Will Tigers Pony up for Skubal

[tiger2022]

18 minutes ago, NorthWoods said:

This belongs better in this thread....

The Tigers?

Adames.   Smoltz.  

And..............

Hanly Ramirez, Anibal Sanchez, Cliff Lee, Grady Sizemore, Carlos Baerga, Joe Carter, Adam Wainwright, Michael Brantley, Jay Buhner, Corey Kluber, Jeff Bagwell, Jason Varitek, derek Lowe, Curt Schilling, Moises Alou, David Ortiz

Were all traded mid season as prospects...and I know I'm missing many as well as lesser but yet successful players.    The Tigers dismal track record doesn't mean everyone fails.

These guys are all retired by now.  Listing guys traded 40 years ago sure drives the point home.

Maybe someone from the current century?

Edited 1 hour ago by tiger2022

[Tiger337]

1 minute ago, tiger2022 said:

These guys are all retired by now.  Listing guys traded 40 years ago sure drives the point home.

True and another thing is that teams know their prospects better than they use to know them and I think they are more reluctant to trade the best ones.  

[tiger2022]

12 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

True and another thing is that teams know their prospects better than they use to know them and I think they are more reluctant to trade the best ones.  

That's a big reason why Baltimore wouldn't trade any of their guys a few years back and also why Harris wouldn't trade any of the Tiger prospects 

The big trade they always talk about is the Chris Archer deal a few years ago.  It was a bad trade but Glasnow has been a human IL machine, Austin Meadows couldn't handle the stress of playing and quit, and Baz has been downright awful.

Edited 58 minutes ago by tiger2022

[monkeytargets39]

3 hours ago, chasfh said:

I know a high percentage of people here are on board right now with selling Skubal, some of them believing so irrespective of how we do going forward. I have been opposed to this, and as a separate idea, I don’t think Harris and ilitch are going to sell, mainly because I don’t think that by the time late July rolls around, our record and prospects will be so bad that we will be forced in a sell-or-else situation. I think we’d have to have a W-L that’s far lower than it is even today, and playing in the most winnable division after having gotten most of the guys on the list back, we simply won’t be both this bad and this unlucky.

That said, i would be open to selling if we do find ourselves in a situation that we don’t recover and we are something like .350 on the season on July whatever-teenth. The question becomes, who do you sell, and what do you hope to get back for them? You named six guys, and five of them were hurt this year (three on the list right now), and the sixth guy is in his late 60s. When I contemplate the possible return, the word “haul” does not show up anywhere in the results.

If we want any possibility of a “haul” we would have to probably sell Riley high, plus Tork and Colt for potential and controllability, at minimum. Skubal, of course, but he will not return what everyone hopes, especially if he doesn’t come back Cy Young hard for at least a month. I don’t see how anyone else gets us anything else besides lottery tickets and throw-ins.

Obviously if we get healthy and are playing strong baseball up to the deadline, the strategy changes.  If we are still struggling though, you have to be realistic and understand that not making deadline moves is a big waste of a chance to move the club in the direction you need it to go.  There’s not a ton in free agency each year to do that with—and you have to compete with all other interested teams to sign a guy.  As deadline sellers, you are in a unique and specific position based off who you are shopping.
 

I don’t know that we necessarily need a “haul” in return for the guys I’d look to trade.  I think quality over quantity is the way to go.  
 

What we need to do in any trades we make is get guys who display the skill set that Harris has been promising since he took over.  Get guys at the positions of need who have good walk rates and very good K:BB rates.  Even if Skubal leaves, we still have a lot of young pitching talent and can supplement that with some good pitching signings with the freed up money after this year. 
 

The offense needs to be built around guys that get on base at .350+ clips and who have bat to ball skills.  Homerun power is great, but we will win more if we are constantly putting pressure on the opposing teams pitching by driving up pitch counts and advancing runners.  Then we need guys who can play defensive positions at a high level.  That’s how these smaller market teams like the Rays and Guardians constantly find success—so we should do the same but then surpass them by actually having the payroll to keep the guys who are stars and supplement the team each offseason. 
 

It’s time for the organization to move on from guys that don’t fit the mantra and go hard towards the team identity that’s being preached.  

Edited 31 minutes ago by monkeytargets39

[NorthWoods]

58 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Prospects don't always fail, but a team which is a seller at the deadline is not generally in a good position.  The teams trading prospects know their young players better than anyone and they are likely to offer flawed players.  You can hope that the propect you get pans out, but chances are he won't.  

Oh I agree, as I said somewhere else - prospects are always a roll of the dice.  But if you don't roll them you can't hit boxcars.

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

Prospects don't always fail, but a team which is a seller at the deadline is not generally in a good position.  The teams trading prospects know their young players better than anyone and they are likely to offer flawed players.  You can hope that the propect you get pans out, but chances are he won't.  

But take Skubal and Mize, for instance. If Tiger management determines they're not going to spend the money to sign them, or if the players are determined to test the market and refuse to sign, wouldn't it be better to get a couple (or few) prospects for them at the trade deadline over getting a single draft pick once they leave? IDK...

[NorthWoods]

54 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

These guys are all retired by now.  Listing guys traded 40 years ago sure drives the point home.

Maybe someone from the current century?

Golly I thought Adames was still playing, silly me.     And yes those are older though your 40 years ago is an exaggerration to cover the fact that your statement is wildly wrong.   Many of those players played well into this century.

It's harder to cite more recent trades because the results aren't fully in.   In 10 years, we'll know more.  Sorry that it doesn't work for message board outrage.

 

[NorthWoods]

42 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

That's a big reason why Baltimore wouldn't trade any of their guys a few years back 

 

How has that worked out for Baltimore?    Hmmm.....

Baltimore

21

-29

[RedRamage]

3 hours ago, chasfh said:

That said, i would be open to selling if we do find ourselves in a situation that we don’t recover and we are something like .350 on the season on July whatever-teenth. The question becomes, who do you sell, and what do you hope to get back for them? You named six guys, and five of them were hurt this year (three on the list right now), and the sixth guy is in his late 60s. When I contemplate the possible return, the word “haul” does not show up anywhere in the results.

I agree at this point. I was in the camp of trade Skubal before the season, but that ship has sailed and I certainly was rooting for the Tigers and Skubal once it was clear they were going to keep him. 

That said, assuming we don't turn things around (certainly possible) then I'd rather get something, even if it's not a haul, vs. just letting the player(s) walk. Now obviously I'd prefer a solid return vs. a bag of used balls and a single-A prospect who's 26, but I'd be happy with a even just a high ranked prospect or two in double or triple A vs. a draft pick when Skubal walks.

[RedRamage]

1 hour ago, tiger2022 said:

These guys are all retired by now.  Listing guys traded 40 years ago sure drives the point home.

Maybe someone from the current century?

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/all-trade-deadline-mlb-prospect-team-of-the-past-decade/

[monkeytargets39]

Let’s be honest here….

 

We haven’t had many stars to trade in the last 10+ years.  Last time we did was the Avila sell off that got us Jake Rogers and nothing else.  Before that we were buyers through the Ausmus and Leyland years and before that we had no stars.

We dealt David Price and got Boyd and Norris.  That was considered a decent return and Norris just didn’t pan out despite being the headliner coming back.  We also acquired Fulmer for Cespedes and that was a great move until Fulmer fell apart.

The most recent other one I can think of was trading Jeff Weaver and getting Jeremy Bonderman, Carlos Pena and Franklyn German.  That actually was a good return—but then we rushed Bonderman and gave up on Pena.

Edited 3 minutes ago by monkeytargets39

[Sports_Freak]

8 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/all-trade-deadline-mlb-prospect-team-of-the-past-decade/

Great article. I never realized this many prospects worked out. It makes me realize just how bad Al Avila's scouts were when he traded away all of the expensive Tiger players.