2022-23 Detroit Tigers Offseason Thread

[oblong]

33 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I understand everything about the logic presented here except why a call up would stil wouldn't be in his interest while all the same stuff to get him moved to somewhere else is going on in the background? If only for the better meal money and higher class transportation. The guy who hasn't been able to stay in the majors is worried about getting 'trapped' in the majors because he performs too well on a team he doesn't prefer? I'll certainly take your word for it but it doesn't sound like very good career advice to follow!  😂

My guess would be he wants everyday playing time to hone something he's working on and to not sit on a bench, even if it means better food and accommodations after.

 

[KL2]

We gonna talk MLB top prospects?

[clicks link looks for Tigers]

 

 

https://www.mlb.com/prospects/top100/

[Edman85]

Woofmaker.com

You are welcome.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

My guess would be he wants everyday playing time to hone something he's working on and to not sit on a bench, even if it means better food and accommodations after.

 

that's a fair take.

[Edman85]

Henceforth, I will use Caleb Thielbar as an example of the Avila era reluctance to churn resulting in the Tigers missing out on a piece.

[Longgone]

2 hours ago, Edman85 said:

Henceforth, I will use Caleb Thielbar as an example of the Avila era reluctance to churn resulting in the Tigers missing out on a piece.

It's a matter of evaluation. Hopefully you're not just churning, but upgrading.

[microline133]

4 hours ago, chasfh said:

This closes the loop for me regarding the Thompson case. He didn't want to play for the Tigers because the Dodgers expressed interest, because really, during the Avila era, who would? Since that appears to eliminate every possibility except (a) do whatever deal you could with the Dodgers or (2) let Thompson's opt out date arrive so he could be sprung and sign with the Dodgers anyway, that reduces the Tigers' leverage to zero. Cash considerations became the best they could get in return. Do I have that straight?

Hypothetical: what if the Tigers tried to promote Thompson anyway, for who knows what reason? (It's a hypothetical, so the idea doesn't have to be defended with an actual reason.) Would Thompson have left the org because ain't no way he's stepping foot in the Comerica home team locker room no how? And if he were to accept such a promotion, would the opt out date clause expire and eliminate his ability to jump to the Dodgers at his discretion? I'm interested in the technicals of such a case, basically because I have never heard of this kind of situation before.

Two last questions: is there a technical difference between "cash considerations" and "cash"? And if you had to guess, how much in "considerations" do you think the Tigers might have received forThompson?

Catching up from earlier....

 

Cash and cash considerations are synonymous in this context. The official term being cash considerations has always struck me as a means to pilut some distance between the transaction and some potential perception of buying/selling human beings. It just softens the action from what it is actually taking place.

In terms of how much cash, it's not typically a significant amount. I couldn't venture a guess on this one....but probably not a large enough amount of money for most fans to think it's worth it in these type of transactions.

To your hypothetical at the point where the Tigers were not calling him up and he was expressing an interest in leaving, it became as much about public/player relations as anything else. Giving him the finger and calling him up when he clearly had other desires and likely wasn't doing much for your 2023 hopes or your longer range future, is just a poor look when you're trying to sign the next one like him to a minor league deal. You'll get a rep for being difficult in those circumstances and minor league free agents will look for more favorable conditions to try their hand.

Now, to Edman's comments about churning players....it's entirely possible the Harris regime's methodology and propensity to churn may have resulted in Thompson being called up a bit earlier and the Dodgers' interest not having time to manifest on a meaningful way. Similarly, though, it's possible he's called up, doesn't hit right out of the gate, and is DFA'd because of that propensity to churn players.

[casimir]

8 hours ago, chasfh said:

Of course, and anyone who saw that Thompson could not have possibly done anything for us because he's a 31 year old OF with a career WAR through that date of 0 and OPS+ of around 95 is equally full of crap.

He was definitely worth a try, a literal no risk move since the cost of trying him would have been essentially nothing, with a potential payout of at least some decent depth pieces. It could have been as close to getting something for nothing as anyone could get.

I don't understand why you're fighting so hard against that idea.

It’s the “only cash considerations” comment that is baffling to me.  What did you really expect via trade for him?

[casimir]

9 hours ago, mtutiger said:

Let's frame it another way... Thompson vs. Derek Hill (who actually was on the active roster in early June)

Do people think it's crazy to have prefer Thompson over Hill too?

Nah, I was done with Hill.  Hill’s value is in playing defense if he can stay healthy and a team can cover his meager offense.  The Tigers need offense.  And unfortunately Hill seems injury prone.

[casimir]

8 hours ago, mtutiger said:

The good news is the architect of last year's team is gone and his replacement seems like he will more nimble in terms of moving guys around (or out) as circumstances arise.

Something we can all agree on.  Kumbaya.

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, casimir said:

It’s the “only cash considerations” comment that is baffling to me.  What did you really expect via trade for him?

At the time I posted, which was before reading microline’s replies, it seemed within the realm of possibility that had we called Thompson up, he could have done up to and including as well for us as he did for the Dodgers, and that might have been worth a decent enough return to make a deal with someone. A flyer pitcher and a flyer hitter, maybe. Concluding that he was terrible before this year so there was no possibility he could have been any good to us this year seemed to me a baffling position to dig your heels in on. In the case of Trayce Thompson as explained by microline, all of this is now moot. 

[Tenacious D]

I would have been pissed if they had given AB’s to a career 4A player vs Hill, Baddoo, Cameron or Carpenter, each of which were considerably younger and are/were still prospects.  Giving playing time to a career minor leaguer, who was basically organizational filler, in an effort to win 1-2 more games during a lost season would have been dumb.  I’m still pissed that we wasted so many AB’s on Reyes and the Castros as it was.

Edited January 28, 2023 by Tenacious D

[mtutiger]

10 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

I would have been pissed if they had given AB’s to a career 4A player vs Hill, Baddoo, Cameron or Carpenter, each of which were considerably younger and are/were still prospects.  Giving playing time to a career minor leaguer, who was basically organizational filler, in an effort to win 1-2 more games during a lost season would have been dumb.  I’m still pissed that we wasted so many AB’s on Reyes and the Castros as it was.

If Thompson, in a world where he didn't have the Dodgers lined up, were taking bats away from either Cameron or Hill, I wouldn't have cared because, at that point, it had become evident that neither player would be part of the long range plans for the Detroit Tigers and were also destined for 4A status.

[Tenacious D]

Hill might have already been gone from the org.  But it sounds like you agree that Baddoo and Carpenter both should have been higher in the pecking order than Thompson.  If anything, I could have been onboard with dumping Reyes for Thompson, exchanging one journeyman for another.

Again—a moot point, given ML’s intel.

[romad1]

Lots of rumblings on twitter about Mario coming back.  I think wishful thinking.  I note that he did know when a ball was going to carry the wall.  It may be he had the game on a delay or something?

 

[gehringer_2]

25 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Lots of rumblings on twitter about Mario coming back.  I think wishful thinking.  I note that he did know when a ball was going to carry the wall.  It may be he had the game on a delay or something?

 

The sad part for Mario is that I think he could have become a lot more loved in Det if he had gotten out from under working with Rod. The big knock on Mario was that he seemed like such a cold fish, but I have a feeling that was only because he was sitting next to a guy he didn't like or want to talk to about anything more than the game. On the few occasions when people had to fill in for an Allen absence, Mario was a much more personable guy. Blame that on Allen or blame it on Mario from not getting past himself to be better, but it was what it was. At some point Mario probably should have realized the Tigers weren't going to dump Allen and moved on for the sake of his own career.

[mtutiger]

48 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Hill might have already been gone from the org.  But it sounds like you agree that Baddoo and Carpenter both should have been higher in the pecking order than Thompson.  If anything, I could have been onboard with dumping Reyes for Thompson, exchanging one journeyman for another.

Again—a moot point, given ML’s intel.

Carpenter wasn't even in AAA in late May-early June and Baddoo didn't get back on the diamond and playing until the second week of June because of an Minor League IL stint. So not sure how either of them factor in.

It would have been down to Hill/Cameron/Castrei/Reyes had Thompson been an option.

[Tenacious D]

13 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Carpenter wasn't even in AAA in late May-early June and Baddoo didn't get back on the diamond and playing until the second week of June because of an Minor League IL stint. So not sure how either of them factor in.

It would have been down to Hill/Cameron/Castrei/Reyes had Thompson been an option.

Again, moot.  I have more regrets that we have wasted time discussing this than seeing the 4A guy go to LA.

Next!

[mtutiger]

5 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Again, moot.  I have more regrets that we have wasted time discussing this than seeing the 4A guy go to LA.

Next!

Either way, Baddoo / Carpenter had a lot of questions about their readiness at the time. Otherwise one or both of them could have been in the mix at the time when Grossman was down and the outfield was shorthanded as opposed to sending Willi Castro out into CF to **** up routine fly balls. Just think we need to clear up the record on that.

And yes, I'd rather see competent outfield play from a AAAA player than giving reps to someone like Castro who couldn't play the position. That's embarrassing and doesn't provide any value or enjoyment for the viewing fan.

Edited January 28, 2023 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

Also, this is a Message Board... unless our names are 'Scott Harris', just about everything discussed is moot

[Tenacious D]

Complaining about last season is a waste of time, unless you enjoy dancing on Avila’s grave.

More energy should be spent around the quality and lack of activity this offseason and whether or not we are starting a new rebuild.  I know Harris has understandably avoided that term publicly, but it’s pretty clear that is where we’re at given the underwhelming return to-date from our #1’s (Manning, Faedo, Mize, Greene and Tork), along with the questions with Jung.
 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Tenacious D

[mtutiger]

49 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Complaining about last season is a waste of time, unless you enjoy dancing on Avila’s grave.

If you don't want to engage, there's always the option of not engaging.

The discussion around Thompson, imo, is relevant in how it compares to the current PBOs view on moving players and churning as necessary. And I suspect that if Harris encounters a similar situation going forward, he will handle it differently. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

1 hour ago, Tenacious D said:

More energy should be spent around the quality and lack of activity this offseason and whether or not we are starting a new rebuild.  I know Harris has understandably avoided that term publicly, but it’s pretty clear that is where we’re at given the underwhelming return to-date from our #1’s (Manning, Faedo, Mize, Greene and Tork), along with the questions with Jung.
 

I dont think Harris views this as a rebuild... my opinion is that he looks at the roster and sees a mix of players who underperformed their career statistics (perhaps unstainably), young players who are capable of performing better than they did in their first year and a few guys who are effectively free agents who didn't contribute at all to last year's club (ie. Meadows, Turnbull, Rogers) and thinks that the roster, with improvements to pitching and defense, are capable of outperforming expectations.

Not saying he's right or wrong, but that's the logic of the moves imo.

Also, I'm not sure that with the trades of Soto or Jimenez, that I would say this offseason had a "lack of activity". In terms of signing established Wil Myers types it was, but he's leveraged the Tigers assets as best as he can. And there are a decent amount of teams, including some big boys like the Red Sox or Dodgers, who one can argue have actually done less.

Edited January 28, 2023 by mtutiger

[KL2]

1 hour ago, Tenacious D said:

Complaining about last season is a waste of time, unless you enjoy dancing on Avila’s grave.

More energy should be spent around the quality and lack of activity this offseason and whether or not we are starting a new rebuild.  I know Harris has understandably avoided that term publicly, but it’s pretty clear that is where we’re at given the underwhelming return to-date from our #1’s (Manning, Faedo, Mize, Greene and Tork), along with the questions with Jung.
 

Oh for God sake can we stop calling guys like Mize green and tork underwhelming. They have barely played a year and lost a year to covid.

You would have cut trout after his first stint and Verlander would have been dfa'ed on July 7 2005.

Give a rookie a moment before declaring him anything.

Edited January 28, 2023 by KL2

[mtutiger]

24 minutes ago, KL2 said:

Oh for God sake can we stop calling guys like Mize green and tork underwhelming. They have barely played a year and lost a year to covid.

You would have cut trout after his first stint and Verlander would have been dfa'ed on July 7 2005.

Give a rookie a moment before declaring him anything.

Greene is particularly odd to group in... he played less than 100 games and really showed flashes of greatness at times. He looked better than his baseball card stats overall.

Edited January 28, 2023 by mtutiger