If the scenario in the OP is correct, I would be happy.
EDIT: Here is a link. Schlereth is still in play
Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
If the scenario in the OP is correct, I would be happy.
EDIT: Here is a link. Schlereth is still in play
Thanks for the new post, the old one seemed to be dead.
I hate this deal for the Tigers. I was fine when it was just Jackson but they're really getting very little for Curtis. The fact that they had to "cave" to the Yanks' request to remove a pitcher from the deal is ridiculous.
(Then again, I was completely against the Joyce for Jackson deal last year and was very wrong about that)
It's called "dumping his contract", but you're right this deal doesn't make sense. He's only 28yrs old.
Maybe they're going with the Dumars' approach, "there are no sacred cows on this team".
Great. Three schmos and a prospect who, if we're lucky, will turn out as good as Granderson in three or four years.
Austin Jackson is one of the top outfield prospects in baseball. He's an amazing athlete and is 6 years younger than Granderson.
Any Tiger fan that thinks he's just "a prospect" is a moron and should stop following baseball immediately. He also won't strike out 141 times/year.
He struck out 123 times in the minors last year. If you think that number is coming down in the majors, you're insane.
I know about Austin Jackson. He's a good prospect, not a great prospect. And any prospect outside of the once-in-a-decade phenoms - which Jackson is not - that has a season like this: .302-23-74 with 23 triples, will have panned out better than most prospects do and be considered a success. That's Granderson from two years ago. Can you promise me that's Jackson in four years, with the defense to boot? You can't make that promise.
Granderson batted .249 last year (it a giant ballpark), had a 2:1 K:BB ratio and stole only 20 bases. The Yanks are giving up their top offense and pitching prospects and a satisfactory lefty reliever (hard to come by these days)
This is an awful trade by the Yanks and a steal for the D-backs and Tigers.
I see it the other way round, as you might have guessed. The centerpiece of the deal for us might be a good player. The centerpiece of it for you is a good player. That's the bottom-line truth.
Max Scherzer is the best player in this deal. Austin Jackson is the 3rd best player in this deal. Schlereth is the 5th best player in this deal. The Tigers WON this trade, hands down.
25 years old and 240K in 224 big league innings. Should do well in spacious Comerica Park.
Dude is stupid filthy. He's got top of the rotation stuff. I believe his MLB debut was 3 perfect innings with 8 k's in one game. Schlereth is also high quality, hard throwing lefty, great K rates.
Tiger fans have an emotional bond with Granderson, but truthfully he's not all that great of a player. He hits the occasional homer but has a poor on-base percentage, can't hit at all against lefties and isn't that great on the basepaths. This looks like a great deal for the Tigers.
and he's unbelievably unclutch. Speaking with a friend today, who is one of the emotionally attached, he responded to my unclutch contention by saying that "He gets triples when they count! Like in the all star game!" I laughed. I feel like every time Granderson is up in the ninth it ends up poorly. Back in the days when he was on the team, I argued strongly that he was the best centerfielder in the division (over the douche from Cleveland, of course), based on his defense and ability to hit and capitalize on his speed. Now, in my process of divesting from him, I still believe that he's better than Grady, but I think our dependence on him really hurt. A guy consistently leading the team (and near the top of the league) in strikeouts getting the most at bats for six years was a problem.
This is a completely inaccurate representation of the trade. Granderson is a pretty good player defensively and offensively. He hit 30 home runs this year, and as a lefty in new Yankee Stadium with that shallow right field, he could hit like 35 next year. He does strike out a bit much, and his OBP could be better, but he draws a decent number of walks as it is. Hes a certain upgrade over Melky Cabrera or Brett Gardner, though he has trouble hitting lefties (well platoon him probably with those other two and a resigned Damon).
Austin Jackson is not really our top overall prospect on offense. That would be future catcher/DH Jesus Montero. Jackson could end being fairly good, though. Problem is he strikes out a lot, and probably will never hit for as much power as Granderson does. If he progresses well in about 3-4 years he could be almost as good an outfielder defensively, and probably a slightly worse batter.
Ian Kennedy is definitely not our top pitching prospect. That would be Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes. Kennedy is something like a AAA all star who cant seems to put it together in the pros. His location is good and could get even better, but his stuff just isnt that great speed wise.
Yankees made a pretty good trade. They essentially swapped a good prospect for a player already in their prime who is probably better than that prospect ever will be anyway. They also had to let go of a decent pitching prospect, who probably wouldn't have ever seen meaningful time in the Bronx anyway.
Detroit should be happy for Scherzer, hes pretty good; the best pitcher of all three involved.
The tigers are getting a good deal out of this. As a yankees fan i hate it. I would much rather have Austin Jackson. There was no need to go out and make a deal. It seems like the Yankees just made a trade for the sake of making a trade. Always trading away the fucking future. I dont mind getting rid of phil coke though, because he is the worst ever.
They will buy the future. And pay well for it.
Post of The Day
What use have the Yankees for prospects? They exist only so the Yankees can trade for other teams' best players that they can't afford any more. You're getting right now what you hoped Jackson would eventually be. You're adding a brilliant defensive center fielder and a powerful hitter to a lineup that won the World Series anyway. And you're the Yankees, so you have the luxury of using Granderson only against righties if you want, making him even more valuable.
And you gave us "the worst ever" pitcher in return, whose only value to a team as far as I can tell is which arm he throws with. What do you have to complain about?
Granderson isnt a great hitter. He is terrible against lefties and has a really bad OPS. I would dig up these stats, but im just too lazy. He also strikes out more than most people.
Jackson struck out 123 times in the minors last year. Yankee fans need to shut the fuck up about hating this deal and recognize they are clearly the winners here.
Man the 21 (now 22) year old who got promoted to AAA this year struck out 123 times and still batted 300...Crazy.
When Granderson was 21 he was still in Single A ball...(also he only hit 3 HRs there)I am not saying that Austin Jackson will be better then Grandy but he has the potential to be a great player for the tigers.
Also considering that they just got a player who is younger and has played better then Cameron Maybin it seems like a good deal.
I think Coke will be a good fit in Detroit and I believe both the pitchers from Arizona could be number 2 or 3 starters in MLB given some seasoning.
Please also consider that Detroit just got 10 times the value then Minny got for Santana.
Granderson is a very good defensive outfielder and it will allow the yankees to sign Damon as a DH.
Jeter - R
Damon - L
Arod - R
Tex - S
Cano - L
Swisher - S
Granderson - L
Melky - S
How do you pitch to this lineup....Look at the speed...look at the defense in the outfield...what is that in the distance...is that...28 world championships...and the gator bowl (please Michigan get in the Gator Bowl)
Yeah, he's not good against lefties, but like I said - you're the Yankees. Just go buy someone else's star outfielder to platoon him with. You can use him 3/4 of the time and be all set.
As far as the stats, other than the lefties, you're only looking at this past year.
Really, i just dont agree with the deal because it never needed to be made. Trades should be made out of necessity and there was really no reason for the yankees to trade their best prospect for someone who plays the same position and isnt great in his prime. Plus I hate trading for/signing big names because everyone just goes on about how the yankees buy championships. Id much rather have them develop their own talent. Its worked in the past with Jeter, Posada, Rivera, Bernie Williams, Andy Pettite, Etc...why continue trading away prospects?
Isn't great in his prime? Granderson was an All-Star last season. He's great.
Anyone who thinks Jackson will amount to anything more than Granderson is delusional. The kid just isn't that good, as many people have pointed out.
Being an all-star doesn't make you great. Robbie Cano was an All-star and he's not great. He may have had a good season one year, but its not like he's a premiere player in the league. Granderson making an all-star game doesnt make him the best cf in the league necessarily. I cant say that Jackson would be better than Granderson, id just like to see him get his chance, instead of making this trade for no reason.
Robbie Cano is a great second baseman. Your threshold for "great" is really high.
I'll gladly let you take your chances on an unproven commodity. I know the range of what I can get from Granderson and I'll take it. Add Carl Crawford or Juan Pierre to the leadoff spot and Granderson hits 5 and that team is a World Series contender. Oh well.
Considering there are only 4 or 5 lefty starters in the AL East that don't play for the Yankees...it makes a lot of sense for NY.
He hit higher than 270 twice...and his obp has never been great. You are doing exactly what you accuse him of doing in looking solely at one year, where his BABIP was something like 330. Curtis granderson is a 260 hitter who is completely helpless against lefties. They got 2 top tier arms in terms of talent, a high ceiling CF prospect who is 5 years younger, and an effective lefty reliever.
Yeah, Coke blows
...are always overrated. The Mets prospects are always overrated too. Remember when Phil Hughes was the best starting pitching prospect in the minor leagues? Several years later they learned he was finally good enough to remain in the big leagues as a setup man. Mike Pelfrey was the best pitching prospect in the national league, and he became...decent. The national media always exaggerates the prospects of NY teams because they get talked about so much by the NY media.
Austin Jackson may end up being a good player, but he is not better than Granderson or E-Jack. As a Tigs fan, I don't hate the trade, but I really am annoyed by NY fans who underestimate the value of Granderson. He is instantly your best outfielder...by a mile. You played Nick Swisher and Melky in CF last year. Are you kidding me? Granderson is one of the top defensive CF in all of baseball. He will hit 30-35 HR next year when he gets to play half of his game in the wind-tunnel-band-box that is Yankee Stadium. Scherzer is filthy, but so is E-Jack. Given the choice, I'll take the youth in that scenario.
Also, the Yankees just added Grandy and the best human being on their roster. That is saying something, because there are some real professionals and quality men on that team, but Granderson is easily among the best human beings in baseball. That absolutely is worth something, even if it is something immeasurable.
You looked at his strikeout numbers lately? 123 Ks in 132 games in triple A. He looks like Granderson with less power.
To argue that he is anything but a prospect is foolish. He is only thought of as amazing/can't miss by yankees fans who think everyone that might don the pinstripes is the next Mantle.
Maybe he'll be better than Granderson, but there's also a real chance that he never even contributes on an everyday basis.
Actually if you consider how they hit when they were both 21..then Jackson hits more homers then Grandy (and against better competition...grandy was still in A ball)...Jackson has played better then Maybin and is younger then Maybin...just saying
He'll have the chance to contribute on an everyday basis, though. Who else is Detroit going to run out to center?
that is what they said about Cameron Maybin...Where is he now? That's right, still trying to "work things out" in the minors.
That's what they also said about roughly 400 other prospects. Sometimes, they flame out.
this is a smart move by the tigers. granderson has had one great year so far and hasn't been able to build off of that year since. the other problem is, where does he bat in the line up??? is he a lead off guy or should he be batting in the middle of the order??? with all of the people complaining it just reminds me of when higginson was here. there was a time that the yankees wants higgy in a bad way but the tigers wouldn't trade him because higgy was the face of the team... well how did that work out??? the tigers have no players to speak of in the minors really so they need young talent to keep them going.
I disagree with the Higginson comparison (even if baseball-reference says that his closest comparison at his age is Bobby Higginson, that's just freaky). He's actually been a solid-above average player since '06. He was one of the guys that was a face of the franchise, obviously loves the game and overall meant a lot to the team, plus his contract wasn't terrible. I understand that all of that makes him one of the more tradeable players on the team, but I really think you need to get a sure-fire replacement for him in CF and I don't think that's what Austin Jackson is.
In any case, hopefully everything works out for the Tigers. But I hope they stop pretending they're not having a fire sale after a deal like this.
Most similar batter to Granderson through age 28?
i like going to a tig's game as much as the next guy and will always root them on. however, when one team can spend 50% more than the second highest team's payroll the sport gets to be a joke. the problem will only continue to get worse. that's what makes the nfl so great. a team like the packers can be good every year and it's not just a function of it being in a major city and being able to spend a bunch of cash (we'll see how long this lasts though).
the funniest thing to me is how excited the yankees get when they win. shit, teams like the yankees and red sox should be embarrassed when they don't win considering the huge payroll advantage they have over smaller market clubs (which make up about 20 teams). i love it when teams like the marlins win it.
MLB is a joke. When one guy on a team makes almost as much as another teams entire payroll, something is wrong. +1
need to happen for MLB to get on track. one thing has already happened, donald fehr stepped down. now the next thing that needs to happen is bud selig needs to go far far away from baseball. MLB needs a commish that is going to work as hard as possible to try and get a salary cap in place, or a salary floor. with a salary floor teams would be forced to keep a payroll above 10 million as an example. until either one of these things happens baseball is always going to be a joke. the yankees are just going spend as much as they want and no one will be able to stop them.
If you forced all major league teams into the same salary...LA and NY would still have a huge advantage since they are the biggest media markets and with the loss of playing revenue players would look to increase their revenue through other streams...like advertising.
Detroit will never have the marketing that NY has...plain and simple but under the current rules a guy like Ilitch can out spend anyone he wants...(guy is one of the richest owners outside of Baseball)
Do the NY teams have a huge natural advantage in the NFL?
Salary floor is right on the money. As a Yankees fan, it almost kills me to admit that John Henry had a good point, but he most certainly did in his interview a few weeks back regarding the teams who take in revenue sharing dollars. It's what teams like Pittsburgh do, not what the Yankees do, that is the real problem with baseball.
were the best at it. if you took all of the players that they traded away from 1990 on, you could make hell of a team. and the one year that the expos were really really good the strike happened.
The Expos weren't really like that until after the strike hit in '94. Prior to that, they had a decent-sized payroll. After the strike the owner panicked and ordered a fire sale, attendance cratered, and the franchise started a slow, painful decline.
If the strike had never happened, I believe the franchise would still be in Montreal.
If not for the strike they would have been in the playoffs that season and could have started building a contender.
maybe you should be pissed at Ilitch..considering he makes way more money then the Steinbreners and oh also what is detroits pay roll right now...122 Million last year...top four in baseball...oh and 100 million right now before you sign a single free agent....there are lots of teams who should bitch about the yankees payroll...the tigers are not one of them...if the Yankees keep the current roster they will rock out at around 160-170 next year...they won't got over 185 and they have another 40 million coming off the books next year...they are starting to run their team smarter and will probably end up in the next couple years at 150-160...which isnt a huge advantage...also considering how much the yankees pay in LT they allow stuggling teams to survive...all hail the generous yankees.
With all respect, I think you're missing the larger point here. Sure, the Tigers may not be that far behind the others in ability to purchase victories. But, there are plenty of small-market teams (e.g., Kansas City and Milwaukee) that have less hope of matching the spending of the Yankees.
It makes the games less interesting, y'know, when big-market teams can out-spend all the other teams. Contrast this to the NBA, where a salary cap makes it more likely that money alone won't affect the outcomes too much. Instead, teams are forced to be shrewd with their money. Big-market teams with inept management (Knicks) can get crushed by small-market ones (San Antonio).
Anyway, it's a matter of preferences. I'd prefer to watch a league where wins can't be indirectly purchased by large, coastal teams. Not BORING like MLB...
Shouldn't this trade be proof enough that the Tigers can't maintain that level of salary generosity and the Yankees can easily afford to take on salary dumps from other teams?
And how do you figure Steinbrenner makes less money than Ilitch?
This trade should not be proof of that.
Not every trade that improves the salary situation can be seen as a trade solely to improve the situation. That's silly.
The Tigs probably upgraded at SP, got some much-needed bullpen help, and downgraded at CF. But outfield is by far their strongest and deepest position in terms of prospects. They will be fine in 2010, and they may yet be better very soon. The loss that will hurt the Tigers most won't be Grandy or E-Jack...it will be Polanco. And in the long run, this will most likely be a move that improved the Tigers.
Ilitch 1.6 Billion
George the King 1.2 Billion
Still a ton of money but he has an extra 1/5 on Steinbrenner
Net worth =/= income. Most of Steinbrenner's net worth is the Yankees, and the media empire he's created to broadcast the Yankees. Ilitch's is tied up in pizza - you can't just sell Little Caesar's to pay for baseball salaries. And I'd wager that a lot of the difference between Ilitch and Steinbrenner is the casino his wife owns, which Forbes might consider "his" because he's married to her, but in no way, shape, or form will MLB allow the casino money or net worth to help finance the Tigers. That stuff stays separate. It's why the casino is in his wife's name in the first place.
...he also owns TWO teams. Just a thought.
Per ESPN, the Yankees payroll was 208 million in 2009. The Tigers were 119 million (5th in baseball). http://espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=nyy. Thus, the gap between the Yankees and Tigers is 89 million dollars. (That is 2.6 A-Rods without deducting the salaries of the players the fictional A-Rods would replace.)
The point here is that the Tigers have to dump salary. This is not a baseball move. Detroit had no choice but to get rid of good, young pitching and the most popular player on the team amongst fans. The only reason why the did this was economics. Does Detroit have some bad contracts? Hell yes. (Willis and Robertson come to mind). But there is no room at all for error.
Meanwhile, the Yankees can add payroll at will b/c they have all the money they will ever need. I heard that the YES network made the Yankee organization 500 million last year. (That's per 97.1 the Ticket in Detorit from Mike Valenti. He is not always 100% correct, but he is a Yankees fan.) I don't blame the Yankees. They didn't make the rules, they are just exploiting what's there. It is the system that is broken.
It IS a baseball move. THEY GOT THE BEST PLAYER IN THE TRADE, in Max Scherzer. Further - do you think "Saving money" can't be a baseball move? In the next two years, they're going to have to re-sign the 2nd best pitcher in baseball - you think that won't be expensive? That Granderson is worth 1/4 as much as Verlander?
Granderson is a league average CF who is an awesome person. He's not worth the money.
The point I was trying to make is that the Yankees only have to focus on the pure on the field part of a trade. Saving money is not an issue there. The Tigers are making this trade for money and money alone. They shopped Granderson and Jackson and got what they could. Every beat writer in Detroit who covers and knows the team thinks so.
Mentioning Verlander hits on what I was driving at. To sign him, Detroti will have to get rid of players. Despite that, I think everyboby here expects Verlander to be in pin stripes in two years. (See also, C.C. Sabatha.) The fact that Granderson will already be there doesn't make us any happier about it.
Look, I hope you are right about Scherzer. Granderson was a very popular player in Detroit. We love the guy here. It sucks that he has to go because of money.
And there went my Tiger...Mr. I will not be getting any of my money next season.
I wouldn't call Max Scherzer a schmo.
I don't know how I feel about the deal yet. I think Granderson erased a lot of defensive shortcomings of the poor corner outfielders. But, for those opposed to dealing Granderson, I'd love to hear what you think is fair value for him.
It is hard to put a price on the face of the team.
I'm not impressed by a 4.12 ERA in the NL. I don't know what I'd consider fair value for Granderson, because I don't have extensive knowledge of every prospect that might be available on all 29 other teams. But this is not it. And besides that, I like rooting for something other than the laundry, and Granderson is a terrific guy to root for, a ballplayer's ballplayer, and would have been a great representative of the city. And we're getting back....just some dudes. Here we are trading two of our core players - arguably our biggest core guy - and the Yankees are just peddling off a couple spare parts that were falling off the wagon anyway.
The Tigers were no fun in the late '90s and early '00s because they were just a bunch of faceless jobbers going in and out. We finally turned that around in the middle of this decade and had a bunch of guys that were a hell of a lot of fun to root for. Granderson was one of the guys who led the spontaneous celebration outside the clubhouse with the fans when we beat the Yankees in 2006.
There's more to Granderson and this trade than just "he can't hit lefties." I've never been so upset to see a player leave the Tigers.
...like a family member just died.
You put the emotional attachment to Granderson as well as anyone and anyone who doesn't feel some sense of detachment right now, has probably not watched that much Detroit Tigers baseball lately
You don't follow baseball outside of Detroit, do you?
Scherzer, first of all, is 24, and was in his first full season. He pitches in Arizona - the dry desert air makes balls go farther - and in a bandbox. Scherzer is moving from a park that allows disproportionately MORE HR's than the average park to one that allows disproportionately FEWER HR's than the average park. He is moving from the 2nd best run-scoring environment in MLB over the past 3 years to the 18th best run-scoring environment. More evidence? Check his home/road splits. When he's not in the 2nd most difficult place to pitch in major league baseball, his HR's are cut to a third, and his ERA drops 0.80 points.
HE. IS. A. GOOD. PITCHER.
Granderson is a league average hitter and an above average fielder who's 28. In 4 years, he still won't be able to hit a lefty, and he'll slow down enough to the point that he'll need to play in a corner OF - where his bat will be a liability. In the meantime, Jackson will be giving Detroit a reasonable facsimile of what Granderson is giving them now - an average MLB CF'er. Except he'll be doing it for the league minimum instead of $12 million a year.
Edwin Jackson was an average pitcher who had a hot 2 months to start the year. The Diamondbacks paid a price for a guy they thought was "a #2 starter" who is actually more like a #4 starter.
The Tigers FLEECED the D-Backs.
You had me up until the part where "Granderson is an average center fielder." Despite trying to appear more knowledeable by throwing in that little dart about not following baseball, there's absolutely nothing to back up the claim that Granderson is just average. He's in the top half of the league whether you're looking at traditional stats or sabermetrics. Even his "crappy" OPS this year of .780 - well below his norm - was good for 12th among centerfielders and within .016 of 6th.
And you claim Jackson will definitely provide an equal replacement for Granderson? Right away? You can't possibly know this. Projections are not definitives.
I don't care what the Tigers did to the D-backs - you'll notice I haven't said a peep about Edwin Jackson. (And I notice, despite all the extra stats you bring to the table, you're no less prone to brushing aside inconvenient truths than the rest of us. Edwin Jackson didn't have "a hot two months", he had a 3.16 ERA in the month of July - that's not "through" July, that's in July. And his August wasn't too shabby either, three of his five starts were quality starts.)
Point is, the way I see the Scherzer-Jackson swap, the D-backs might be way worse off from 2009 to 2010, but we'll be about the same - if you're right about Scherzer that he can be expected to perform better once away from the desert. Keep in mind he'll have the DH to deal with. But like I said, I have no qualms about trading Jackson.
But Granderson? That's a salary dump. Pure and simple. We give Curtis Granderson to the Yankees for a cheaper player who we hope turns out as good. I don't know how you can claim Austin Jackson will definitely jump right in and be a "reasonable facsimile" after watching Cameron Maybin spend two years mostly in the minors. In exchange for basically getting to morph a prospect into an All-Star in one offseason - now they have Granderson instead of Jackson - the Yankees gave us a guy whose biggest asset is the arm he throws with.
P.S. At no point in Granderson's contract will he make $12 million, unless the Tigers (make that Yankees) pick up the team option on the last year.
12th of 30 isn't "average"? It's pretty damn close.
Further, I never said that he'd be as good as Grandy right away. What I'm saying is this:
This team, as constituted before this trade, MAY make a run at a Central division title, but their talent level doesn't support a claim that they can do much more than that - they need to reshuffle, that takes a few years.
SO, Granderson will be 32 and making $10 million at that point. His defense will have slipped due to age. So, do you want that, or a guy that your scouts tell you will bring most of what Granderson gives you TODAY? I know my answer.
Also - maybe it is a salary dump - but would you rather have Granderson or have the money to keep Verlander? Finally, you need to give up something to get something. They vastly upgraded a SP, and got a closer of the future. In exchange, they had to exchange a certain level of certainty for an unproven player.
Your statements are limited to mistruths like asserting Scherzer is mediocre, which lead me to think you don't follow much beyond the Tigers.
You're going to claim vindication of your absurd "average centerfielder" claim based on one stat? A stat at which Granderson performed more than 70 points below his career average? I can do better: based on one stat (home runs), Granderson is the best centerfielder in the league. Or maybe we should stick with OPS: if we were having this argument last year, would Granderson be the fourth best in the league? And that wasn't even his best year.
For someone who likes to call forth stat after stat about ballpark-adjusted abilities and so on and so forth to prove your point about Max Scherzer, you sure do like to zero in on a couple basic ones to judge Curtis Granderson.
If I formed my opinion on what baseball you follow the same way you form yours of mine, I'd be forced to conclude you follow everyone but the Tigers considering your "mistruths" like claiming Edwin Jackson had two hot months and that was it.
YOU'RE THE ONE THAT CITED HIS STATUS AS HAVING THE 12TH HIGHEST OPS TO CLAIM HE WAS NOT AVERAGE. Now you're going to blame ME for laughing at the asinine stat YOU brought up? I agree using that number is stupid as shit - but YOU'RE the one that said "Hey, he was the 12th best CF in OPS!" in an effort to claim he wasn't average!
I'll admit to being wrong about Jackson - he had 4 good months and 2 poor ones (though, if you look at his July peripherals, things started to go south). Regardless, he's still a mirage of abnormally low BABIP (just like Washburn was before the Tigers traded for him). I don't, for the record, think he's "bad". I think he's a guy that can throw 180 innings of 4.30-ish ERA baseball. That definitely has value. It doesn't have as much value as Scherzer.
Do you want me to talk Granderson without zeroing in on a handful of stats? Fine:
1. He has excellent power for a CF.
2. He has reasonably good patience and walks a decent amount.
3. He's an excellent defensive player.
1. He strikes out enough that his batting average will never hit .290 again unless he miraculously gets better placte discipline. There are VERY few players that can strike out 140 times and maintain an average that high. Despite the fact that he walks a decent amount, this will stop his OBP from ever really being that good for a leadoff man.
2. He is useless against lefties - effective bullpen usage can remove him from the game.
That's really it - he comes out to being a player that is better than he is worse - which I agree with. He's a good player. He's not all-star caliber. The reason why I DON'T think he's irreplaceable is because this Tiger team is extremely flawed right now, and can't honestly contend for much more than the Championship of the worst division in baseball. In 3 years, when they may be able to have a contending team, Granderson will NOT be as good as is now, as he's sort of at the late stage of his peak (age 29 next year). So, they traded him for:
1. An elite young pitching prospect with a year of MLB experience (Scherzer is 24, and was the 11th pick in the draft 2 years ago). A pitcher who is one of the 10 best strikeout pitchers in major league baseball.
2. A solid hitting prospect that, by the time the Tigers can contend, has a solid chance of being roughly as valuable as Granderson.
3. Immediate bullpen help with the potential of getting their future closer (Schlereth).
4. A toss-in, garbage reliever.
5. All of this for substantially less money than what they would be paying the combination of Jackson and Granderson in 3 years (Granderson would be making $10,000,000 that year, these three, combines will be making around $1,000,000.
6. Gained financial flexibility that gives them a good chance to re-sign the 26 year-old Justin Verlander - the 2nd best starting pitcher in baseball.
ALL they gave up for all these things is one over-rated pitcher and a solid CF (who they may have replaced, in this trade). I'm not arguing that Jackson is going to be as good as Granderson next year - he won't.
They just don't. He's a useful piece and a great guy, but at this point in his career, he can't be a cornerstone of a team. You can effectively remove the bat from his hands in the final 3 innings of close games, assuming you started a RHP. Hell if you start a lefty, like CC, or Lester, you remove him completely from the game offensively.
For full details, courtesey http://www.mlbtraderumors.com:
"12:48pm: Heyman tweets that an agreement has been reached, with only medicals pending. We'll do a fresh post once this trade is official. To reiterate: the Yankees get Curtis Granderson, the D'Backs get Edwin Jackson and Ian Kennedy, and the Tigers get Max Scherzer, Daniel Schlereth, Austin Jackson, and Phil Coke."
...is this a good trade? This is about logic. It doesn't make any sense. The Tigers are essentially dumping a guy they didn't have to trade, who makes a reasonable salary for a guy his caliber. Wasn't Illitch pretty forthcoming saying "finances weren't an issue" last year? One game away from the playoffs and now it's a firesale?
And that's to say nothing of what Curtis has meant to the city of Detroit. He was a great, community guy in a city that badly needed one, in a time it badly needed one. I don't buy the prospects issue either. Max Scherzer is only a year younger than Edwin. Austin Jackson is a great prospect but why trade potential for proven commodities (Cameron Maybin, anyone)? So basically they've traded two All-Star players with very reasonable salaries for 4 "prospects" who may or may not pan out, while alcoholic Cabrera eats (or drinks) up the rest of the budget. After 2010, Magglio's contract frees up a shit-ton of space - it doesn't make sense.
And too the Yankees of all teams? It makes me sick to my stomach.
I pray to God Dombrowski's right because last time I saw balls this big they were rolling towards Indiana Jones
This just about says it all. I loved the trade for Cabrera and that they spent what was necessary to keep him, so I don't understand why the same year they sign him they all of a sudden act like the contract is too large.
I applaud the current regime for some of the moves they made, but don't punish us because you idiotically gave Nate Robertson any money at all, much less his current stupid contract (in addition to the deals for Willis, Bonderman and Magglio). Curtis was the type of player you build around, and if none of those prospects pan out, this deal looks even worse than it already appears.
NSFMF - Magglio also has a guaranteed contract for 2011 if he reaches the same threshold as last year. So we get the same shenanigans again this year. Should we pay him and not use him so we can save money for next year, or actually use the $18 million dollar man and get tied down for another year at $15 million.
On the other hand, god I wish I was Scott Boras, he sure as hell knows how to make money off of incentive laden contracts.
Those safeguards were necessary for Magglio to sign with Detroit in the first place. He came here because he was a big question mark coming off surgery and nobody wanted to guarantee him money. Detroit signed him to an incentive laden deal that gave the Tigers an out if he wasn't healthy.
He had a couple of spectacular seasons, I wouldn't complain.
Verlander to the Red Sox or Mets at the deadline, I guess. Meh.
That dude could've ran for mayor next year and won. Who will be our CF next year? Please don't say Clete Thomas. Who will be our leadoff guy? Again, please don't say Clete Thomas.
I don't understand how we don't try to get a top 3B prospect for one of these guys. If Grandy's average is an issue, then I know we can't resign Inge with his current production.
To whoever says Scherzer is a "schmo" - do you follow baseball?
We just dealt out slightly less than $10 million off the books in exchange for three pitchers (apx. $2.9-3.5 million) and a prospect (est. $400k-$600k), meaning that we dumped $5.5-6 million in salary. In exchange, we get a prospect that may be able to replace Granderson at some point in his career, one decent (albeit relatively unproven) reliever, one pitching prospect (again a reliever), and a middle of the rotation starter (who, being fair, could get better) to replace Edwin Jackson.
This does address some bullpen issues, but at the same time, we still have numerous deficiencies:
We have yet to get a closer or set-up man.
We lost a key piece of our outfield and will lose production there.
We have an absolute mess in the middle infield.
Our rotation still needs a fifth serviceable starter, as we also have lost Washburn.
If this is our only important move this offseason, I will be displeased/rather upset/extremely angry.
Yankee fan here in Jersey so I don't see Granderson regularly. I hear his defense regressed last year down the stretch. Can any of you Tiger fans fill me in on what was up with that?
he was more tired than anything, from having to cover all that space in centerfield. and on top of that he had to cover for slower than normal corner outfielders.
is Austin Jackson better turn into what Cameron Maybin never amounted to. I had such high hopes for Maybin and to get a young similar prospect is exciting, that's the only way I look at it so I don't rip my hair out.........
Everyone thinks and expects Austin Jackson to be very, very good. His power production went down this past season compared to the year before, though. He is a very good hitter though, with speed. He could use another year in the minors, IMO. I wouldnt say that he is a leadoff hitter either. I think he is most likely to be a 3 hole hitter in the future.
Everyone besides the teams and the players think it is done. I hope not. I really do. The Yankees have absolutely no need for Granderson. Not in center and not in left(the Yankees will re-sign Damon, IMO). Also, Austin Jackson, as of 2:10, has not heard anything, according to Chad Jennings of The Journal News and the LoHud Yankees Blog, who was the beat writer for the Yankees AAA team in Scranton, who A-Jax played for. I wouldnt say its done just yet.
The Yankees 2010 prospective rotation:
Wang? Hughes? Mitre?
Edwin Jackson was traded to Arizona, not New York.
thanks for the clarification Bray
Edwin Jackson would be going to the D-Backs in the proposed trade.
The 2010 prospective rotation for the Yankees, as of this moment:
As a Cubs fan, I can say you better hope for Mitre to fill that last spot. He is the veritable picture of inconsistency.
Granderson makes a reasonable salary this year. Problem is, he's signed for two more at rates that won't be reasonable if he performs at a 2009 level. He'll also turn 29 before the season starts... so improving on his numbers at this point is not a given. Sure, the Tigers only save 5.5 million this year on Granderson's contract. But they save 25 million over 3 years. With a ton of their bad contracts coming off the books next year (Bondo, Willis, Robertson and Maggs if he doesn't vest his option) the Tigers should have tens of millions to spend.
Is Granderson worth the difference between a 70 win season and a 80 win season? Who cares, it's a 3rd/4th place team anyway. But moving him now and potentially having a 70 win season this year sets them up to be in a better position to win 95 in '11 and '12.
I hate it. I hate it. I hate it.
Curtis was and forever will be my Tiger. Teared up watching a montage of his highlights while fucking Buster Olney tried to act like the Tigers weren't getting jobbed.
This makes my heart hurt. Curtis was not only a great player, but a great person, and MY TIGER!!!
This is what you get when you have contracts like Maggs, Bondo, D-Train and Robertson and btw...have a salary budget unlike the yankees.
I think this is a good deal for the Tigers. The only thing to give me pause (Paws?) is that it was done by the same guy who thought signing Dontrelle Willis to a contract extension was a good idea.
I love Granderson and am very sorry to see him go -- he is a Gammonsesque 'special' human being. But they are getting some great arms in return.
The Tigers OF defense could be woeful next year. And they still have some horrendous contracts (Cabrera not being one of them). But I'm half-expecting a deal where Detroit sends Cabrera, Ordonez, and Willis (maybe Robertson or Bonderman or Guillen, too?) to Boston in exchange for a couple of prospects.
First of all... Boston isn't taking all those contracts for prospects. Miggy is 120 million. Every other person you named has at least 10 million left. No way Boston gives up anything of value for that... regardless of the inclusion of Miggy. Outside of Miggy, none of those guys would make Boston's 40 man, let alone 25 man roster. And they'd have to give up more than $10 million a man to do it.
Secondly... why would Detroit package all those guys with Cabrera... when they can just play out the year and see Willis, Bondo, Robertson and Maggs (if his option doesn't vest again) walk? Keep Cabrera and then have $50 million come off the books in just those 4 names. Much more attractive than losing Cabrera.
Thirdly... if you are going to trade Cabrera... trade him by himself. That brings back the best collection of prospects. Then you still let those stiffs walk at the end of the year. But keeping the stiffs for their final year allows you to get full value for Miggy.
Look, I emotionally hate this trade. Heck I bought a Granderson throwback Toledo Mud Hens Jersey last year, but its not a bad deal.
We trade Granderson who had 3 years + option year on his contract for 38 million
Edwin Jackson, two more years under team control probably going to get 6 or 7 per.
Max Scherzer, who I love, young strikeout guy. Almost a strikeout an inning guy. Who is 26 and is under team control for 5 more years. He had a 4.10 ERA in the worst home ball park for pitchers in the MLB.
Daniel Schlerth..Yes that Schlereth, son of the ESPN announcer and former Bronco. Lefty with a huge cannon, he was the setup man for the D'backs last year and should step into that role, or close this year. We control him for 6 years.
Phil Coke, huge arm, was Yankees reliever who was really good the first half, pressure, fatigue maybe set in. Yanks tend to kill their relievers. Can be a set up man right away. We have him under control for 5 years.
Austin Jackson- He won't replace Grandy, but he has the chance to be really good. Decent defender arm, good hitter, average power. Below average speed for cf, won't steal many bases in MLB. Could blossom if the power comes. We control him for 6 years.
For those saying we didn't save much money, these are all less than 2 million players. Two of them fill the holes of the bullpen, that you would otherwise pay Rodney or others 5 million or so to fill those spots. So in reality this deal saves about 15-20 million.
The 10 you save between Grandy, and Jackson's contract, and the 10 your not spending on relievers.
Predictions, Scherzer is a nice surprise to everyone. Schlereth closes. Coke is a nice set up man. And our offense is worse because the top of the lineup will be scary young with Jackson and Sizemore.
Verlander, Porcello, Scherzer is a really really good rotation start with Crosby coming up quick to join them.
Good point. Plus (from mlbtraderumors.com):
The Tigers receive four players: starter Max Scherzer, relievers Daniel Schlereth and Phil Coke, and center fielder Austin Jackson. The Tigers get five years of Scherzer, six of Schlereth, five of Coke, and six of Jackson, potentially 22 years of control in total. Scherzer, 25, and Jackson, 23 in February, are probably considered the prizes of the haul.
That's a lot of years of cheap control for Detroit.
Your giving Coke too much credit. I am a huge Yankees fan, and watched every game closely. Phil Coke was apart of the "Philthies"(Coke and Hughes-Yankees broacaster Michael Kay coined the term). But I did not see how he was filthy in anyway. I saw a pitcher that was an accident waiting to happen. I saw someone thats stuff was the most vulnerable of any pitcher to get absolutely rocked. And what happened? He got crushed. He gave up the most home runs of any MLB reliever.
As for your tendency to kill relievers comment, that was under Joe Torre. Joe Girardi balances it out. It shouldnt have mattered with Coke anyway because he was groomed to be a starter, but moved to the bullpen at the end of the 08 season. He was even told to go into the 09 spring training preparing to start.
Micheal Kay sucks donkey balls. He said that Chamberlain's pitch count is high because his stuff is too filthy, so that hitters foul off too many pitches. I about fell out of my chair with trying to swallow that load.
Coke was groomed to be a starter, hence pitching every fifth day. The grind of a season, not knowing when you will pitch or pitch every other day is not easy to learn.
Plus, I will argue with the World Series title, Giraldi did grind his bullpen. He had nothing left at the end. Hence, you going with the 3 man and using Joba from the pen. Your bullpen was one of the best early in the season, but by the end your bullpen had nothing left. Part of the problem being Gaudin, Joba and Pettite are 5 inning pitchers in the regular season.
This is why in the playoff games, you were consistently going to Riveria for 2 innings.
Giraldi doesn't have a rep for killing bullpens, but between the stadium and last year he's starting to build one.
If Giardi grinded his bull pen at all it is because of Major injuries to Marte, Bruney, Wang and others.
If you keep those guys healty then your in damn good shape plus Joba's three inning per start August/September was a grind forced on them by management.
I admitted that Giraldi had to use his bullpen more because of the 5 innings or less of Gaudin, Joba, and Pettite.
Thats the point, Giraldi DIDN'T keep those guys healthy due to overuse and caused the injuries. Marte's and Bruney broke down because of overuse.
Look the guy won a world series, and doesn't have the rep yet of killing a bullpen, but the pieces of there.
Granderson was a 24 years old when he played in the International League. He basically went:
290 average, 890 OPS, 15 HRs, 150-50 k/bb, 22 for 28 SBs.
Jackson was a 22 year old in the International League and went:
300 average, 760 OPS, 5 HRS, 140-50 k/bb, 24 for 28 SBs (in 60 more at-bats)
At the same level, and being two years younger, Jackson struck out less and had less power. But a lot of the other numbers are pretty similar.
I like this but be careful comparing minor league numbers, especially in power.
Minor leagues are littered with guys who have tools and the power never develops. Granderson's power did develop, which made him special.
Jackson's power may never develop, but he should be a better, more consistent hitter, and not an automatic out with a lefty on the mound. This is the risk they are taking.
Plus be careful, if you want a trip compare Sizemore's numbers to Utley's. If you look at that Sizemore is the next Utley. (No I don't actually believe this.)
I agree... you have to be careful comparing minor league numbers... but in terms of Grandy vs A-Jax, it's a big part of what we have to go on right now. Sure, sometimes guys don't pan out and sometimes the Sizemore's of the world look like the next Utley. But for everyone saying Granderson is "great" and "irreplaceable"... at least take a look at what Detroit is getting. I'm well aware of the track record NYY prospects have when they are traded... but everyone seems to think this trade is a big win for Detroit. Sure, losing the face of the franchise sucks. But it's okay to be excited about a possible Granderson 2.0 and saving 30-40 million over the next 3 years on Grandy and E-Jax.
Just not a fan of of comparing minor league numbers to make points
I think everyone will agree with me when I say GRANDY NOOOOOOOOOO!