2022-23 Detroit Tigers Offseason Thread

[mtutiger]

25 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I agree so long as the discussion goes like "I wonder how Scott Harris is going to approach the roster, maybe he will do X or Y", versus "I don't know what Scott Harris will do, no use speculating about it until we find out for sure", which is kind of where concluding "it's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" leaves it.

"It's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" is as legitimate view to take in a discussion about whether he should be brought back or not as it is to give a black and white, yes or no answer. 

I dont see how holding any particular view one way or another on whether Candy should come back or not and speculating on how the team or the new POB may handle it "stifles" discussion, maybe it's just a different angle to look at the situation. 

Edited October 24, 2022 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

25 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Respectfully, I think this organization has rolled the dice way too much in the last several years, which is exactly what planning to play Schoop at a position he's manned for exactly one inning in the past eight seasons would be doing. I think that's why Baby Doc hired Harris: he's gotten sick of his front office rolling dice and crapping out. Particularly at third base!

Has this org rolled the dice a lot? My view of Avila was that he tended to overvalue what we had (both in terms of prospects and on the 26 man roster) and was unwilling to take risks or be aggressive in making moves. The trade deadline the past couple of years being a great example....

Even with the Baez signing, there's a perception that he settled with the guy who would sign pre-lockout so as not to risk walking away empty handed when the music stopped playing post-lockout.

Edited October 24, 2022 by mtutiger

[Tenacious D]

25 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Respectfully, I think this organization has rolled the dice way too much in the last several years, which is exactly what planning to play Schoop at a position he's manned for exactly one inning in the past eight seasons would be doing. I think that's why Baby Doc hired Harris: he's gotten sick of his front office rolling dice and crapping out. Particularly at third base!

where I might be different from others here, is that I expect the next two seasons to be awful.  that's why I'm open to this solution, though I'd rather we ship him to the Yankees to take on Donaldson's contract with an elite prospect.

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

"It's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" is as legitimate view to take in a discussion about whether he should be brought back or not as it is to give a black and white, yes or no answer. 

I dont see how holding any particular view one way or another on whether Candy should come back or not and speculating on how the team or the new POB may handle it "stifles" discussion, maybe it's just a different angle to look at the situation. 

I don't think that's a point of view as much as a simple reality because, in the end, it's always up to the team to figure out whether their bubble players can be fixed or not for the following season. That's a fact, not a speculative opinion. A speculative opinion would be along the lines of "I think the team can fix him so we should keep him", or, "I don't think he can be fixed so we should look elsewhere." Regardless of which of these we believe, we can still append the phrase "but it's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" to either one.

Without going back and studying up before typing this, I believe you are leaning toward the camp of "Jeimer can't be fixed so we should look elsewhere." Is that true?

[mtutiger]

13 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I don't think that's a point of view as much as a simple reality because, in the end, it's always up to the team to figure out whether their bubble players can be fixed or not for the following season. That's a fact, not a speculative opinion. A speculative opinion would be along the lines of "I think the team can fix him so we should keep him", or, "I don't think he can be fixed so we should look elsewhere." Regardless of which of these we believe, we can still append the phrase "but it's up to the team to figure out whether he can be fixed" to either one.

Without going back and studying up before typing this, I believe you are leaning toward the camp of "Jeimer can't be fixed so we should look elsewhere." Is that true?

Yes... more or less was stated in my first post on this discussion. And that his defense being bad last year in particular makes it hard to countenance keeping him around.

Either way, what I'm trying to drive at is that while keeping Candy around is the safe move, if the Tigers do not feel that he can be fixed or they think the risk of trying to find something better (either through free agency or trade or other means), they should have no concerns with moving on and trying something different. Even if that means they end up with a less ideal situation at the end of the offseason... 

After all, that is what Harris himself said, he is someone who is willing to take calculated risks. And in order for this org to improve (and do so on a faster timeline than expected), they may be required to do so at times.

Edited October 24, 2022 by mtutiger

[Edman85]

30 minutes ago, chasfh said:

So, with four days off before the World Series starts, and therefore not in conflict with actual games, do we see any substantial moves by Scott Harris this week?

No. Maybe a GM or Scouting Director hire, but no free agents have hit free agency, and trades are still closed until after the World Series.

[chasfh]

12 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Has this org rolled the dice a lot? My view of Avila was that he tended to overvalue what we had (both in terms of prospects and on the 26 man roster) and was unwilling to take risks or be aggressive in making moves. The trade deadline the past couple of years being a great example....

Even with the Baez signing, there's a perception that he settled with the guy who would sign pre-lockout so as not to risk walking away empty handed when the music stopped playing post-lockout.

I think both can be true: Al tended to overvalue the players in the system, but he would also roll the dice on things like bringing up Daz and bringing up Kody and bringing up Zack and bringing up Beau and bringing up Elvin (repeatedly), even though none of those guys were ready, because he was rolling the dice and hoping they'd come up seven or eleven. And that's in just the past two seasons.

On the other hand, Al kept Kerry Carpenter buried in the system even after it was long apparent he was ready to come up and we needed somebody anybody in the outfield who could hit. But maybe that's because Kerry wasn't a first round draft pick, or part of a trade for an inner-circle Hall-of-Famer, or the son of a good or great ballplayer himself. I don't think it is any accident that Kerry Carpenter was called up the night before it was announced that Avila was getting the boot. I would bet money that Al had nothing to do with that decision.

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

No. Maybe a GM or Scouting Director hire, but no free agents have hit free agency, and trades are still closed until after the World Series.

Right, I agree, no trades or free agents, but maybe hirings or firings or releases.

[Edman85]

7 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Right, I agree, no trades or free agents, but maybe hirings or firings or releases.

Maybe hirings/firings... Releases, no. If you release a player you are restricted in bringing them back next year. This is different from outrighting a player for them to hit free agency or non-tendering a player. A player straight up released can't be re-signed and put on the active roster until May 15. The only player movement you will see between now and the end of the world series are waiver claims and international free agents.

Maybe they try to slip some guys through waivers this week, but there's really no point. Just wait until after the Series, especially with the new guy in charge still getting up to speed.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Edman85

[1984Echoes]

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

In defense of mtutiger’s point, a move to bring on Longoria would not be a build-for-the-future move any more than keeping Candelario around for another year will build for the future....

Except...

The calculated risk yields more dividends with Candy getting back to a 3 WAR player than holding onto the corpse of Evan Longoria.

But more to the point... I'm going to guess that Harris counts pennies. Because pennies can sometimes add up to dollars. The reward to the risk of betting on Candy next year is that Harris can trade him at the deadline for something of value. Versus absolutely zero value for 37 y.o. Longoria. And even if it's trading Shane Greene for Joey Wentz, or Daniel Norris for Reese Olson or Jeimer Candelario at the trade deadline for... ____________? ... there is the possibility of unlocking some kind of future value by betting on a Candy recovery.

But... that would be...

A calculated risk.

[chasfh]

13 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Yes... more or less was stated in my first post on this discussion. And that his defense being bad last year in particular makes it hard to countenance keeping him around.

Either way, what I'm trying to drive at is that while keeping Candy around is the safe move, if the Tigers do not feel that he can be fixed or they think the risk of trying to find something better (either through free agency or trade or other means), they should have no concerns with moving on and trying something different. Even if that means they end up with a less ideal situation at the end of the offseason... 

After all, that is what Harris himself said, he is someone who is willing to take calculated risks. And in order for this org to improve (and do so on a faster timeline than expected), they may be required to do so at times.

Do you think Jeimer is unlikely to be fixed and we should let him go?

[1984Echoes]

1 hour ago, Tenacious D said:

At this point, I'd be OK with rolling the dice on moving Schoop to 3B next season if we can't come up with a better option.  He's already signed and will be without a position next year, once we acquire a real SS and move Baez to 2B.

For consideration, the Yankees will need to desperately cut payroll to attempt to keep Judge next season.  If we could get one of their better prospects, I think it might be worth taking on Josh Donaldson and the remaining year on his crappy contract....

I would be interested in this as an alternative.

Not signing Longoria.

[1984Echoes]

PS: I'd rather sign Eva Longoria, as 3B coach, just for the eye candy...

Than Evan Longoria.

[1984Echoes]

2 hours ago, mtutiger said:

Is Candy a ...

Possible future trade value at the deadline?

Yes.

[Stanley70]

With all of the pitching injuries there is a huge range of possibilities performance wise with the starting rotation. If Turnbull, Skubal, and Manning pitch well at some point and ERod is still a mid rotation guy they could in a good place by the end of the year. Plus they have Jobe and Flores in the minors and Mize coming back in 2024. Or not. So spending on multi year deals doesn't make sense until they get some clarity.

And then as Edman mentioned they have to go through Candelario, and every position player player on the roster, with the new hitting and analytics staffs and determine if there are any keepers, and at what cost. Get creative with value trades and low cost signings and go from there. I don't think they will trade Skubal for example if he pitches well, but other relievers and possibly Turnbull.

That is what I expect.

 

[bobrob2004]

1 hour ago, casimir said:

Is this the @gehringer_2 plan of only 8 men on the roster type of blow it up?

Well, not extreme.  This team has been a failure for years now, why keep the failure around?  Everyone is calculating the $$/value to see if it's economical for Candelario to come back.  But what if the problem is mentality?  What if the problem cannot be seen in the stats?  This isn't a simulation, this is real people.  Get players that fit the team dynamic that Harris wants.  Does that include Candelario?  Maybe, maybe not.  But you can't see that in the stats.  The Tigers haven't had a winning season with Candelario on the team.  Maybe he's part of the problem.  

[chasfh]

4 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Maybe hirings/firings... Releases, no. If you release a player you are restricted in bringing them back next year. This is different from outrighting a player for them to hit free agency or non-tendering a player. A player straight up released can't be re-signed and put on the active roster until May 15. The only player movement you will see between now and the end of the world series are waiver claims and international free agents.

I appreciate your pointing out the difference, although I also think there are several players we could simply release this week without fretting over whether we'll be able to bring them back for next year. Not necessarily will, but could.

Not you here now, but in general building off what you just said, I feel as though we Tiger fans have been conditioned to accept that there is only a small subset of players we have available to us, to the degree where we predict rosters for three-four years hence filled with players we have in the system at the time; or we believe it's SOP to release and re-sign the same players over and over; and so we have to make sure that anyone we let go can be brought right back. I have a feeling that Scott Harris is going to effectively deprogram us re: this notion.

[1984Echoes]

22 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

...

Either way, what I'm trying to drive at is that while keeping Candy around is the safe move, if the Tigers do not feel that he can be fixed or they think the risk of trying to find something better (either through free agency or trade or other means), they should have no concerns with moving on and trying something different...

IMO:

We can do both. The Tigers can offer arbitration if they believe he is redeemable and has some kind of future value... AND the team can just as quickly move on from him as soon as they find a better option. Let's just say that the better option, for whatever reason, does not turn up until January or February (late FA signing, trade, whatever...); there should be no impediment to moving on from Jeimer.

To one of Chas's earlier points: there are teams out there that have a need and will certainly look at Jeimer as a candidate. He does not have ZERO value out on the market despite what anyone thinks of him here... Harris "should" be able to trade him at any point in time, as long as he hasn't destroyed his 2023 value (medically, atrocious start to 2023 in which February will have revealed nothing to that point, or otherwise, etc.).

[Edman85]

4 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

IMO:

We can do both. The Tigers can offer arbitration if they believe he is redeemable and has some kind of future value... AND the team can just as quickly move on from him as soon as they find a better option. Let's just say that the better option, for whatever reason, does not turn up until January or February (late FA signing, trade, whatever...); there should be no impediment to moving on from Jeimer.

To one of Chas's earlier points: there are teams out there that have a need and will certainly look at Jeimer as a candidate. He does not have ZERO value out on the market despite what anyone thinks of him here... Harris "should" be able to trade him at any point in time, as long as he hasn't destroyed his 2023 value (medically, atrocious start to 2023 in which February will have revealed nothing to that point, or otherwise, etc.).

Worth pointing out the new CBA makes arb salaries fully guaranteed.

[mtutiger]

19 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Do you think Jeimer is unlikely to be fixed and we should let him go?

 

35 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Yes... more or less was stated in my first post on this discussion. And that his defense being bad last year in particular makes it hard to countenance keeping him around.

Either way, what I'm trying to drive at is that while keeping Candy around is the safe move, if the Tigers do not feel that he can be fixed or they think the risk of trying to find something better (either through free agency or trade or other means), they should have no concerns with moving on and trying something different. Even if that means they end up with a less ideal situation at the end of the offseason... 

After all, that is what Harris himself said, he is someone who is willing to take calculated risks. And in order for this org to improve (and do so on a faster timeline than expected), they may be required to do so at times.

 

[mtutiger]

23 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

But more to the point... I'm going to guess that Harris counts pennies. Because pennies can sometimes add up to dollars. The reward to the risk of betting on Candy next year is that Harris can trade him at the deadline for something of value. Versus absolutely zero value for 37 y.o. Longoria. And even if it's trading Shane Greene for Joey Wentz, or Daniel Norris for Reese Olson or Jeimer Candelario at the trade deadline for... ____________? ... there is the possibility of unlocking some kind of future value by betting on a Candy recovery.

But... that would be...

A calculated risk.

Without a doubt one of the more compelling reasons to keep Jeimer around.

But it is a calculated risk, they have to believe he can be a 120+ OPS+ player again and not the sub-90 he was last year (which was worse than the corpse of Longoria).

[RatkoVarda]

6 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Worth pointing out the new CBA makes arb salaries fully guaranteed.

I think this is true only if you do NOT go to a hearing before arbitrator; so players have more incentive to settle

[sabretooth]

3 hours ago, chasfh said:

Would you pay $7 million for this?

AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	HBP	SO	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
512	69	131	33	4	17	63	58	6	126	1	1	.256	.338	.436	.774

Yes, absolutely.  It's a less-than-50/50 chance that he does that or completely sucks.  There doesn't seem to be any in-between with Candy.

If Harris already has an above-average budget to work with, I would want him to take the chance.  If Harris is working on a limited budget, I would want him to prioritize other things, like getting a very good SS either through FA or Trade and pitching.

[sabretooth]

29 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I appreciate your pointing out the difference, although I also think there are several players we could simply release this week without fretting over whether we'll be able to bring them back for next year. Not necessarily will, but could.

Not you here now, but in general building off what you just said, I feel as though we Tiger fans have been conditioned to accept that there is only a small subset of players we have available to us, to the degree where we predict rosters for three-four years hence filled with players we have in the system at the time; or we believe it's SOP to release and re-sign the same players over and over; and so we have to make sure that anyone we let go can be brought right back. I have a feeling that Scott Harris is going to effectively deprogram us re: this notion.

You are right on the first bolded part, and I really really really hate that conditioning.

I hope you are right on the second bolded part, because THAT will determine the Tiger's future.

If Harris is given a mandate of a limited budget along the lines of what we have seen to-date (well below average, especially when Miggy's contract is discounted), I believe that we will be a losing team indefinitely no matter what Harris does with drafting and development.

Don't get me wrong, even if he's given an average or above average budget that doesn't guarantee anything in terms of success....he still has to maximize use of analytics and scouting and his own sense of things, and some luck, and make it all happen.  But WITHOUT at least an average budget, all of this discussion about analytics, drafting, development, trading, Candy vs. whoever, is all academic and pointless in my opinion.

[SoCalTiger]

3 hours ago, chasfh said:

Would you pay $7 million for this?

AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	HBP	SO	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
512	69	131	33	4	17	63	58	6	126	1	1	.256	.338	.436	.774

Yes and point well made but which is he is the question and he and the team was beyond terrible last year so I vote for a fresh look knowing it might be the wrong decision verses retaining him and knowing it could also be the wrong decision.