Jump to content

chasfh

What Will Become of Nicholas Castellanos?

How will the Tigers deal with Nicholas Castellanos?  

37 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. How will the Tigers deal with Nicholas Castellanos?

    • Trade him.
      21
    • Tender him a Qualifying Offer after the season, which he will accept.
      2
    • Tender him a Qualifying Offer after the season, which he will decline.
      3
    • Extend him for multiple seasons.
      0
    • Non-tender him after the season (aka let him walk).
      11
    • Other. (Explain in comments.)
      0
  2. 2. Suppose Castellanos is tendered a qualifying offer after the season and he declines it? Then what?

    • Will be re-signed afterward by the Tigers.
      3
    • Will be signed by another team before the 2020 draft.
      10
    • Will be signed by another team after the 2020 draft.
      24
  3. 3. If the Tigers do trade Castellanos, what kind of return will they get, based on what you think a player of his level should get?

    • Return equal to expectations.
      8
    • Higher return than expected.
      0
    • Lower return than expected.
      29

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 07/12/2019 at 04:59 AM

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, chasfh said:

With Nick, it's not as much about the money as it is about the years. Do we want to commit to him for three years? What is the hope for the 2022 team and what is 30-year-old Nick's role on that team?

Not every position can be staffed by an All-Star, defined by Baseball Reference as 5 WAR, but if Nick is signed for three years, that will basically represent a 2-3 win ceiling on whatever position he ends up at. We could make that up by staffing All-Stars at other positions to get us closer to contention, but if Nick is being signed on to be our position player star for the next three years, that probably means we'll still be in draft-high mode in 2022. There are no position player prospects in the pipeline, so we'd have to rely on free agents and trade to supplant Nick and support the presumed front end of the rotation if we hope to contend in 2022.

I don't think Nick being (or not being) on the roster has all that much to do with the likelihood of being in a position to contend in 2022.

I do not understand the bolded part, specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, chasfh said:

With Nick, it's not as much about the money as it is about the years. Do we want to commit to him for three years? What is the hope for the 2022 team and what is 30-year-old Nick's role on that team?

Not every position can be staffed by an All-Star, defined by Baseball Reference as 5 WAR, but if Nick is signed for three years, that will basically represent a 2-3 win ceiling on whatever position he ends up at. We could make that up by staffing All-Stars at other positions to get us closer to contention, but if Nick is being signed on to be our position player star for the next three years, that probably means we'll still be in draft-high mode in 2022. There are no position player prospects in the pipeline, so we'd have to rely on free agents and trade to supplant Nick and support the presumed front end of the rotation if we hope to contend in 2022.

Nick would have been the 6th best 1B in all of MLB by wOBA last season. I don't think his ceiling there would be a big issue unless he turned out to be a real hack there, but his 3b play argues against that as his main problem at 3rd was range rather than catching. I have argued in the past that I don't think that he can be as good a 1b as Cabrera *could have been*, which was a really good one, but that is beside the point - Cabrera isn't that guy now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We really have little to no basis to judge his d at 1b, good, bad or indifferent.

I guess I don't understand how having a 2 or 3 WAR player in the hypothetical at one position 3 years from now fundamentally changes the direction the organization is likely to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

Nick would have been the 6th best 1B in all of MLB by wOBA last season. I don't think his ceiling there would be a big issue unless he turned out to be a real hack there, but his 3b play argues against that as his main problem at 3rd was range rather than catching.

If Nick can hit like he did in his best year, consistently, his bat won't be the problem. Can he play a creditable first? I don't know. There are range requirements there, too, and he'll need to be good at digging errant throws out of the dirt. I don't know whether he can, but I think until he proves otherwise, the assumption has to be he'll be below average there, too.

Nick has not proven himself to be a star of a contending team. He might be a decent regular on one. But we'll need at least a couple better position players than he if we seriously plan to contend while he is committed to the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chasfh said:

Nick has not proven himself to be a star of a contending team. He might be a decent regular on one. But we'll need at least a couple better position players than he if we seriously plan to contend while he is committed to the team.

That's what all those MIFs are for. The next Tiger team is going to be built around the next HOF shortstop, even if Al has to take on every IF prospect in the minors to find him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

That's what all those MIFs are for. The next Tiger team is going to be built around the next HOF shortstop, even if Al has to take on every IF prospect in the minors to find him!

Well, then, we'd better ink Nick to five or six years, just to be safe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Nick could handle 1B, but it's a moot point since he apparently passed on that.  I would not have had a problem with him learning the position, and us committing to him for a few more seasons, since he really wouldn't be blocking anyone.  However, as I've mentioned, we can go get a CJ Cron or Matt Adams on the cheap, and not sacrifice much.  You don't have to rely as heavily on offensive production from 1B, if you know you're getting it elsewhere.  Currently, we don't have another position player, either in the majors or minors, that you can say with certainty will be providing offensive value in three years time.  Which is why we should have signed Manny Machado, when there was an opportunity.  If Lindor hits the open market, I hope we don't screw that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tenacious D said:

I think Nick could handle 1B, but it's a moot point since he apparently passed on that.  I would not have had a problem with him learning the position, and us committing to him for a few more seasons, since he really wouldn't be blocking anyone.  However, as I've mentioned, we can go get a CJ Cron or Matt Adams on the cheap, and not sacrifice much.  You don't have to rely as heavily on offensive production from 1B, if you know you're getting it elsewhere.  Currently, we don't have another position player, either in the majors or minors, that you can say with certainty will be providing offensive value in three years time.  Which is why we should have signed Manny Machado, when there was an opportunity.  If Lindor hits the open market, I hope we don't screw that up.

Manny seems to be resigned to playing 3rd again. He has played SS this season only while Tatis was on the DL. Ironically from what I have read Tatis is destined to be a 3B pretty soon as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More accolades for Boras to use when promoting Nick this offseason:

“Named one of MLBTR’s 17 above average hitters available at the deadline”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He does have an OPS+ of 110 which makes him an above average hitter.  Of course, that doesn't account for his position or his fielding.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

He does have an OPS+ of 110 which makes him an above average hitter.  Of course, that doesn't account for his position or his fielding.  

Well, yeah. He wouldn’t have qualified for that list if he wasn’t above average. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, this Trade Rumors writer likes Nick's chances of moving this month, even if not for a king's ransom.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/07/top-60-trade-candidates-at-the-all-star-break.html 

6. Nicholas Castellanos, OF, Tigers (LR: 8): We noted in our first ranking that the 27-year-old could move up the ladder if he kept up a hot streak, and he has done just that. He sprints into the rental-bat lead after a .354/.420/.532 run over his past twenty games. The return here probably won’t be that strong — even a red-hot J.D. Martinez netted the Tigers a lackluster return as a rental two summers ago — but Castellanos is among the game’s safest bets to be traded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Avila is any kinda negotiator he will make sure to let the other team know that his Mom is hot and she comes with the deal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick goes all Juan Gonzalez and rips Comerica Park as a "joke".  Comerica Park responds by mocking his defense

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This definitely solidifies his rep as a lippy malcontent. I wonder whether that’ll affect his trade value? After all, who wants to bring malcontents into their clubhouse? Is Nick a good enough hitter for a trade partner to completely set that aside? 

Share this post


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

The cubs employ Addison Russell. 

The difference being—presumably—domestic abuse was not a known known about Russell coming in. The Cubs were already committed to Russell when that happened. Obviously this is not that, but does that mean this means zero? I don’t know either way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think his comments in context are as bad as they appear in the headline. And he’s under a lot of pressure and uncertainty and the team sucks. And he admits that no matter what he says it can be interpreted in a negative manner if people are looking for something. 

What was the thinking behind the unusually large dimensions of Comerica 20 years ago?  Were they trying to bring back exciting NL-style play or something? Athleticism over power? Hit-and-run, stealing, bunts. Real baseball? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I don’t think his comments in context are as bad as they appear in the headline. And he’s under a lot of pressure and uncertainty and the team sucks. And he admits that no matter what he says it can be interpreted in a negative manner if people are looking for something. 

What was the thinking behind the unusually large dimensions of Comerica 20 years ago?  Were they trying to bring back exciting NL-style play or something? Athleticism over power? Hit-and-run, stealing, bunts. Real baseball? 

This shouldn’t be an issue anymore. HR’s haven’t been discussed since they fixed LF.  It’s just that this team sucks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, what a baby. Good for him to turn things around and have a decent season offensively though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IdahoBert said:

I don’t think his comments in context are as bad as they appear in the headline. And he’s under a lot of pressure and uncertainty and the team sucks. And he admits that no matter what he says it can be interpreted in a negative manner if people are looking for something. 

What was the thinking behind the unusually large dimensions of Comerica 20 years ago?  Were they trying to bring back exciting NL-style play or something? Athleticism over power? Hit-and-run, stealing, bunts. Real baseball? 

The idea behind Navin/Briggs/TigerStadium was the classic square field concept where HRs were the reward for pull hitters and CF was the safe zone for a power pitcher - and they carried it over to CoPa.  It's an old formulation and one I still think is a good one. The rabbit ball has pretty much negated it though as 420 is no longer anything like a safe distance against the HR. Nick just doesn't hit them that far, which is one his limitations in today's game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5.6 war in 6 seasons. Solid hitter but not what most MLB teams are after. They want power first in the possisions Nick can play. He would be great in the 80's, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the complaining, isn't Comerica pretty much neutral for HRs?  I know when you hit the ball to centerfield and into the alleys near centerfield you’ll remember not getting a pay back.  But other than that is it really that bad?  

  • Like 1

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.


×
×
  • Create New...