate would be the Orioles' Jim Johnson.

J.J. Putz is another possibility (his trade price would be much lower, I'm guessing just Rondon would do).

IMO, that is most assuredly a big steaming buffalo chip of a trade.

**ballmich** · 02-04-2013, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Keepleyland2

That Procello comparision is a bit off. $5 million for a long reliever is a bit much. Bourn will be paid to, and will, play everyday.

It's like if we had a $5 million bench player. Yeah it be nice insurance to have, but can a team like the tigers carry a guy at $5 million because he's nice insurance in case soemthing maybe could possibly happen? I think its a better idea to have a $1 million long reliever and use the extra $4 million elsewhere.

It's disingenious to call Porcello a long reliever, particularly when it's already been stated by DD that Porcello "has a leg up" in the rotation competition. The point is, that if the $5.1MM in salary is a reason to deal Porcello, dealing a significant blow to SP depth, then there should be no reason to consider a Bourn deal because he will cost that and then some. Further, the 20-40 starts made by #6-10 SP's each year for competitive ballclubs, can easily be more important than the difference between Bourn/Dirks over 150 games.

**Yoda** · 02-04-2013, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by roarintiger1

I agree... Bourn's 155 strikeouts last year scare me.

An out is an out... he's producing, which should matter far more than the k's.

**zimm** · 02-04-2013, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

J.J. Putz is another possibility (his trade price would be much lower, I'm guessing just Rondon would do).

Putz was recently extended. pretty sure there's no chance he'll be dealt, especially for a CL prospect.

**Keepleyland2** · 02-04-2013, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by ballmich

It's disingenious to call Porcello a long reliever, particularly when it's already been stated by DD that Porcello "has a leg up" in the rotation competition. The point is, that if the $5.1MM in salary is a reason to deal Porcello, dealing a significant blow to SP depth, then there should be no reason to consider a Bourn deal because he will cost that and then some. Further, the 20-40 starts made by #6-10 SP's each year for competitive ballclubs, can easily be more important than the difference between Bourn/Dirks over 150 games.

Considering healthy pitchers make 33 starts a year I have no idea where you 20-40 starts for number six comes from.

And again cause apparently you missed it. Bourn would play every day, a six starter wouldn't. He also wouldn't pitch every five days. Even with our starter injuries last year. Outside of the top six guys (anibel added mid year). There were 10 starts by other guys.

The $5.1 is expensive for a relief pitcher/guy that be five but easily replaced. While it be nice to keep him. I understand why you would trade him for salary reasons because that $4 million might be nice to have midseason when you need to add a piece.

Again it seems silly to me to keep a marginal player on a $5 million contract because something maybe could possibly happen. To me that's the equivalent of signing Kevin Youkoulis to our bench because Prince or Miggy could get hurt.

**RandyMarsh** · 02-04-2013, 08:50 PM

I have no interest in trading Rondon for a closer, I'd much rather see what he has to offer first at a fraction of the price. Closer is the one position that every year prospects seem to make an impact right away. Whether it was Papelbon or Jenks several years ago, or Kimbrel, Axford, Chapman and Reed more recently. They are always coming in and dominating right away and I'd like to give him a chance at doing the same before dealing him. It sure would be nice to have a low cost dominating closer controlled for the next 6 years.

**Casimir** · 02-04-2013, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by john doe

Please, NO on Bourn, not worth the cost or the years. I'd go with Dirks.

I agree. If there were no draft pick attached and he'd be willing to go for a short deal, then it might be worth pursuing. Berry gets squeezed off and Dirks becomes the 4th OF, so in that respect, it'd be a good trade off. I don't know if Bourn over Dirks as the starter is a great deal, but I think it'd be tolerable to chance it.

**EchO** · 02-04-2013, 09:16 PM

I would think long and hard about giving up the pick if Bourn could be had on a one year deal with a mutual option for a second. I think Illitch could possibly be suckered by Boras in that type of scenario, one of Boras's infamous one year rebound deals sold as the final piece in a team built to win now.

**sabretooth** · 02-04-2013, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by Yoda

An out is an out... he's producing, which should matter far more than the k's.

That's just it, he really doesn't produce. A .315 career wOBA, having topped out at .325 - .330 is not producing. Even his net stolen bases have started to fade.

He's Carl Crawford without any power. I would not mind a 1 year deal, but he's a mediocre offensive force near to the downside IMHO.

**holygoat** · 02-04-2013, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by RedRamage

Is he developing a breaking ball?

They say he's in the best shape of his life.

**catswithbats** · 02-04-2013, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

Time to dust off my crystal buffalo chip once again. The way the Tigers keep talking up Rondon, I think the Tigers will try to package
Rondon and Porcello, for a closer plus a so-so prospect. Most likely candidate would be the Orioles' Jim Johnson.

Johnson doesn't really make sense for the Tigers. He's a low-strikeout groundball pitcher.