Jump to content

IdahoBert

The Official 2017-2018 Detroit Tigers Off-season Thread

Recommended Posts

Good question, and Plouffe is the perfect verb for that.

Back in the day, it would have been 'we got Inged.'

I am guessing for 2018 it will be we got Mahtooked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Being as objective as I can, the area the DD excelled in as a GM was trading.  Fangraphs did an article some 3 or 4 years ago, and at that time he created something like 20 more WAR for the Tigers via trade than the next closest team over the span of his tenure.  He was net 50 WAR or something at the time, which was really impressive given he had been with the club 10 years, so you are talking 5 extra wins a year on average relative to an average MLB team.

An analysis of every trade Dombrowksi made with the Tigers based upon WAR on the attached document...

Dombrowski Trades.xlsx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Oblong said:

Is Compete the buzzword now... hey we may not win... but we'll compete.  We'll play the game the right way. We'll be scrappy.  Gritty.  Dirty uniforms.  We'll be the pesky Twins now.

Which Tiger will have the name that we'll use as a verb... like Trevor Plouffe.   He'd get a big hit or something and we'd say "Damn, we got plouffed"

 

Punto comes out of retirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2018 at 2:45 PM, Casimir said:

OK, one.  So, since 2006, that list that I described is three long.  And one of those three was used as trade bait to acquire a proven relief pitcher.

Four long.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/greench03.shtml

Fun fact: despite Paredes and Candelario being held up as examples of Al Avila making successful trades, both Chad Green and Corey Knebel were also dealt by Al Avila.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2018 at 9:46 AM, tiger337 said:

FanGraphs is wrong.  I am boldly predicting that the Tigers will win 70 games this year.  

Please save all bold predictions for the Bold Predictions thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Green never pitched for the Tigers so he doesn't qualify as a pitcher who pitched for the Tigers and then went onto future success.  Knebel only pitched 8 games.  Both were prospects who were traded for veterans who could help now.  

As far as being bad trades, Knebel was traded by Dombrowski.  The Green trade netted them Justin Wilson who was traded for Candy Man and Paredes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Please save all bold predictions for the Bold Predictions thread.

It is actually not so bold.  I used stats to come up with that prediction.  The thing I didn't factor in was the possibility of mid-season trades, but the team they have right now could very reasonably win 70 games.  I was actually surprised at the result, because I was expecting worse.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

Green never pitched for the Tigers so he doesn't qualify as a pitcher who pitched for the Tigers and then went onto future success.  Knebel only pitched 8 games.  Both were prospects who were traded for veterans who could help now.  

As far as being bad trades, Knebel was traded by Dombrowski.  The Green trade netted them Justin Wilson who was traded for Candy Man and Paredes.  

If the benchmark is that we can only consider players who pitched at the major league level for the Tigers as being the only valid players to consider their success after trading them, then you're right, Chad Green doesn't qualify.

Also, I get that Dombrowski only traded prospects to get veterans that would help now, although by your benchmark, no trade, not even Brock for Broglio or Smoltz for Alexander, can be criticized as long as it was done with an eye by one franchise on winning now. I don't see it that way, but I'll agree to disagree on it.

And yes, I botched the Knebel thing.

rick-perry-gop-debate-video-oops1.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

If the benchmark is that we can only consider players who pitched at the major league level for the Tigers as being the only valid players to consider their success after trading them, then you're right, Chad Green doesn't qualify.

Also, I get that Dombrowski only traded prospects to get veterans that would help now, although by your benchmark, no trade, not even Brock for Broglio or Smoltz for Alexander, can be criticized as long as it was done with an eye by one franchise on winning now. I don't see it that way, but I'll agree to disagree on it.

And yes, I botched the Knebel thing.

rick-perry-gop-debate-video-oops1.jpg

 

It is certainly valid to include traded prospects among bad trades.  I was just going back a couple of pages in the thread to the origin of the argument about relievers.  It wasn't about how many bad trades were made.  It was about whether DD was good at building bullpens.  Somebody argued that he was.  Somebody else argued that he wasn't and was wondering how many Tigers relievers had success after they left the Tigers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joaquin Benoit was as a very good bullpen asset over the years.  So, what, 4 now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fenech: The Tigers will be represented at right-hander Tim Lincecum's pitching showcase this week, I'm told.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what has been bugging me?    Brad Ausmus' contract was not renewed, right?   So technically he wasn't fired.    I wanted him fired.   This doesn't sit right with me.  They need to hire him back so they can fire him.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kdog said:

Fenech: The Tigers will be represented at right-hander Tim Lincecum's pitching showcase this week, I'm told.

The Tigers would give Sidd Finch a look if they think they could get a cheap 1 year deal on him.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the Detroit media is trying to generate clicks with stories about Miguel Cabrera's mistress and the child support trial. Call it clickbait but I'm just not interested. The guy probably had all kinds of things going on during his great seasons so I think he will be ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kdog said:

I know the Detroit media is trying to generate clicks with stories about Miguel Cabrera's mistress and the child support trial. Call it clickbait but I'm just not interested. The guy probably had all kinds of things going on during his great seasons so I think he will be ok.

There is no probably.  We know he had a drinking problem in some of his great seasons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the Cabrera story is unnecessary and I am not clicking any of it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Oblong said:

Yeah the Cabrera story is unnecessary and I am not clicking any of it 

Definitely.  Please don't tell me what these guys are like off the field, I don't care.  I don't want to know them, I don't need them as friends. 

My favourites over the years have included Gibson and LeFlore, a couple of guys that I don't think I'd associate with in my personal life.  I just want to enjoy what they do on the field.  Cabrera is in that group too; if the Tigers lose but he gets 4 hits, I'm happy.  There haven't been many like that - Horton, LeFlore, Gibson, Cecil Fielder, Juan Encarnacion (I know, what's he doing here?), Cabrera.

If someone is truly depraved like Kevin Spacey or Chad Curtis, or this guy at the White House who landed an overhand right on his spouse, then yes it will affect my opinion of them and I won't watch them work anymore if they are active entertainers.  But someone who has a DUI, or gets caught cheating on his spouse?  I wouldn't do those things, but I don't need to hear about them.  They are not trivial by any means but I'm not going to cast the first stone.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Oblong said:

Yeah the Cabrera story is unnecessary and I am not clicking any of it 

unnecessary and uninteresting.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2018 at 11:56 AM, Shelton said:

Did DD really do enough with the checkbook to earn continued access?

Prince Fielder was a bad signing.

Victor’s recent deal is bad (but his initial deal worked out well). 

Joe Nathan

jose valverde

torii hunter

nate robertson

dontrelle willis

cabrera’s current deal

max’s non deal

gary sheffield

I’m trying to think of the free agent deals that worked out well. Pudge’s deal worked. Kenny Rogers was a decent deal for one year. Benoit was a good deal. Maggs turned out to be good. Victor’s first deal. Valverde was ok early on.

Maybe I’m missing a few here and there but I don’t think I agree that DD is some big market savant. 

Disagree on Fielder.  He was a 5+ and 3+ WAR player for two very successful teams.  Traded for Kinsler who did a great job.

Valverde was a good deal...he was 'effective for 2 of his 3 years under the multi-year deal.

Sheffield wasn't a Free Agent....he was acquired for a bunch of crap and did a great job until a freak injury.

The Cabrera extension was huge and completely unnecessary....and by all reports completely Ilitch's fault.

He got a really nice year out of Damon for fairly cheap in 2010.

Rajai was a good deal.

Rondell White was a good deal.

Octavio Dotel was a good deal.

Al Al was a good deal.

Hunter had a good year and a bad year.....he had been a very effective player for a long time before crashing in year 2 of his deal.

Hard to argue that these turned out badly: Robertson's extension, Guillen's extension, Willis, Penny, Jason Johnson, Vina, Percival, Nathan, Todd Jones.

But he also traded for and traded away a number of larger contracts, and there is no doubt that his trades overall worked out great...I've seen analysis ranging from +50 to +100 WAR depending on the timing of the analysis.

So yes, overall, he minded the checkbook very well given the mandate to win consistently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't lived unless you have seen The Ron LeFlore story.  Mid-70's TV at it's best.  That movie always reminded me to make sure my lights worked at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sabretooth said:

Rondell White was a good deal.

I believe it was Reggie Sanders that was offered the same contract as White that offseason with the stipulation from the Tigers that the first one to sign it got it and the other remained a free agent.  White signed with Detroit and Sanders signed with St. Louis.

White's contract was two years for $2,750,000 and $3,250,000, signed on December 19.  He posted a 3.7 WAR over 898 PAs.

Sanders' contract was two years for $2,000,000 and $4,000,000, signed on December 19.  He posted a 3.4 WAR over 816 PAs.

Not bad for either club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, sabretooth said:

Disagree on Fielder.  He was a 5+ and 3+ WAR player for two very successful teams.  Traded for Kinsler who did a great job.

Valverde was a good deal...he was 'effective for 2 of his 3 years under the multi-year deal.

Sheffield wasn't a Free Agent....he was acquired for a bunch of crap and did a great job until a freak injury.

The Cabrera extension was huge and completely unnecessary....and by all reports completely Ilitch's fault.

He got a really nice year out of Damon for fairly cheap in 2010.

Rajai was a good deal.

Rondell White was a good deal.

Octavio Dotel was a good deal.

Al Al was a good deal.

Hunter had a good year and a bad year.....he had been a very effective player for a long time before crashing in year 2 of his deal.

Hard to argue that these turned out badly: Robertson's extension, Guillen's extension, Willis, Penny, Jason Johnson, Vina, Percival, Nathan, Todd Jones.

But he also traded for and traded away a number of larger contracts, and there is no doubt that his trades overall worked out great...I've seen analysis ranging from +50 to +100 WAR depending on the timing of the analysis.

So yes, overall, he minded the checkbook very well given the mandate to win consistently.

Fielder was a bad contract. Whether or not he was traded for kinsler is irrelevant.

I don’t think valverde pitched all that effectively over the first two years. DD also picked up his option for the third year and he was garbage. 

Sheffield has one year on his deal when we traded for him and as a condition of the trade the tigers were allowed to negotiate an extension. As you no doubt recall Sheffield was cut in the spring prior to his final year under contract. 

Ilitch driven or not, DD signed Cabrera to his massive extension. 

I don’t really have much to say about a bunch of 1 or 2 year deals. Doesn’t seem like the type of thing to hang your hat on if you are DD and wanted to justify how you good you are spending big money. But sure, those deals tended to work out well enough  

Hunter was paid a lot. He was old. Not a shock he wasn’t good in that second year. That’s a bad deal. 

His trade record has been ok. Definitely a lot “wins” in that regard. But he also had his share of bad deals, especially in his last few years, which led us to the point we are at today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RIP Tito Francona.

43-268Fr.jpg

Francona played for the Tigers in 1958, batting .246 with 10 RBI in 45 games as an outfielder and pinch hitter.  Acquired from the White Sox in a 4-player deal midway through the '58 season, he was then traded to Cleveland the following offseason in exchange for outfielder Larry Doby, having asked for a trade due to a lack of playing time.  A one-time All-Star (and the father of future Tigers coach Terry Francona) in a 15-year career, Francona also appeared in the majors with the Orioles, White Sox, Indians, Cardinals, Phillies, Braves, Athletics, and Brewers.  He died yesterday at the age of 84.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Fielder was a bad contract. Whether or not he was traded for kinsler is irrelevant.

If we're evaluating DD on the basis of the original post, which was that he earned the right to handle a large checkbook, then yes the trade for kinsler is absolutely relevant, because ongoing evaluation of contracts and second-position moves like trading Prince for Kinsler is all part of the checkbook management process.  For the $$ spent, DD received strong performance from Prince for two years and leveraged Kinsler, who came with a big $$ that he more than earned.

The owner's intention in spending big $$ for Prince, Cabrera is absolutely relevant, since it's their checkbook and owners are going to have the final say sometimes if they want to spend the farm.

Quote

I don’t think valverde pitched all that effectively over the first two years. DD also picked up his option for the third year and he was garbage. 

The option year was a big mistake, yes....I forgot about that and didn't see that in the record I was looking at.  But still, Valverde was very effective in the first year, and fairly effective in year 2....for the $$, his first two years were just fine.

Quote

Ilitch driven or not, DD signed Cabrera to his massive extension. 

If we're evaluating whether the Owner can trust the GM with the checkbook, then Ilitch's decision-making authority as owner is very important.  

Quote

I don’t really have much to say about a bunch of 1 or 2 year deals. Doesn’t seem like the type of thing to hang your hat on if you are DD and wanted to justify how you good you are spending big money. But sure, those deals tended to work out well enough  

If you're going to evaluate the GM's handling of the checkbook, you have to credit him for the value deals too.

Quote

His trade record has been ok. Definitely a lot “wins” in that regard. But he also had his share of bad deals, especially in his last few years, which led us to the point we are at today. 

His trade record has been outstanding.  We sure would like to have Suarez and Knebel back, but in evaluating whether we would have preferred DD to another GM (like Avila, for example), I'll take the playoff contention for most of 10 years in exchange for what these two have/might become if we had kept them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sabretooth said:

If we're evaluating DD on the basis of the original post, which was that he earned the right to handle a large checkbook, then yes the trade for kinsler is absolutely relevant, because ongoing evaluation of contracts and second-position moves like trading Prince for Kinsler is all part of the checkbook management process.  For the $$ spent, DD received strong performance from Prince for two years and leveraged Kinsler, who came with a big $$ that he more than earned.

 

You do realize that those 2 years of Prince cost the Tigers $78 million  ($24 mil/yr + $30 mil sent to Texas).  I don't know that that 5 WAR and 3 WAR is strong performance for $78  million.  No matter how you look at it, it was a terrible contract.  I'm sure it was Ilitch recommended, but it was a terrible contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now