4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 hour ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. I agree completely, which is why I think it would take attaching a prospect at least the calibar of Anderson/Jung in order to move Jansen without eating salary. Quote
chasfh Posted July 13 Posted July 13 (edited) 2 hours ago, Shelton said: I think you’d need to find a team that somehow found a nugget a value in the player and contract. Like, maybe there is a second division team with a distinct need at 1B this year and next and would basically just take Tork for nothing. Maybe they think there is some small amount of of surplus value there and the cost control is nice to have. It’s also hard to envision Scott Harris being content with exceeding the tax limit by such a small amount, when the penalty is as significant as it is. So I do wonder their plan is in the event that they are not sellers. Maybe it’s as simple as getting enough guys back from the DL and their projections look good for that, and they don’t need to do much of anything. We might be able to do that with Tork if he could go on a bit of a heater just as we're trading him, but that is definitely not him right now. The guy drafted for his professional hitter potential is now arguably below average with the bat, on his way to turning in one of the worst defensive seasons of any first baseman in the Statcast era, and bonus: he's going to strike out more than 200 times. The optics of shopping him around would be terrible. And the cherry on this cake: Tork's about to turn 27, so it can be fairly argued that he's run out of time to show any remaining potential to grow. There are almost no teams for whom Tork would be an upgrade at first. Maybe it's simply a matter of his going to a system that allows Tork to be Tork to somehow bring out whatever the best of him looks like, but It seems increasingly likely to me that his best chance to have a productive career would be Japan. Otherwise, I can see your point about Harris might not do much of anything, since the team we have now appears capable of competing for a playoff spot as is. Tell you what, though: to the fan base that practically demands Harris put himself out there and do something anything, moving big names out and big names in just to prove he has a pulse, standing largely pat would drive them absolutely ape****. And I am here for it. Edited July 13 by chasfh Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 2 hours ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. Probably just as fanciful as a team trading for Chris Paddock, Paul Sewald, Tanner Rainey, Dietrich Enns or Charlie Morton at the deadline and to help assist a team in getting to the playoffs. NONE of whom had ANY-thing left in the tank and were actual DETRIMENTS to whichever team it was that traded for them last year. Oh yeah, that's right. Flaherty is a far superior pitcher to any of those pitchers listed above and has a 2.12 ERA since June 1st. Jansen is also far superior to any of them and I would put money on at least ONE contending team offering to trade a low-to-mid-level-prospect for him. For as bad as anyone wants to BELIEVE Jansen has been this year... he has a 1.23 WHIP. 0.95 last year and 1.06 WHIP the year before that. If Harris wants to trade him, there WILL be a market. Although we won't know anything of this unless one of them actually does get traded. But you guys go ahead and keep believing that because they play on the Tigers they are absolutely worthless. That strikes me as fanciful and jaundiced-colored-glasses thinking. Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 hour ago, 4hzglory said: I agree completely, which is why I think it would take attaching a prospect at least the calibar of Anderson/Jung in order to move Jansen without eating salary. Ixne. Quote
4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: Probably just as fanciful as a team trading for Chris Paddock, Paul Sewald, Tanner Rainey, Dietrich Enns or Charlie Morton at the deadline and to help assist a team in getting to the playoffs. NONE of whom had ANY-thing left in the tank and were actual DETRIMENTS to whichever team it was that traded for them last year. Oh yeah, that's right. Flaherty is a far superior pitcher to any of those pitchers listed above and has a 2.12 ERA since June 1st. Jansen is also far superior to any of them and I would put money on at least ONE contending team offering to trade a low-to-mid-level-prospect for him. For as bad as anyone wants to BELIEVE Jansen has been this year... he has a 1.23 WHIP. 0.95 last year and 1.06 WHIP the year before that. If Harris wants to trade him, there WILL be a market. Although we won't know anything of this unless one of them actually does get traded. But you guys go ahead and keep believing that because they play on the Tigers they are absolutely worthless. That strikes me as fanciful and jaundiced-colored-glasses thinking. Jansen is the only one 1 think is worthless to a contending team. I definitely think Flaherty has value and could be moved if we wanted, but I see him having significant value to us, both to make a run to get into the playoffs, and if we get there, to give us another high end potential reliever, whether it's him or Melton that gets bumped from the rotation. Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 minute ago, 4hzglory said: Jansen is the only one 1 think is worthless to a contending team... But you're completely forgetting about small market teams that don't want to trade high value prospects... but do want to take a chance for the playoffs. One of those small market teams will definitely be interested in trading a low-A guy for Jansen. Don't kid yourself. As for Flaherty, I approve of that message. I'm fine with making Flaherty the closer in the playoffs for us. Do we run a 3 or 4-man rotation in the playoffs? Anyone outside Skubal-Mize-Valdez is a candidate to log important reliever innings in the playoffs. The loser of the 4th spot, if we have a 4-man rotation, between Flaherty/ Montero/ Melton can bullpen. Maybe even Verlander in the pen as well. Whatever it takes to win. Quote
4hzglory Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said: But you're completely forgetting about small market teams that don't want to trade high value prospects... but do want to take a chance for the playoffs. One of those small market teams will definitely be interested in trading a low-A guy for Jansen. Don't kid yourself. As for Flaherty, I approve of that message. I'm fine with making Flaherty the closer in the playoffs for us. Do we run a 3 or 4-man rotation in the playoffs? Anyone outside Skubal-Mize-Valdez is a candidate to log important reliever innings in the playoffs. The loser of the 4th spot, if we have a 4-man rotation, between Flaherty/ Montero/ Melton can bullpen. Maybe even Verlander in the pen as well. Whatever it takes to win. For sure in the 7 game series teams usually use 4 starters. If all we're doing is looking to get under the CBT threshold and getting guys healthy isn't quite enough, it looks like Rogers or Veirling are about the only other realistic options who by themselves could get us there. I highly question if Valencia is capable enough defensively to be the 2nd catcher full-time. The only way I see possibly moving Veirling are if Baez gets back healthy in time for the deadline. Quote
chasfh Posted July 13 Posted July 13 10 minutes ago, 4hzglory said: Jansen is the only one 1 think is worthless to a contending team. I definitely think Flaherty has value and could be moved if we wanted, but I see him having significant value to us, both to make a run to get into the playoffs, and if we get there, to give us another high end potential reliever, whether it's him or Melton that gets bumped from the rotation. Flaherty has been awesome and I do think if we were to sell he'd be in high demand. So would Skubal and Mize, natch. Would Gleyber be in demand? He's been on the list twice already this year, for almost two whole months of the season, so even if he comes back this weekend, which he might, I'm doubtful about his marketability. We are obviously not trading Jake, and he has no real trade value, anyway. Everyone else we have is under control next year. Tork and Jansen, though? Who needs either of them to make a run at a ring? Quote
papalawrence Posted July 13 Posted July 13 4 hours ago, chasfh said: The idea of trading Jansen, Tork, or anyone else deemed to be hurting us to any other team—as a favor to us, I guess?—strikes me as wishful and fanciful. Trade Jansen to the Mets for Bobby Bonilla's contract. 1 Quote
1984Echoes Posted July 13 Posted July 13 On Jansen... Everybody angling for the playoffs wants a reliever or two. They'll all be flying off the shelves like water and lumber and nails in Florida with an incoming hurricane. There will be a market for Jansen. I GAR-en-T that... Quote
NorthWoods Posted July 14 Posted July 14 IF we decide to trade him I need my Dodger OFers. If, though, the Tigers do decide to deal Skubal, the market is likely to be a healthy one, not surprisingly. On that front, the New York Post reports that the Cubs, Braves, and Rays are all expected to be interested in acquiring Skubal, among presumably other "buyer" teams. On the other side of things, the Yankees and Dodgers are not expected to be strong bidders for Skubal, at least at this juncture. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-rumors-trade-deadline-tarik-skubal-luis-arraez-cubs-braves-rays-phillies/ Quote
papalawrence Posted July 14 Posted July 14 3 hours ago, Shinzaki said: They aren't going to DFA Tork...that's just crazy talk Almost, but not totally. He's sitting at -.04 war. Say he hits 28 home runs and ends the season at 0 war. I'd say that's actually a close estimate. He's entering arbitration year 1. This year he makes 4+ million. With 28 homes runs in arb he might get 7-8 million. I could see Harris passing on that salary for a 0 war 1st baseman. Maybe Valencia gets a shot at 1st? I still believe he stays, but I won't be shocked if he gets dfa'd or traded for a mid prospect Quote
chasfh Posted July 15 Posted July 15 Here we have so many people stressing out about the idea of Harris settling for anything less than multiple Top 50 prospects in exchange for Skubal at the trade deadline, and yet now the suggestion is we’d be OK with Harris simply letting a controllable near-30-homer first baseman walk away and get nothing for him, while replacing him with an unknown guy who is equally replacement-level? That definitely does not compute. 3 Quote
papalawrence Posted July 15 Posted July 15 1 hour ago, chasfh said: Here we have so many people stressing out about the idea of Harris settling for anything less than multiple Top 50 prospects in exchange for Skubal at the trade deadline, and yet now the suggestion is we’d be OK with Harris simply letting a controllable near-30-homer first baseman walk away and get nothing for him, while replacing him with an unknown guy who is equally replacement-level? That definitely does not compute. So you think continuing to have a basically 0 war 1st baseman year in and year out is the best route to a WS? 3-37 lifetime with the bases loaded. Like I posted, letting him walk would be almost crazy, but not totally, and I wouldn't be shocked. If Harris felt he could add a piece and they're knocking on the tax doors, Tork is replaceable. Tork's war this year is -0.5 and in his career war is 1.8. By contrast CJ Cronin had a 0.3 war with Detroit is 13 games. Almost crazy to let him walk, but not totally. Quote
Tiger337 Posted July 15 Posted July 15 13 minutes ago, papalawrence said: So you think continuing to have a basically 0 war 1st baseman year in and year out is the best route to a WS? 3-37 lifetime with the bases loaded. Like I posted, letting him walk would be almost crazy, but not totally, and I wouldn't be shocked. If Harris felt he could add a piece and they're knocking on the tax doors, Tork is replaceable. Tork's war this year is -0.5 and in his career war is 1.8. By contrast CJ Cronin had a 0.3 war with Detroit is 13 games. Almost crazy to let him walk, but not totally. He is not good, but you keep him until you have a replacement that is better. Most of the replacements the Tigers have brought up this year have been worse than him. 2 1 Quote
4hzglory Posted July 15 Posted July 15 18 minutes ago, papalawrence said: So you think continuing to have a basically 0 war 1st baseman year in and year out is the best route to a WS? 3-37 lifetime with the bases loaded. Like I posted, letting him walk would be almost crazy, but not totally, and I wouldn't be shocked. If Harris felt he could add a piece and they're knocking on the tax doors, Tork is replaceable. Tork's war this year is -0.5 and in his career war is 1.8. By contrast CJ Cronin had a 0.3 war with Detroit is 13 games. Almost crazy to let him walk, but not totally. No, I don't, but I also don't think just letting go of someone who is a league average RH bat with power for whatever we get (including nothing), when we are short on RH bats is either. We should be trying to upgrade, but that doesn't mean just giving away Tork. Quote
papalawrence Posted July 15 Posted July 15 Again, I am saying it would be almost crazy but not totally. As I posted, if Harris had another option that would push them past the tax door, then I could see it happening, as Tork will probably make about 8 mil next year. But no, without that upgrade you don't let him just walk away. Quote
Tenacious D Posted July 15 Posted July 15 8 minutes ago, papalawrence said: Again, I am saying it would be almost crazy but not totally. As I posted, if Harris had another option that would push them past the tax door, then I could see it happening, as Tork will probably make about 8 mil next year. But no, without that upgrade you don't let him just walk away. He might not be on the team next year, but it would be foolish to cut him at this point in the season, especially without an obvious replacement. Which is why I’d have Max Anderson getting reps there in Toledo. Additionally, we will have significant payroll flexibility this offseason to identify a solution outside of the organization if they choose that path. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted July 15 Posted July 15 (edited) 3 hours ago, 4hzglory said: No, I don't, but I also don't think just letting go of someone who is a league average RH bat with power for whatever we get (including nothing), when we are short on RH bats is either. We should be trying to upgrade, but that doesn't mean just giving away Tork. right. You don't give up a player until you have his better replacement - or maybe he gets too expensive. Edited July 15 by gehringer_2 Quote
Shelton Posted July 15 Posted July 15 I still think they have to have a plan to do something to cut salary and avoid the tax in the event they aren’t trading Skubal and Mize. It doesn’t have to be Tork or anyone in particular, but it inherently has to be someone that fits the mold of being good enough to justify the elevated salary being dumped, but also not too good that they would be substantially missed. Tork is one example of that. That said, they are indeed short on right handed hitters and also shortstops, so Tork and Vierling and McKinstry might have to stay. The list starts getting pretty short if they aren’t being moved. One thought discussed with a former poster today was Jack Flaherty. He makes enough to get below the tax if he is moved. He’s pitching well enough and SP being in short supply across the league probably means you could actually get something for him (just like last time). At the moment he is part of a six man rotation and we do have Jobe on his way back. It would be a risk, but if this depth still exists, maybe an old school challenge trade of Jack in return for a right handed 1B/OF that makes less money could be a possibility. This is all moot if they become sellers. 1 Quote
Shelton Posted July 15 Posted July 15 What is the threshold for being a seller or not? I have settled on needing to be 54-58 or better at the deadline. As long as 54 wins at the deadline is still in reach I’m holding. As soon as 54 wins is not achievable by the deadline, I’m willing to pull the trigger on a good deal. That means a 10-6 record in the next 16 games leading to the deadline. Things can change very quickly over the next 2.5 weeks. If things in the AL change over the next couple weeks maybe my target will change. Quote
4hzglory Posted July 15 Posted July 15 8 minutes ago, Shelton said: What is the threshold for being a seller or not? I have settled on needing to be 54-58 or better at the deadline. As long as 54 wins at the deadline is still in reach I’m holding. As soon as 54 wins is not achievable by the deadline, I’m willing to pull the trigger on a good deal. That means a 10-6 record in the next 16 games leading to the deadline. Things can change very quickly over the next 2.5 weeks. If things in the AL change over the next couple weeks maybe my target will change. For me I like Edman's playoff odds of being at least 33%. Prior to the last 3 games, I think they got up to 38-39%. Now they are down to 23%. If they are lingering in the 25-30% range, I probably sell Skubal (assuming the return is worth it), but keep the rest for a push. If they are over 33%, I'm keeping everyone, except making sure they get under the tax. If they are 20% or less, I'm open to everyone on their last year (Skubal/Mize/Flaherty/Torres/relievers) Quote
gehringer_2 Posted July 15 Posted July 15 9 minutes ago, Shelton said: If things in the AL change over the next couple weeks maybe my target will change. I guess everything goes into the decision matrix but I would still focus most on games behind in the loss column to the Central leader. I still think the div is going to be the main chance - have to be within 5 (currently at 7) 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.