Jump to content
spikesglaring

Doug Fister Traded to the Nationals

Recommended Posts

Fister will probably be a 6-7 win player, give or take, over the next two years of his contract. For argument's sake, let's also say he declines a qualifying offer that gets the nats a compensation pick. That pick, on average, will fall between the first and second round, so in the 30-40 range. Picks in that range, on average, produce about 3 wins.

So we gave up 10 wins that would have cost us about 18 million. 10 wins generally costs about 50 million.

We need to get back 32 million of value, or about 6 wins.

Lombardozzi and krol are probably good for at least 2 total wins over their tenure as tigers.

So the question then becomes whether or not Ray can be worth 4 wins.

There is also the issue of timing. Are wins now worth more than wins in the future?

I'd argue it depends where the team is at, but typically they are worth more now because it is easier to plan around. Don't know if that makes sense.

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

It's really simple. Ray's status has been on the upswing and possibly some of these "scouting experts" are a little late to the game on that. Tons of players playign today who are 3 plus WAR guys who weren't top 100 prospects or top 50. Think of how Scherzer was viewed 5 years ago. He's gonna be a closer!!!!! It's not the end all and be all. I'd imagine if Ray improves this year over last years stats he would move into the top 100 as well, if thats what everbody really needs, some John Sickels nerd disciple having said player in his little top 100 list.

Scherzer was not widely viewed as a closer. He was much further along than Ray and was coming off a season where he struck out out 174 batters in 170 innings in the major leagues. He still had some command issues to work out and there were mixed reviews, but many viewed as an outstanding prospect. the same types of people that are doubting Ray were surprised that Arizona let a great prospect like Scherzer get away.

Also, criticizing people for following John Sickels is as old as criticizing people for using OBP. We are way beyond that point now and I don't think too many people here turn to Sickels for prospect lists anymore. There are much better prospect analysts out there now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First, I didn't mention Storen. I said Espinosa makes more sense than Lombardozzi, and he does. Espinosa made $500k last year and certainly can't be in line for a huge jump given his disasterous season. Lombardozzi also made $500k and is likely to get an increase. If there is a AAAA player available for about nothing in the free agent market, its a guy like Lombardozzi. He's like a Don Kelly clone, except he's a switch hitter. Espinosa at least provides some upside, if you can straighten him out.

And although I didn't mention Storen, he would have been a good acquisiton. He's projected to make $3.6 million and could set-up or close. If you take the difference in the salary that we will be paying to Nathan, that's another $6 million to invest in another quality reliever to solidify our bulllpen. That wuold have made a lot of sense because we need a lot more depth in our pen, not just a closer. Good middle relievers sign for over $5 million/season, so Storen could not have been had in the free agent pool for the same price.

Your assuming that the Tigers have a budget to add those type of players, I'm saying it wasn't in the cards. Espinosa is still projected at 2.1 million and the 3.6 to Storen equals no savings by moving Fister. They may sign one more reliever but something tells me they will put there faith in the Big Fat Guy who throws 101 MPH for the eighth and sign a reclemation project on the cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. There's an obvious benefit to both sides. Smoltz was fortunate to land in the perfect situation. Hard to say how he would have fared in the Tigers' system.

He claims he learned to pitch in the Braves system and given the Tigers lack of success in the late 70's and all through the 80's and 90's at developing players it's not unrealistic of to assume if he stayed in the Tigers system that he'd be in Lansing today coaching HS baseball as a former minor league player with a cup of coffee in the majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
one word john smoltz = tigers trade prospect for atlanta starting pitcher and lost this deal

Well, that is more than one word, and there is a pretty good argument that the Tigers won that trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is also the issue of timing. Are wins now worth more than wins in the future?

I'd argue it depends where the team is at, but typically they are worth more now because it is easier to plan around. Don't know if that makes sense.

Agreed. Part of the assumption is that the tigers will be a contending team into the near future.

I guess what I was trying to illustrate was that fister, while good, is only contract for two more years, and is at the point financially where his value doesn't exceed his cost by as much as it did a year ago.

This goes back to my point earlier in thread that teams coveting fister could also look to free agents. While the free agents cost more, it doesn't cost a team the value of the players they gave up. So the idea that they should have gotten more in return is arguable.

The tigers needed to get about six wins (relative to the cost of a win) in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 3m

One question in column: Why didn’t #Tigers get more for Fister? Some GMs weren’t even aware he was available. Making sense of Tuesday's hot day in Hot Stove - MLB News | FOX Sports on MSN

This is total spin by MLB executives let's be honest. They were unaware that Doug Fister was available in trades even though there was an article on MLBtradrumors.com that said Fister is being made available and several articles that said the Tigers were making there entire stafff available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your assuming that the Tigers have a budget to add those type of players, I'm saying it wasn't in the cards. Espinosa is still projected at 2.1 million and the 3.6 to Storen equals no savings by moving Fister. They may sign one more reliever but something tells me they will put there faith in the Big Fat Guy who throws 101 MPH for the eighth and sign a reclemation project on the cheap.

No, I'm not. This is the second time now that you have insinuated that I've said something which clearly I have not.

Espinosa isn't even arbitration eligible, as it turns out, and will make between $500-600k in 2014. Even if he was arbitration eligible, first year players don't go from $500k to $2.1 million unless they are an unusal situation, particularly guys who spent most of the year in the minor leagues. So Espinosa is going to make about the same amount as Lombardozzi. Maybe less. Clearly he would be in the Tigers budget, if acquired instead of Lombardozzi, which is what I suggested all along.

Storen was your comment, not mine. I think he wuold have made sense, in the context of not signing Nathan and getting two qualities relievers in the place of one (Nathan), for relatively the same price. I don't think it's good practice to dump that much money into one player when there is a need for mulitple players, unless there is payroll available to sign them all. But that clearly won't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure the 80's version of Dave Cameron and Keith Law panned that deal instanly for the Braves suggesting they should have asked for a higher ceiling pitcher like Steve Searcy or Kevin Ritz!

Baseball America ranked Smoltz as the Tigers #2 prospect in 1987.

1983-2000 Top 10 Prospect Rankings Archives - BaseballAmerica.com

1987

  1. Rey Palacios, c
  2. John Smoltz, rhp
  3. Steve Searcy, lhp
  4. Scott Aldred, lhp
  5. Scott Lusader, of
  6. Randy Nosek, rhp
  7. Billy Bean, of
  8. Mike Henneman, rhp
  9. Phil Clark, c
  10. Morris Madden, lhp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baseball America ranked Smoltz as the Tigers #2 prospect in 1987.

1983-2000 Top 10 Prospect Rankings Archives - BaseballAmerica.com

1987

  1. Rey Palacios, c
  2. John Smoltz, rhp
  3. Steve Searcy, lhp
  4. Scott Aldred, lhp
  5. Scott Lusader, of
  6. Randy Nosek, rhp
  7. Billy Bean, of
  8. Mike Henneman, rhp
  9. Phil Clark, c
  10. Morris Madden, lhp

I always assumed that Smoltz was not a highly regarded prospect based on what everyone said. I was born a year after that trade so my bad in a poor assumption!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I always assumed that Smoltz was not a highly regarded prospect based on what everyone said. I was born a year after that trade so my bad in a poor assumption!

He was very raw and far away from the majors, but had a high upside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was very raw and far away from the majors, but had a high upside.

Everything that I heard indicated that the Tigers weren't too keen on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everything that I heard indicated that the Tigers weren't too keen on him.

That wouldn't surprise since the Tigers weren't too smart about pitching back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is total spin by MLB executives let's be honest. They were unaware that Doug Fister was available in trades even though there was an article on MLBtradrumors.com that said Fister is being made available and several articles that said the Tigers were making there entire stafff available.

Yes, If DD thought there was a fit he would have called them up.

At any rate, I'm over the disappointment, no point in crying over spilled milk. And honestly the most reliable scouting report on Ray is the Tigers own, one which is obviously glowing.

I still like the off-season overall; getting rid of Prince was key, Nathan came cheaper than I thought, and by the Choo reports we still have quite a bit of money to spend. Even if it's not Choo, you can still get Benoit back and others. We might be weaker in the regular season, but when it's all said and done, we should be stronger in the playoffs, if we make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fister will probably be a 6-7 win player, give or take, over the next two years of his contract. For argument's sake, let's also say he declines a qualifying offer that gets the nats a compensation pick. That pick, on average, will fall between the first and second round, so in the 30-40 range. Picks in that range, on average, produce about 3 wins.

So we gave up 10 wins that would have cost us about 18 million. 10 wins generally costs about 50 million.

We need to get back 32 million of value, or about 6 wins.

Lombardozzi and krol are probably good for at least 2 total wins over their tenure as tigers.

So the question then becomes whether or not Ray can be worth 4 wins.

Good analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's like a Don Kelly clone, except he's a switch hitter. Espinosa at least provides some upside, if you can straighten him out.

I'm not saying Lombardozzi is good...but he has more upside than Don Kelly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude, this trade blows ballz.

Do you look at everything in life in a vaccumn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not convinced of this. What did it get them? Won the division but booted from the first round. Smoltz may have never developed in the Tigers system, or he could have become the ace that he was. Maybe they trade him when he's 25 and get a huge haul for him, they were already a decent team in the early 90's.

It could have played out many ways, but I don't think it's as clear-cut as you make it seem.

Yeah - I think 4 playoff games for not watching a hall of famer's career in your uniform is bad deal no matter how you slice it. Viewing it otherwise strikes me as whistling past the graveyard. Should we have traded JV to have made one round of the playoffs in 2007? The idea that Smoltz was destined to be a bust if he stayed in Detroit is also a stretch. Were the mounds at Tiger stadium a different height or the distance to home plate unique? He was going to get time and reps in either org.

That's not to say I mean the trade looked horrible at the time. But all trades are judged in both real time and hindsight. I'll accept that real time it didn't look bad, but to not recognize in *hindsight* we should not have done it - I can't get there by any logic.

Edited by Gehringer_2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you look at everything in life in a vaccumn?

I am not sure how to even respond to this.

I will try...when it comes to trades it is cut and dry....you give up 'x' and receive 'y'.

You can try to justify the like or dislike of trades based on 'z', but it is guessing/projection.

If I am in the front office of the Tigers I have more info than you...or me. I know what is going on with every facet of the trade. Not having all that info leads us to speculate to try and make the trade seem 'good' for our team for some people which is fine.

It is not as cut and dry as math, but pretty close.

The trade blew ballz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how old you are, but that was a great trade for the Tigers, one that they would make over and over again if they had a chance.

I think he was more or less pointing to the fact that Smoltz was sorta in the same boat as Ray, heck Ray I'd guess was ranked higher in an organization at that. Maybe he lands up being better than what he projected as at the time of the trade type deal. I mean it's not something i'd 100% bank on in trading an asset like Fister, but there must be something that made him pull this trade off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah - I think 4 playoff games for not watching a hall of famer's career in your uniform is bad deal no matter how you slice it. Viewing it otherwise strikes me as whistling past the graveyard. Should we have traded JV to have made one round of the playoffs in 2007? The idea that Smoltz was destined to be a bust if he stayed in Detroit is also a stretch. Were the mounds at Tiger stadium a different height or the distance to home plate unique? He was going to get time and reps in either org.

We are talking about a very raw prospect with major command problems flourishing in one of the worst pitcher development system versus the best. I think it's possible that he would have had less success had he stayed in the Tigers system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scherzer was not widely viewed as a closer. He was much further along than Ray and was coming off a season where he struck out out 174 batters in 170 innings in the major leagues. He still had some command issues to work out and there were mixed reviews, but many viewed as an outstanding prospect. the same types of people that are doubting Ray were surprised that Arizona let a great prospect like Scherzer get away.

Also, criticizing people for following John Sickels is as old as criticizing people for using OBP. We are way beyond that point now and I don't think too many people here turn to Sickels for prospect lists anymore. There are much better prospect analysts out there now.

I'm aware that Scherzer was higher thought of, I watched the draft that year as he was picked(I believe 11th overall). My whole point was sometimes pitchers are viewed with a preceived value that doesn't comes come close. For good or or bad. In Scherzer's case a few "experts"

I'm not critizing anyone following Sickels I use to comment on(Hell I broke news on there about Brians death) and browsed his site religously until 2-3 years ago when I started to realize he was more hack than accuate on his scouting takes. But when you do go to sites like Sickels and Fangraphs sometimes I have stop reading, putz around in garage and then go hug my kid and fiancee just to make sure I'm not 45 and living in my parents basement wearing a Ryne Sandberg jersey.

I favor and understand advanced statistics as much as the next guy(Your book is great btw), but don't you ever just step back and go wtf am I doing reading this back and forth intense nerd crap lol? Maybe it's just me. Every once in a while I get that feeling after reading an article on Fangraphs or Sickels site. I just to scream get a fing life some of you. Thats all. I'm sure after typing this someone, somewhere is thinking the same about me lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah - I think 4 playoff games for not watching a hall of famer's career in your uniform is bad deal no matter how you slice it. Viewing it otherwise strikes me as whistling past the graveyard. Should we have traded JV to have made one round of the playoffs in 2007? The idea that Smoltz was destined to be a bust if he stayed in Detroit is also a stretch. Were the mounds at Tiger stadium a different height or the distance to home plate unique? He was going to get time and reps in either org.

That's not to say I mean the trade looked horrible at the time. But all trades are judged in both real time and hindsight. I'll accept that real time it didn't look bad, but to not recognize in *hindsight* we should not have done it - I can't get there by any logic.

One round in the playoffs in 2007 doesn't equate to a round in the playoffs in 1987. We got 5 playoff games and a division title out of the deal. Those 5 games represents just under 40% of all the playoff games the Tigers played in from 1969 through 2005. Keeping Smoltz, even if he had pitched at exactly the same level with the Tigers and stayed with them as long as he did the Braves (neither of which is certain), in no way guarantees we'd have played in more than 5 playoff games or won a division title during his Tigers career. He might have made the difference in 1991 or 1993.

I don't think he was destined to be a bust if he had stayed with the Tigers (the fact that Smoltz was pitching well in the majors by 1989 suggests to me that he was likely to succeed no matter where he was at). I do think he was unlikely to pitch on the same team as Greg Maddux or Tom Glavine and the difference between watching part of a Hall of Famers career on a largely losing team and not getting that opportunity but instead getting to watch a team win a division once after an extremely exciting division race and then play in the playoffs isn't a terrible deal.

I also might be a bit biased because 1987 is the first year I really got excited about watching baseball and the Tigers.

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...