Jump to content
spikesglaring

Doug Fister Traded to the Nationals

Recommended Posts

I'm with those that say that if this is all we could have gotten for Fister, then we should have kept him. He was cheap.

He is arb eligible, correct?

He would be getting $7M if he had gone to arb.

But we all know that DD does not do arb., so what does DD do with him?

Try to sign him before arb?

Let's say he goes (went, for he may well have talked contract already) to Fister's agent and he gets a response of 4 yr/$$$$$ - what is he to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BetMGM Michigan $600 Risk-Free bet

BetMGM Michigan Sports Betting
Michigan online sports betting is now available! Start betting at BetMGM Michigan now and get a $600 risk-free bet bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan Now

DD has always managed to sign players before arb. I doubt that was much of an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's more perplexing: this trade? Or a board mod telling people that said trade shouldn't be analyzed, which is a pretty big part of even having the board to begin with.

Hey guys, come post on our board! But when a huge trade happens, it'll be pointless of you to discuss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DD has always managed to sign players before arb. I doubt that was much of an issue.

I think it played a factor - especially seeing as to what Fister's value would be on the open market.

What do you think Fister would have been signed for by DD? Honest question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, Prince is gone and 30 million with him.....Fisters gone for some spare parts, Peralta walks via free agency as does Infante and we get Kinsler. Hmmmmm. So far, so......

This.....we've given up something like 10+ WAR and hav received maybe 5 in return...we've saved maybe 20M so far. There needs to be at least one good position player and reliever added to make this work IMHO....that will likely burn up the savings and then some.

It all rests on the quality of the next two major acquisitions...I trust that they will get good players, HOWEVER...

They don't have much left to offer other than money, unless they put Kinsler on the table...in any case our current level of need would seem to put us in a disadvantageous position in terms of bargaining.

The thing I don't like about this is that none ofthe moves made or likely to be made in the offseason are likely to make the Tigers better overall in 2014...maybe we have more $$$ 3+ years out, and I'm not against that, but I am not moved by that hypothetical savings years out as a fan. I want to see the best team possible for the next 3 years without overpaying for guys.....DD has certainly cut out a big job over the next couple of months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is very little negotiations in arbitration raises, they are computer generated! I don't think that played a factor in the trade.

They traded Fister because they have a in-house replacement and was two years from getting a Sanchez size deal! I don't like the deal but figured it was inevitable that someone was going to be moved for young cost-controlled players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is very little negotiations in arbitration raises, they are computer generated! I don't think that played a factor in the trade.

They traded Fister because they have a in-house replacement and was two years from getting a Sanchez size deal! I don't like the deal but figured it was inevitable that someone was going to be moved for young cost-controlled players.

Understand all that regarding arbitration - just indicating that if Fister went to arb, which people are assuming, it would be a First for DD. It is possible that might have occurred, but it would be something new for this mgmt team.

Definitely agree on the second point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because there's no gray area between this and it being a bad trade...

Judge the trade a failure if Ray isn't at least a #3 or 4 starter on our playoff teams going forward. Fister was that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, didn't seem to cost the Nats either.

Worst trade in the history of baseball, no matter the context. Absolutely fleeced. I am plum confused. Tank mode.

You are saying this trade is the worst in the history of baseball?

Frank Robinson for Milt Pappas, Jack Baldschun and Dick Simpson say hello.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an awful trade as of now, so the good news is that it can only go up from here. The success of the trade depends on the development of Ray and the decline of Fister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still content with this trade.

I think the team is about as good today as it was yesterday. I think smyly and fister are comparable, and krol should be able to fill smyly's role. Lombardozzi is comparable to any number of utility players, and might have a bit of upside given his age. He could become the bench player that people always wish we had. If not, he's still just a bench player.

Ray isn't an elite prospect but he's a good prospect, and they had to add to the system.

I understand if people feel that fister should have brought back a better package. I think that's hard to say.

I'm fairly confident that this wasn't the only deal available so I trust that the org valued this package more than the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still content with this trade.

I think the team is about as good today as it was yesterday. I think smyly and fister are comparable, and krol should be able to fill smyly's role. Lombardozzi is comparable to any number of utility players, and might have a bit of upside given his age. He could become the bench player that people always wish we had. If not, he's still just a bench player.

Ray isn't an elite prospect but he's a good prospect, and they had to add to the system.

I understand if people feel that fister should have brought back a better package. I think that's hard to say.

I'm fairly confident that this wasn't the only deal available so I trust that the org valued this package more than the others.

The timing of the deal may have been important to DD if he's looking to sign a particular FA with his newly available open payroll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The tigers are getting absolutely shredded on twitter. How does an entire organization think up a trade like this and think its anything but horrible? I have zero excitement to watch baseball in 2014 now. Guess illitch really is cutting payroll by tens of millions.

Join Date sums this guy up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's more perplexing: this trade? Or a board mod telling people that said trade shouldn't be analyzed, which is a pretty big part of even having the board to begin with.

Hey guys, come post on our board! But when a huge trade happens, it'll be pointless of you to discuss it.

That's not what I said. I was talking of a specific type of analysis. I didn't say it wasn't allowed, just commenting on the worthiness of that type of analysis at this point in time, which is in line with common board discussion. I did not say it 'shouldn't be analyzed'. That's a ridiculous suggestion. Huge difference but I'll cut you some slack in that it's still early in the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are saying this trade is the worst in the history of baseball?

If you haven't noticed, I am a big fan of knee-jerk reactions. By the next day I settle right down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's an awful trade as of now, so the good news is that it can only go up from here. The success of the trade depends on the development of Ray and the decline of Fister.

The deal has nothing to do with Fister declining. It's about replacing an expensive asset with a cheaper asset and then using the rest of the money to fill more pressing needs! Ray is insurance against losing Sherzer or Porcello next year!

They freed up an additional five million by not signing a competent Loggy and utility player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not what I said. I was talking of a specific type of analysis. I didn't say it wasn't allowed, just commenting on the worthiness of that type of analysis at this point in time, which is in line with common board discussion. I did not say it 'shouldn't be analyzed'. That's a ridiculous suggestion. Huge difference but I'll cut you some slack in that it's still early in the day.

I am just now having my first coffee, I'll happily use that as an excuse :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with those that say that if this is all we could have gotten for Fister, then we should have kept him. He was cheap.

To be fair, cheap is relative. If DD has a hard budget and has to maneuver within it, it made sense to sell a high priced guy to fill out the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like the trade as it stands but I also believe its a domimo move for something else. So It can't be viewed in a vacuum. This move alone doesn't make the team better and I am sure dombrowski and staff are well aware of the numbers in that regard.
The timing of the deal may have been important to DD if he's looking to sign a particular FA with his newly available open payroll.

I have to imagine DD could have moved Fister for a similar return after these hypothetical moves are made (but before the season starts), so I guess I am not understanding why Fister has to be moved first for the other moves to take place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Understand all that regarding arbitration - just indicating that if Fister went to arb, which people are assuming, it would be a First for DD. It is possible that might have occurred, but it would be something new for this mgmt team.

Definitely agree on the second point.

Players have very little leverage when it comes to arb. They don't hold it for multiyear deals. They could have signed a longer contract in lieu of going with a one year deal, but at the end of the day fister was going to end up with about 7 million in 2014 and 11 million in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The timing of the deal may have been important to DD if he's looking to sign a particular FA with his newly available open payroll.

I think this is probably a big factor as well. If its a straight payroll dump, you can afford to wait until the FA SP market has dried up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, cheap is relative. If DD has a hard budget and has to maneuver within it, it made sense to sell a high priced guy to fill out the roster.

But Fister isn't high priced. He certainly isn't high priced relative his production or what is available in free agency.

It makes little sense to trade a guy to save money so that you can then take that money and use it less efficiently in free agency.

That is why the move is vexing from the 'it frees up payroll' perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The timing of the deal may have been important to DD if he's looking to sign a particular FA with his newly available open payroll.

Either fister or Porcello were going to be traded this offseason, and doing so was always likely to bring back a prospect and a reliever, so the money set aside for fister or Porcello was never going to be part of their 2014 bottom line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He is arb eligible, correct?

He would be getting $7M if he had gone to arb.

But we all know that DD does not do arb., so what does DD do with him?

What has DD historically done with all of the other arb eligible players in the organization that aren't eligible for free agency?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan launched online sports betting and casino apps on Friday, January 22, 2021. We have selected the top Michigan sportsbooks and casinos that offer excellent bonus offers. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - Get a 100% up to $250 deposit bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Click Here to claim $250 deposit bonus at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - Get a $1,000 risk-free bet at FanDuel Michigan on your first bet.

Click Here to claim $1,000 Risk-Free Bet at FanDuel Michigan

BetMGM Michigan - Get a $600 risk-free bet at the BetMGM online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan

   


×
×
  • Create New...