Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 hours ago, chasfh said:

OK, that's plausible.

Now the question is whether we want him back even for another year. With top prospects knocking at the door possibly as soon as March, I'm not sure he would be worth the twenty-two five.

Well, who would get displaced, the up and coming rookie or someone like Ibanez/Sweeney?  And who's to say the up and coming rookie performs as ready enough right off of the bat?  Or what about injury?

Posted
4 hours ago, Dan Gilmore said:

Bo Bichette, what does the forum think of him as a potential FA acquisition?

What kind of contract do you think he’ll get? He’s never played 3B in the majors, but I could see him as an option if the term and dollars aren’t too large. My assumption is Bregman won’t be coming here.

Could Bichette at 2B and Keith at 3B be an option?

Posted
15 minutes ago, casimir said:

Could Bichette at 2B and Keith at 3B be an option?

Everything is an option, but if we’re signing Bichette for the seven or more years it’s going to take to get him to come here, we’re probably going to have to trade three of McGonigle, Anderson, Lee, and Rainer. OK?

Posted
6 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Everything is an option, but if we’re signing Bichette for the seven or more years it’s going to take to get him to come here, we’re probably going to have to trade three of McGonigle, Anderson, Lee, and Rainer. OK?

What if they already had Bichette?  What would they do then?  Someone can move to the outfield in a few years.  Or maybe some of those guys don't hit well enough in the majors to matter.  They aren't getting Bichette anyway, but if they did, these things work themselves out.  

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

These announcements dribbling out day/weeks apart instead of all at once are probably great for staff morale.

actually let me correct this. These are reports - the Tigers have not announced anything. 

Posted
9 hours ago, chasfh said:

Everything is an option, but if we’re signing Bichette for the seven or more years it’s going to take to get him to come here, we’re probably going to have to trade three of McGonigle, Anderson, Lee, and Rainer. OK?

Trade from the surplus to address a need.  I doubt all four hit, but if it happens, we should all be very happy.

Posted
11 hours ago, chasfh said:

Everything is an option, but if we’re signing Bichette for the seven or more years it’s going to take to get him to come here, we’re probably going to have to trade three of McGonigle, Anderson, Lee, and Rainer. OK?

A five person infield/DH arrangement of Bichette (or Bregman), Rainer, Kevin, Colt, and Anderson/Lee seems fine to me. Plus the system assets you got in return for an actually good version of Anderson/Lee? Sign me up!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Shelton said:

A five person infield/DH arrangement of Bichette (or Bregman), Rainer, Kevin, Colt, and Anderson/Lee seems fine to me. Plus the system assets you got in return for an actually good version of Anderson/Lee? Sign me up!

With as high as the ceilings are on the five system guys you named, would you prefer to keep them all and potentially under-utilize several of them? Would you not prefer prefer to trade any of them sooner to fill holes elsewhere? Because we have plenty of those.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, chasfh said:

With as high as the ceilings are on the five system guys you named, would you prefer to keep them all and potentially under-utilize several of them? Would you not prefer prefer to trade any of them sooner to fill holes elsewhere? Because we have plenty of those.

 

The Tigers would never bring guys north to sit on the bench 5 days a week. This organization is really good with players development and the best way to develop them is for them to play every day. That's why I was in favor of moving a few prospects at the trade deadline for major league talent. But...whatever.

Posted
2 hours ago, chasfh said:

With as high as the ceilings are on the five system guys you named, would you prefer to keep them all and potentially under-utilize several of them? Would you not prefer prefer to trade any of them sooner to fill holes elsewhere? Because we have plenty of those.

 

I suppose we could quibble over how high the ceilings for Anderson and Lee truly are. But your questions are indeed valid. I don’t know what’s better. If you have faith in your internal evaluations, then I think the best approach is cash in the guys you don’t believe in, before they prove to others that they are nothing more than potential. 
 

in the case of those two, I would be surprised if they fetched much of anything at this stage. I’m not highly interested in making sure every last decent AAA prospect has a corresponding slot to provide themself. That doesn’t seem to work very often. It’s been two years now and Colt Keith is just now feeling like an asset. 
 

That’s a long way of saying I’d prefer they address the acute need that they have right now, and worry about being forced to trade guys that have value later once there is a true logjam. 
 

We often talk about that “good problem to have” in a hypothetical sense, but it’s been a while since I can remember ever actually having that good problem. 
 

Short answer to your question is that I think I’d rather gamble on them being good and underutilized, rather than trade them, but that’s mostly because I don’t think the bottom two have that much value in trade, and the top three can slot very easily into our future plans.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted

I am still not completely convinced about Keith.  He is trending in the right direction, but he faced mostly right handers this year and is not a strong fielder so far.     

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Shelton said:

I suppose we could quibble over how high the ceilings for Anderson and Lee truly are. But your questions are indeed valid. I don’t know what’s better. If you have faith in your internal evaluations, then I think the best approach is cash in the guys you don’t believe in, before they prove to others that they are nothing more than potential. 
 

in the case of those two, I would be surprised if they fetched much of anything at this stage. I’m not highly interested in making sure every last decent AAA prospect has a corresponding slot to provide themself. That doesn’t seem to work very often. It’s been two years now and Colt Keith is just now feeling like an asset. 
 

That’s a long way of saying I’d prefer they address the acute need that they have right now, and worry about being forced to trade guys that have value later once there is a true logjam. 
 

We often talk about that “good problem to have” in a hypothetical sense, but it’s been a while since I can remember ever actually having that good problem. 
 

Short answer to your question is that I think I’d rather gamble on them being good and underutilized, rather than trade them, but that’s mostly because I don’t think the bottom two have that much value in trade, and the top three can slot very easily into our future plans.

I'd rather try to flip at least one or more of them for a controllable starter, which I think we will need starting next year. Jobe might be out all next year, and Olson is starting to look like a 50/50 bet to totally crap out on injuries. The way Anderson is raking in Arizona, plus his breakout at AAA last year, he might be the top chip that unlocks someone. Maybe not Alcantara level—although who knows, maybe. (Marlins do have a pretty good 2B already.) Sign Bichette—which was the genesis of this sidebar—and a Anderson/Rainer-plus package should get at least one controllable guy in the top half of the rotation.

Lee seems like that guy who will play second and third for us as either a fourth guy, or as a platoon partner with Keith at third (or platoon relief for McGonigle at second). I think we'd like to keep the flexible guy over the other one.

 

Posted (edited)

With respect to position players - I pray that the Tigers do not sign a long-term FA.  This team came within a base hit of beating Seattle.  Nearly every player seems to be on the upwards path of their career trajectory.  Do not throw into the mix a long-term contract with a player on their downside path.  It seems to me that most long-term signings eventually become regrettable.  We are lucky that Javy was flexible and contributed in a number of ways this year.  Even then, every long-term signing going back to Miggy has been regrettable, some ludicrously bad.  With so much talent coming through the pipeline, I'd like to see every position made available to the home grown talent.  Maybe make a few commitments ala Colt Keith to some of the sure thing standouts.   

Edited by Arlington
  • Like 2
Posted
24 minutes ago, Tigermojo said:

Nido back on a minor league deal. Return to the post season assured.

The Tigers played .636 ball in games in which appeared this year.  That's a 103-win pace.  Things like that don't happen by accident.  

  • Haha 1
Posted
37 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

The Tigers played .636 ball in games in which appeared this year.  That's a 103-win pace.  Things like that don't happen by accident.  

$1.5 million if he gets to MLB. That's less than $15K per win!

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...