OT- Nathan. Signs two year deal. This isn't worth exclamation points.

Submitted by Canadian on

Nathan to the tigers!! Finally going into the season happy with back end of bullpen

MGoBoard

fatbastard

December 3rd, 2013 at 2:13 PM ^

I don't think we know what we got for Fister yet, as there may be another deal brewing.  Regardless, it seems that Fister was scheduled to make about 7M/year in arbitration.  Getting Nathan for 10M/year more than replaces Fister's salary, and we've got additional players who can help this year, and a prospect that sounds like he's got a good shot at becoming a reasonable starter down the road. 

 

Joined: 01/03/2009

MGoPoints: 792

Nick

December 3rd, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^

The structure of Fister for prospects was fine. But you trade him to maximize return, not fill back of the bullpen and utility infielder holes.  Dombrowski could have gotten back better prospects and still filled those holes internally or through the free agent bargain bin later this winter.
 
And if you argue thats the best they could have gotten for Fister, well then guess what.... dont fucking trade Fister if youre getting a mediocre package back.  They could have dumped Fisters admittedly small salary in a better deal and still did the Nathan deal.
 
Dombrowski allowed himself to get boxed in by narrowing the constraints of his return to a versatile infielder, a bullpen guy and a pitching prospect, instead of taking the best available prospect package.  I guarantee Robbie Ray isnt the best prospect they couldve gotten for Fister, not even close.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1113

MGoBender

December 3rd, 2013 at 2:55 PM ^

They could have dumped Fisters admittedly small salary in a better deal and still did the Nathan deal.

This type of comment drives me insane.  Do you think Dombrowski had a better deal and said "No, I'll go with the worse offer."

It takes two to tango.  The market for a Fister trade that returned a player with little/no salary (needed to sign Nathan and theoretically more) is not a huge market.  Known commodities cost money.  Big prospects aren't going to be parted with.  If Dombrowski could have gotten more, he would have.

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128

Nick

December 3rd, 2013 at 3:05 PM ^

A better deal in my mind, not in Dombrowskis.  Im sure he thought this was the best deal he could get.  I disagree because I think he values Robbie Ray more highly than most scouts do.

I said that if they didnt have a deal better than this, they should have just kept Fister... but Dombrowski went into the offseason with the plan of trading a starter and didnt deviate from it.  The return was obvioulsy good enough for him... but most out there are calling it a bad return.  

Dombrowski has a great trading history, but just saying that we should trust him no matter what he does is an appeal to authority and leaves no room for reasonable criticism.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1113

Maize_Nation

December 3rd, 2013 at 7:01 PM ^

"If Dombrowski could have gotten more, he would have."

False.

DD could have gotten more, that is a simple fact.

From a Keith Law article...

"I've spoken to numerous team executives who were shocked at the return for Fister and wish they had been given the opportunity to offer more or to try to assemble a multi-team deal that would give the Tigers the specific pieces they wanted. One contending team's GM, known to be looking for another starter, told me he hadn't talked to the Tigers about Fister in weeks. Another exec with a contender indicated something similar. "

So let's get the notion that maybe that's all the value that Fister could have gotten back in a trade out of here now, but it's simply not true. He had far more value than a loogy (who has little to no value), a crappy utility player (who literally has no value) and a decent prospect, who is outside of every publications top 100. It's evident that DD values Ray far more than everyone else, and that's where the disconnect lies.

Joined: 07/29/2012

MGoPoints: 1133

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

December 3rd, 2013 at 12:38 PM ^

He's 39, so, not falling apart is no guarantee.  We needed a closer and we got one - that's fine.  My point with Valverde is exactly that - he looked great and then imploded, so acting like Nathan buys us two years of nothing but guaranteed 9th innings is foolhardy.  I'll withhold ecstasy re: closer signings til he saves the fourth win of the Series.

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 41586

fatbastard

December 3rd, 2013 at 2:20 PM ^

I'd be hard pressed to choose anyone available over Nathan.  I think the Tigers got the guy who's best suited for the job -- to win now. 

Wilson was attractive because he won't command that type of money.  But, to win now, I'd take Nathan in a heartbeat. 

The fact that it's only a two year deal is reflective of his age. 

Joined: 01/03/2009

MGoPoints: 792

ChasingRabbits

December 3rd, 2013 at 1:39 PM ^

Should we withhold ecstasy re: any player until they do something in the fourth win of a world series? 

Miggy?  Hasn't done anything yet...  Verlander?... nope

Nathan has a long long track record of being a lights out closer including last year.  No reason to not be excited about this one.  More excited during the Tigers 4th WS win?  sure.

Joined: 01/19/2010

MGoPoints: 1502

ca_prophet

December 3rd, 2013 at 4:45 PM ^

1. He's 39 and coming back from elbow surgery two years ago. 2. All pitchers are more volatile than all hitters as a rule. Relievers are even more volatile, and closers not named Mariano Rivera are the worst bang for the buck - they are just as flaky and command higher dollars. As far as the Fister deal, if we sign a big bat I'll be happy. Shin-Soo Choo is my preference- he gets on base and I think he's underrated.

Joined: 09/07/2010

MGoPoints: 7016

JamieH

December 3rd, 2013 at 12:48 PM ^

was the best closer available.  He's better than Wilson.  Yeah, he's 39, so what?  Rivera was even older.  He has to pitch 1 inning a game.   Unless his velocity suddenly leaves him, he'll be fine.

He should be fine for a 2-year deal.  I wouldn't have wanted to sign him past that.  This guy is one of the best closers of all time and was lights out last year.  I doubt he just suddenly loses it because he is now 39 instead of 38.

Joined: 09/05/2009

MGoPoints: 28331

maize-blue

December 3rd, 2013 at 12:57 PM ^

Yeah, his age doesn't really bother me either. The Tigers know they have only a short window anyway to win the World Series. This coming season may be their best and last for a while. I'd bet their gearing for this year and not worried about his age either.

Joined: 01/10/2013

MGoPoints: 44662

Canadian

December 3rd, 2013 at 3:58 PM ^

Sure as fuck is. It's been a rough few weeks here for my sports teams. Lions blew some games against shitty teams, we all know about Borges. This is a better signing than Wilson would've been

Joined: 06/02/2012

MGoPoints: 13364

Maize_Nation

December 3rd, 2013 at 7:07 PM ^

Improved it from where it was earlier today? Yeah.

Is it improved from the same bullpen that imploded during the postseason?

No.

Smyly&Benoit>>>>>Krol&Nathan.

The issue was not closing, Benoit was terrific last year, and it is highly unlikely Nathan will outperform what Benoit provided.

We need more depth, so it is still necessary to add another arm or two to help solidify the middle relief.

Joined: 07/29/2012

MGoPoints: 1133

denardogasm

December 3rd, 2013 at 6:46 PM ^

I think we just traded one proem for another unfortunately. Losing Peralta, Infante, and Fielder takes away a lot of our run production. Couple that with inexplicably dumping Fister for basically nothing and we are definitely a worse team than last season. Ausmus better have a little Buck Showalter in him because this is not the team he inherited.

Joined: 09/11/2011

MGoPoints: 10688