Jump to content
John_Brian_K

Joe Nathan Signed 2 year deal.

Recommended Posts

Well said.

The DD apologist are the same as the Leyland apologist were...it is just funny to see the back and forth....to a fault with both and both sides 'lol'ing at the other, but both are doing the exact same thing.

lol

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

If fair value was not available, then there was always the option of not trading Fister. No one had a gun to DD's head, as far as I am aware of. And as I pointed out earlier, Fister would have made a fine closer, if we desparately needed to get him out of the rotation and find a way to justify his $7 million salary.

Fair value is based on the price someone is willing to pay on the open market. I seriously doubt the value was going to change between now, in July or next year unless the performance was marketably better!

Doug Fister was not traded because he made seven million dollars, he was traded because he had value and we had internal replacements to cover the difference. Plus he was on the verge of being a 15 million dollar arm!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If fair value was not available, then there was always the option of not trading Fister. No one had a gun to DD's head, as far as I am aware of. And as I pointed out earlier, Fister would have made a fine closer, if we desparately needed to get him out of the rotation and find a way to justify his $7 million salary.

Or they could have traded Scherzer. Or Sanchez. If they couldn't get fair value for Fister or Porcello. Scherzer probably would have been teh best candidate to trade anyways. And while I've always been of the opinion that Illitch would never agree to such a trade given his desire to win a WS, he apparently signed off on the Fielder and Fister trades, neither of which made us a better team for 2014. So perhaps I am wrong and he would have been okay with a Scherzer trade if we were getting good value in return.

Maybe, maybe not. But he's never closed, and I can't imagine that we would have started the season – after all of the heat that the bullpen took for its failures last year – with Fister anointed as closer. That would never have happened.

If this is what the return for Fister was, then I will assume the return for Porcello would have been less, meaning trading him was not an option, and DD either couldn't get enough value for Scherzer or decided that trading him would really damage our postseason hopes, whereas trading Fister would be less likely to do so.

It seems pretty clear that he's trying to create some breathing room in the payroll situation for the next year or two, in order to address needs (bullpen being the most significant one). I expect we will sign one or two of Belasario, Crain, Bailey, Axford, Howell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bad offseason to be a free agent pitcher or selling pitching. The $20 million Fister will make in 2014-2015 is only slightly less than what he could expect as a free agent this offseason. Why would a team give up tons of prospects for Fister when they can sign a similar free agent for only a little bit more and lose, at most, one draft pick?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The answer is Benoit, BTW... it's decieving to include 2011, considering it was an outlier season for Nathan and he was coming off of missing all of 2010.

To be fair, 2012 was an outlier as well, at least in the sense that it doesn't fit in with the other three years. Benoit has been very good since 2010 and the difference between the two isn't that large. In terms of expectations for next year, the biggest difference between the two is their age (which is in favor of Nathan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If fair value was not available, then there was always the option of not trading Fister. No one had a gun to DD's head, as far as I am aware of. And as I pointed out earlier, Fister would have made a fine closer, if we desparately needed to get him out of the rotation and find a way to justify his $7 million salary.

Or they could have traded Scherzer. Or Sanchez. If they couldn't get fair value for Fister or Porcello. Scherzer probably would have been teh best candidate to trade anyways. And while I've always been of the opinion that Illitch would never agree to such a trade given his desire to win a WS, he apparently signed off on the Fielder and Fister trades, neither of which made us a better team for 2014. So perhaps I am wrong and he would have been okay with a Scherzer trade if we were getting good value in return.

ah - but do you still want to win now? I'm not questioning that folks can be skeptical of this trade from any number of angles, but like Shelton, I think it's easy to see that once you (as theoretical GM) have made a decision that your feel your best starting 5 to win a WS in 2014 are JV, Scherzer, Sanchez, Smyly and Porcello, everything else follows completely rationally. It's that first decision about the starting 5 you want to play that drives everything else, but few are arguing seriously that they wanted to trade any of the others. To me that is the most reasonable place to argue the trade.

Fister to the pen might have been an interesting experiment - though soft tossing sinker pitchers are not particularly common stock for making relievers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the deal done or just "close"? Do we know for how much? I haven't been able to find answers for either on Twitter.

My understanding is the deal is agreed upon, but not final yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's laughable to suggest Doug Fister on the verge of an 85 million dollar contract would agree to be the closer to make room for Smyly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, 2012 was an outlier as well, at least in the sense that it doesn't fit in with the other three years. Benoit has been very good since 2010 and the difference between the two isn't that large. In terms of expectations for next year, the biggest difference between the two is their age (which is in favor of Nathan).

The comment was more to show the absurdity of comparing Benoit/Nathan based on who gave up more runs over the past three years. It's awfully arbitrary to throw out periods of time to prove a point.

And honestly, I know who I'd rather have coming in during the 9th inning between the two...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If fair value was not available, then there was always the option of not trading Fister. No one had a gun to DD's head, as far as I am aware of. And as I pointed out earlier, Fister would have made a fine closer, if we desparately needed to get him out of the rotation and find a way to justify his $7 million salary.

Or they could have traded Scherzer. Or Sanchez. If they couldn't get fair value for Fister or Porcello. Scherzer probably would have been teh best candidate to trade anyways. And while I've always been of the opinion that Illitch would never agree to such a trade given his desire to win a WS, he apparently signed off on the Fielder and Fister trades, neither of which made us a better team for 2014. So perhaps I am wrong and he would have been okay with a Scherzer trade if we were getting good value in return.

Scherzer, as great as he is, probably wouldn't have returned fair value given the fact that he's under contract for only one more year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not a single person in this thread (unless DD is lurking) knows what Fister's value was. No one.

And I highly doubt DD just traded away Fister to the first team to throw three names into a hat and make an offer. To think he did is pure idiocy.

We all would've like a better return. But the bottom line is, no one outside of the Tiger's front office knows what Fister's true trade value was.

Thank you.

The value is determined by the offer that occurred. I've used this analogy a million times here but it doesnt' work like a general store where you walk in with something worth X and get X back in return. YOu have to match up needs with teams and available components. Shelton outlined that earlier in this thread. It could be that the strength of the starting pitching was boxing the team in. He wanted to move one of the guys and Fister's the one who brought the best value relative to before/after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. This doesn't address the fact that if this is the most they could get, then they probably should have kept him.

Also, it's entirely reasonable to think they may have found a better offer during the winter meetings, and especially at the trade deadline. None of the players they received will be needed before August.

I wonder if Dombrowski and his staff thought of that... waiting for the winter meetings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The comment was more to show the absurdity of comparing Benoit/Nathan based on who gave up more runs over the past three years. It's awfully arbitrary to throw out periods of time to prove a point.

And honestly, I know who I'd rather have coming in during the 9th inning between the two...

Ok, I don't know who I'd rather have. They seem very similar to me. Hopefully Nathan is the right choice for 2014 since he's the guy the Tigers will have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's laughable to suggest Doug Fister on the verge of an 85 million dollar contract would agree to be the closer to make room for Smyly!

I wasn't aware we were on the verge of 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder if Dombrowski and his staff thought of that... waiting for the winter meetings.

Thank you for your astute analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a bad offseason to be a free agent pitcher or selling pitching. The $20 million Fister will make in 2014-2015 is only slightly less than what he could expect as a free agent this offseason. Why would a team give up tons of prospects for Fister when they can sign a similar free agent for only a little bit more and lose, at most, one draft pick?

Because it is only a year to year commitment and you probably are saving a total of roughly $10M over those 2 years, which is pretty significant on a base of $20M?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At his age there's about a 25 percent chance Nathan implodes coming out of spring training and isn't even on the roster by July, so hopefully they have Plan B all figured out.

Then in addition there's about a 50 percent chance he is average to mediocre -- in effect, no better than Benoit was this year. Given his age also he will almost certainly deteriorate during the season.

But there is probably a 25 percent chance he springs back to All-Star form. Let's hope this is what ends up happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank goodness Brian Wilson opted for somewhere else.

+ infinity.

Nathan is an OK signing I guess, but I am still not comfortable with the rest of the bullpen. Would love for Benoit to come back, but I don't see it in the tea leaves right now.

Are there any available quality arms that could pitch more than one inning at a time and not require the next 4 days off? I can't stand the modern day 7th inning situational platoon, 8th inning guy, 9th inning guy, along with the just-in-case loogy. Why has baseball devolved into pitchers can only be used for a max of 3 outs in a hold/save situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd be thrilled if he were merely as mediocre as Benoit was in 2013.

Me too, but the good thing about Nathan is that I have more confidence in him having that kind of season next year than Benoit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd be thrilled if he were merely as mediocre as Benoit was in 2013, let alone better.

EDIT: Average to mediocre? Mediocre is a synonym for average.

Technically yes, but in common usage, mediocre is a level slightly below average.

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...