Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store

Recent Blogs


Photo

Detroit Tigers

  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,030 posts

Posted 18 October 2012 - 05:07 PM

This is how we should strive to build our team. Strikeout pitchers up and down the rotation and bullpen and a couple big hitters in the middle with no futility infielders.

All we have to do is trade our overrated prospects to cheap teams that want to shed salary. Detroit seems to rob Miami every season. Time for us to find a whipping boy. Hell, let's start with the Marlins!

#2 glunn

glunn

    Head Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,365 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:26 PM

This is how we should strive to build our team. Strikeout pitchers up and down the rotation and bullpen and a couple big hitters in the middle with no futility infielders.

All we have to do is trade our overrated prospects to cheap teams that want to shed salary. Detroit seems to rob Miami every season. Time for us to find a whipping boy. Hell, let's start with the Marlins!


It sure seems like the Tigers are doing a lot of things better than the Twins, especially in terms of starters. Also, Delmon Young was just named MVP of the AL Championship series against the Yankees, which suggests that the Twins were the whipping boy in that trade.

I would love to hear some of the experts on TD analyze what the Twins might learn from the Tigers.

#3 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,168 posts

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:41 PM

First off, it helps if you draft a guy like Verlander. He was a #2 overall like Buxton, so maybe we're onto something there. On the other hand, the Marlins did get completely trade-raped on Cabrera, so I guess we can't emulate the Tigers just by sucking for high draft picks.

On the other hand, while getting to the World Series is great, I think they've crippled their future by getting rid of a lot of their best prospects (their farm team is in shambles), and they've definitely paid way too much for whatever remaining years Prince Fielder has (2, maybe 3?) before types 2, 3, and 4 diabetes set in. I wouldn't advocate copying that part.

#4 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,266 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:26 AM

Delmon Young was not good during the season. He was paid what Willingham was. Which would you rather have? They have a surplus of outfielders, if they trade one or more and they are successful, that does not mean they should have kept him. You really only need 3 or 4 at a time.

I agree that being willing to trade veterans and prospects to fill holes is a good strategy.

#5 SweetOne69

SweetOne69

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 467 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:28 AM

If the Detroit wins the WS, they will most likely start dumping payroll. Illitch has been going broke trying to get a World Series title out of the Tigers. He owns both the Red Wings and Tigers and was desperate to get a WS title before he dies. The Tigers have been losing $30-40M/year for the last few years in Illithch's efforts to win a title.

#6 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,882 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:51 AM

It' s a matter of philosophy. The Tigers seem willing to suffer miserable seasons as long as they have a brief surge (1-3 years) once a decade. The Twins seem to prefer to idle along near the top but without ever taking the risks necessary to "reach for the star".

Neither approach is "right" -- it's a matter of what you can tolerate as a fan. Neither team has won a World Series in more than 20 years. The Twins won more recently and twice but the Tigers have advanced in the post-season more recently and have at least played in the World Series.

I knew where I came down on this question before the last 2 years and the misery of 2011 and 2012 haven't done anything to change my mind. I'd rather suffer multiple losing seasons to have a significant chance at "winning it all" than get to the playoffs regularly but never make it past the first round (or heck, with the Twins, the first game).

#7 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 590 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:53 AM

I'd say some of what the Tigers is worth looking at as a model.

The Fister and Sanchez trades helped build a solid rotation behind Verlander. Delmon and Peralta, though flawed players, were good pickups from divisional opponents selling low.

However, the Tigers needed some good fortune to get to where they are. Thanks largely to defensive ineptitude and inconsistent effort, they spent most of the year chasing a very mediocre Chicago team, and needed a late-season collapse said Whiteys to win baseball's weakest division.

2 other teams from the AL had more wins and didn't make the playoffs. The Tigers record would have earned them a 4th-place finish in either the East or West.

Thanks to the Rangers collapse, they were able to get to the World Series without having to beat the AL's best team. (For that matter, they're lucky that Baltimore couldn't put away a very weakened Yankee team, I think the O's would have given them a tougher time in the ALCS.)

So I'd like to see us improve through getting the better of trades the way they did, but I'm not sure their overall model is designed for sustained success. For all the talk about Mauer's contract, I'd rather be stuck with that than Fielder's. They've also been very willing to part with prospects, good chance that comes back to bite them eventually.

#8 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,266 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:09 AM

Eventually, sure, but in exchange for what? They are exchanging a future that may never come for a more certain present. That is what Hunter and Santana complained this team never does. It is what the White Sox GM said this team should have done.

#9 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,423 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:29 AM

Tigers have won 20 playoff games with 2 trips to the world series since the last Twins playoff game win.

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#10 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 590 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:34 AM

Eventually, sure, but in exchange for what? They are exchanging a future that may never come for a more certain present. That is what Hunter and Santana complained this team never does. It is what the White Sox GM said this team should have done.



---But that doesn't always work either. They did that in '87 when they traded John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander. How did that work out for them? They lost in the first round of the playoffs, then spent most of the next decade-and-a-half or so in the crapper. (You think 2 years of losing is bad, try 16.)

Trading prospects for proven talent makes some amount of sense when you're one player away and have a stockpile of minor league talent. (The Yankees, for example, were able to trade for A-Rod without giving up Cano.) But going all-in and mortgaging your entire future is risky business. Its kind of like putting all of your chips on one number. You'll win big if it comes up, but you're left screwed with nothing if it doesn't.

#11 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:37 AM

The Tigers are not a good model, they barely won a terrible AL Central, and most of that was due to the Chicago White Sox completely falling apart down the stretch. They barely beat the A's and then faced a Yankees team that decided to forget how to hit.

I mean I am happy for the Tigers, but that are in some deep crap in the coming years.

Also, Delmon sucks, 4 good games doesn't make up for a TERRIBLE season.

#12 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,266 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:40 AM

I would never endorse trading all prospects, but occasionally trading one, yes. Like earlier this century, when they were a DH away.

#13 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:50 AM

For all the talk about Mauer's contract, I'd rather be stuck with that than Fielder's.


Really?

Mauer - 8 years, $23 million per
Fielder - 8 years, $24 million per

Other factors - Fielder hits for more power and is never hurt. And he's one of the few hitters who can approach Mauer's OBP. Mauer's a 1/2 time catcher now, and has a well-documented injury history.

I think I'd rather have Fielder's contract.

Edited by Boom Boom, 19 October 2012 - 09:04 AM.
Wanted to bold and italicize "is never hurt".


#14 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,882 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:57 AM

It all comes down to risk-reward.

The Tigers have taken some big risks -- and have a pretty good chance at a huge reward this season. The risks don't bode well for a number of future seasons but that is something with which they will have to deal.

The Twins are almost entirely risk averse and have a very conservative approach to running the organization. I actually think this may be part of why Terry Ryan retired earlier. He had a huge risk facing him -- trading Santana -- and he made it pretty clear that he didn't think he was the best person to deal with it.

Now he's back but with a team that is in such shambles, he (and the owner) have to think that taking a conservative approach and simply returning the team to "competitiveness" will pacify the fans. He will still need to take smaller risks to acquire serviceable (note I didn't say good) starting pitching but it won't be the substantial risks that most teams have to take to be truly elite and compete in the post season.

I don't think one can "conserve" one's way to a world championship -- I think you have to take some pretty significant risks (and yes, have some good luck too). I just think the Twins are going to have to be more willing to gamble if they are ever to bring another championship to Minnesota. Is now the time to do that? I don't think its the time to go "all in" but I'd like some demonstration that they are willing to do a little gambling instead of skipping the casino altogether.

Edited by JB_Iowa, 19 October 2012 - 09:01 AM.


#15 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 590 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:09 AM

I can see the idea that you'd trade what the Twins have done recently for what the Tigers have done recently.

But if you're looking for someone to model after, wouldn't it be better to choose, say, the Cardinals as opposed to the Tigers? Unlike the Tigers, the Cards have actually won it all, and unlike the Tigers, they have been good almost every single year.

#16 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 590 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:11 AM

It all comes down to risk-reward.

The Tigers have taken some big risks -- and have a pretty good chance at a huge reward this season. The risks don't bode well for a number of future seasons but that is something with which they will have to deal.

The Twins are almost entirely risk averse and have a very conservative approach to running the organization. I actually think this may be part of why Terry Ryan retired earlier. He had a huge risk facing him -- trading Santana -- and he made it pretty clear that he didn't think he was the best person to deal with it.

Now he's back but with a team that is in such shambles, he (and the owner) have to think that taking a conservative approach and simply returning the team to "competitiveness" will pacify the fans. He will still need to take smaller risks to acquire serviceable (note I didn't say good) starting pitching but it won't be the substantial risks that most teams have to take to be truly elite and compete in the post season.

I don't think one can "conserve" one's way to a world championship -- I think you have to take some pretty significant risks (and yes, have some good luck too). I just think the Twins are going to have to be more willing to gamble if they are ever to bring another championship to Minnesota. Is now the time to do that? I don't think its the time to go "all in" but I'd like some demonstration that they are willing to do a little gambling instead of skipping the casino altogether.



---A lot of that risk is tied to money. The Tigers have consistently had a top-5 payroll while the Twins, until recently, operated on a shoestring budget. You're a lot more likely to win big playing at a high-stakes blackjack table than you are playing nickel slots.

#17 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:18 AM

Really?

Mauer - 8 years, $23 million per
Fielder - 8 years, $24 million per

Other factors - Fielder hits for more power and is never hurt. And he's one of the few hitters who can approach Mauer's OBP. Mauer's a 1/2 time catcher now, and has a well-documented injury history.

I think I'd rather have Fielder's contract.


From '05-'10, only one player whose primary position is catcher played in more games than Mauer and none had more plate appearances. His games played per season from '05-12 are in line with most players whose primary position is catcher with the exception of two seasons. I believe his injury history is a bit over-exaggerated, especially when you consider he'd likely have a lot more games played if Gardy didn't feel the need to play his substitute players so much. Situations like Sub-Sundays, day after night games, and the last game of a 3 game series where we already won the first 2 games. This year, Mauer played quite a bit 1B, but that happened for a few reasons. 1: Doctors said if Morneau played both sides too much it could cause concussion symptoms to show up. 2. Mauer was the best option to fill in for Morneau. 3. With Doumit on the roster, it gave them a good option for replacement and then later, with Butera, he need his playing time too.

I have no doubt Mauer could have played more catcher not only this season, but other seasons as well, but this year, with having three catchers and Morneau who needed rest, made sense to play Mauer at 1B more.

#18 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,685 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:37 AM

I can see the idea that you'd trade what the Twins have done recently for what the Tigers have done recently.

But if you're looking for someone to model after, wouldn't it be better to choose, say, the Cardinals as opposed to the Tigers? Unlike the Tigers, the Cards have actually won it all, and unlike the Tigers, they have been good almost every single year.

Much better model. I would argue that they win in large part because their manager is the best in the game. I am not a fan of the Cards one bit, but respect how they've been able to repeat success with a moderate payroll (110 m). They play all-round good baseball and make good moves.

I believe the Twins need to take something from how many teams have turned it around. TB and the O's have done some good things, TEX has become a force, SF is in the mix now. Mostly, and the biggest gripe I and many others have with this organization, is the philosophy about starting pitchers. The teams that win now either draft or sign strike out pitchers and let them throw 120 pitches to be the deciding factor in a game. The Twins don't. They don't draft high upside pitchers (sans Berrios). They certainly don't sign high upside pitchers. So until they do, it will difficult for this team to win. They had their best chance when Santana and Liriano were in the rotation in 2006 until Liriano got hurt. Unfortunately, its easier said than done. I don't think the Twins try NOT to get these type of players, I feel the can't due to their talent evaluators being inadequate. Perhaps that is changing, but I want to see more than just signing Berrios to believe it.
Do or do not. There is no try.

#19 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,266 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:56 AM

How did the cardinals get that one expensive outfielder they have?

#20 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 590 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 09:58 AM

Much better model. I would argue that they win in large part because their manager is the best in the game. I am not a fan of the Cards one bit, but respect how they've been able to repeat success with a moderate payroll (110 m). They play all-round good baseball and make good moves.

I believe the Twins need to take something from how many teams have turned it around. TB and the O's have done some good things, TEX has become a force, SF is in the mix now. Mostly, and the biggest gripe I and many others have with this organization, is the philosophy about starting pitchers. The teams that win now either draft or sign strike out pitchers and let them throw 120 pitches to be the deciding factor in a game. The Twins don't. They don't draft high upside pitchers (sans Berrios). They certainly don't sign high upside pitchers. So until they do, it will difficult for this team to win. They had their best chance when Santana and Liriano were in the rotation in 2006 until Liriano got hurt. Unfortunately, its easier said than done. I don't think the Twins try NOT to get these type of players, I feel the can't due to their talent evaluators being inadequate. Perhaps that is changing, but I want to see more than just signing Berrios to believe it.


---Not sure about the manager thing, they didn't miss a beat after La Russa hung it up, but pitching? Definitely. Starting pitching in baseball is like goaltending in hockey. You need it to win. If yours is really good, you can win despite flaws in other areas. If yours is really bad, forget it, you're done, it's nearly impossible to compensate for it with strengths in other areas.

#21 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,685 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 10:29 AM

Much better model. I would argue that they win in large part because their manager is the best in the game. I am not a fan of the Cards one bit, but respect how they've been able to repeat success with a moderate payroll (110 m). They play all-round good baseball and make good moves.

I believe the Twins need to take something from how many teams have turned it around. TB and the O's have done some good things, TEX has become a force, SF is in the mix now. Mostly, and the biggest gripe I and many others have with this organization, is the philosophy about starting pitchers. The teams that win now either draft or sign strike out pitchers and let them throw 120 pitches to be the deciding factor in a game. The Twins don't. They don't draft high upside pitchers (sans Berrios). They certainly don't sign high upside pitchers. So until they do, it will difficult for this team to win. They had their best chance when Santana and Liriano were in the rotation in 2006 until Liriano got hurt. Unfortunately, its easier said than done. I don't think the Twins try NOT to get these type of players, I feel the can't due to their talent evaluators being inadequate. Perhaps that is changing, but I want to see more than just signing Berrios to believe it.


---Not sure about the manager thing, they didn't miss a beat after La Russa hung it up, but pitching? Definitely. Starting pitching in baseball is like goaltending in hockey. You need it to win. If yours is really good, you can win despite flaws in other areas. If yours is really bad, forget it, you're done, it's nearly impossible to compensate for it with strengths in other areas.


I meant winning the last few decades, not simply at the present time. The system is built already and carrying it on will be the task of the new guy.
Do or do not. There is no try.

#22 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 11:27 AM



Really?

Mauer - 8 years, $23 million per
Fielder - 8 years, $24 million per

Other factors - Fielder hits for more power and is never hurt. And he's one of the few hitters who can approach Mauer's OBP. Mauer's a 1/2 time catcher now, and has a well-documented injury history.

I think I'd rather have Fielder's contract.


From '05-'10, only one player whose primary position is catcher played in more games than Mauer and none had more plate appearances. His games played per season from '05-12 are in line with most players whose primary position is catcher with the exception of two seasons. I believe his injury history is a bit over-exaggerated, especially when you consider he'd likely have a lot more games played if Gardy didn't feel the need to play his substitute players so much. Situations like Sub-Sundays, day after night games, and the last game of a 3 game series where we already won the first 2 games. This year, Mauer played quite a bit 1B, but that happened for a few reasons. 1: Doctors said if Morneau played both sides too much it could cause concussion symptoms to show up. 2. Mauer was the best option to fill in for Morneau. 3. With Doumit on the roster, it gave them a good option for replacement and then later, with Butera, he need his playing time too.

I have no doubt Mauer could have played more catcher not only this season, but other seasons as well, but this year, with having three catchers and Morneau who needed rest, made sense to play Mauer at 1B more.


I don't disagree with you, and I wasn't trying to make the tired old argument about Mauer being overpaid. I just think that Prince Fielder's contract provides somewhat better value to the Tigers than Mauer's contract provides to the Twins.

#23 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:00 PM

I don't disagree with you, and I wasn't trying to make the tired old argument about Mauer being overpaid. I just think that Prince Fielder's contract provides somewhat better value to the Tigers than Mauer's contract provides to the Twins.


If position isn't taken into account, or defensive ability, maybe. But comparing offensive output from a player who is primarily a catcher (or has been and likely will be again) to offensive output from a 1B straight across the board is something I try not to do (and Fielder plays a poor 1B too).

For me, it's similar to the MVP debate this year. The two top candidates are a leadoff hitting CF and #3 hitting corner IF (in this case a 1B playing 3B...badly). If we don't dive too far into advanced metrics, we see [FONT=&]Cabrera was #1 in BA, Trout #2. Trout #3 in OBP, Cabrera #4. Cabrera #1 in SLG%, Trout #3. Cabrera #1 in OPS, Trout #2. Trout #1 in OPS+, Cabrera #2. Pretty darn close there, no? Really close to each other in every one of those categories...Trout getting him in OBP and OPS+, Cabrera getting him in BA, SLG% and OPS. [/FONT] But again, one is a leadoff hitting CF and one is a corner IF. If we take into account position, isn't the CF more valuable? Then there is the base running and defense comparisons and Trout kills him in those as well.

As far as the Mauer, Fielder debate, there are other factors. How much revenue does having the hometown boy done good bring into the team in tickets sales, concession sales from people who attend games, merchandise, etc. Especially in a place like Minny whose people REALLY take pride in home state players. How much does that need to be taken into account?

Edited by ThePuck, 19 October 2012 - 12:03 PM.


#24 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:23 PM


I don't disagree with you, and I wasn't trying to make the tired old argument about Mauer being overpaid. I just think that Prince Fielder's contract provides somewhat better value to the Tigers than Mauer's contract provides to the Twins.


If position isn't taken into account, or defensive ability, maybe. But comparing offensive output from a player who is primarily a catcher (or has been and likely will be again) to offensive output from a 1B straight across the board is something I try not to do (and Fielder plays a poor 1B too).

For me, it's similar to the MVP debate this year. The two top candidates are a leadoff hitting CF and #3 hitting corner IF (in this case a 1B playing 3B...badly). If we don't dive too far into advanced metrics, we see [FONT=&]Cabrera was #1 in BA, Trout #2. Trout #3 in OBP, Cabrera #4. Cabrera #1 in SLG%, Trout #3. Cabrera #1 in OPS, Trout #2. Trout #1 in OPS+, Cabrera #2. Pretty darn close there, no? Really close to each other in every one of those categories...Trout getting him in OBP and OPS+, Cabrera getting him in BA, SLG% and OPS. [/FONT]But again, one is a leadoff hitting CF and one is a corner IF. If we take into account position, isn't the CF more valuable? Then there is the base running and defense comparisons and Trout kills him in those as well.

As far as the Mauer, Fielder debate, there are other factors. How much revenue does having the hometown boy done good bring into the team in tickets sales, concession sales from people who attend games, merchandise, etc. Especially in a place like Minny whose people REALLY take pride in home state players. How much does that need to be taken into account?


As I said before, Mauer is now a 1/2 time catcher. The other part of that is the fact that the Twins are required to carry a lesser catcher on the roster to back up Mauer who doesn't play full time there.

In Fielder's career, the fewest games he's played in a full season is 157. That's 10 more than Mauer has played in his healthiest season (which just happened, and Mauer's caught only 74 of those games). The Tigers don't need a backup 1B because Fielder is always healthy.

As for the hometown boy thing, jersey sales, what have you, that's all guesswork. I'm sure Fielder sells a lot of jerseys too, and I bet there was a buzz around Tiger Stadium to go see Fielder play at least at the beginning of the year.

#25 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,423 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:34 PM

"[COLOR=#333333]For me, it's similar to the MVP debate this year.........." the debate is over the Most Valuable Player award not the best all around player award. You take Cabrera out of the Tigers lineup and they are dead in the water. Take Trout out of the Angels lineup and they are still not in the playoffs.

The fact remains that over the years the winner isn't always the best player or the most valuable because there is no set of criteria for the vote. Some years it's more about which way the wind is blowing the last couple weeks of the season.

Imo, Cabrera is no doubt the most valuable, is he the best all around player probably not. [/COLOR]

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#26 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:34 PM

As I said before, Mauer is now a 1/2 time catcher. The other part of that is the fact that the Twins are required to carry a lesser catcher on the roster to back up Mauer who doesn't play full time there.

In Fielder's career, the fewest games he's played in a full season is 157. That's 10 more than Mauer has played in his healthiest season (which just happened, and Mauer's caught only 74 of those games). The Tigers don't need a backup 1B because Fielder is always healthy.

As for the hometown boy thing, jersey sales, what have you, that's all guesswork. I'm sure Fielder sells a lot of jerseys too, and I bet there was a buzz around Tiger Stadium to go see Fielder play at least at the beginning of the year.


I get that, but catchers don't play 157 games a year anyway. By the nature of the position, they just don't play that many games. This year the most games started at catcher was 136. Last year, it was 131. Every team needs another catcher, not just us. Not only that, but above I showed why he played so little at catcher this year. On top of that, you seem to be saying that the only time Mauer hasn't been in the lineup is when he's been hurt. That's not the case. As a catcher, Gardy just rested him as other managers do with their catchers.

#27 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:49 PM


As I said before, Mauer is now a 1/2 time catcher. The other part of that is the fact that the Twins are required to carry a lesser catcher on the roster to back up Mauer who doesn't play full time there.

In Fielder's career, the fewest games he's played in a full season is 157. That's 10 more than Mauer has played in his healthiest season (which just happened, and Mauer's caught only 74 of those games). The Tigers don't need a backup 1B because Fielder is always healthy.

As for the hometown boy thing, jersey sales, what have you, that's all guesswork. I'm sure Fielder sells a lot of jerseys too, and I bet there was a buzz around Tiger Stadium to go see Fielder play at least at the beginning of the year.


I get that, but catchers don't play 157 games a year anyway. By the nature of the position, they just don't play that many games. This year the most games started at catcher was 136. Last year, it was 131. Every team needs another catcher, not just us. Not only that, but above I showed why he played so little at catcher this year. On top of that, you seem to be saying that the only time Mauer hasn't been in the lineup is when he's been hurt. That's not the case. As a catcher, Gardy just rested him as other managers do with their catchers.


#1 - how many teams need three catchers?

#2 - I know it's a fact of the position that catchers get time off, but that only proves my point that Fielder has more offensive value. He's in the lineup more.

#28 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:59 PM

'#1 - how many teams need three catchers?

#2 - I know it's a fact of the position that catchers get time off, but that only proves my point that Fielder has more offensive value. He's in the lineup more. '

response to #1: We only needed three catchers cause Gardy love Butera and is scared to have Doumit and Mauer playing at the same time. That's a Gardy thing. We didn't really need three catchers until Gardy decided to play Doumit in the OF or DH while Mauer was at 1B. That's a Gardy juggling lineup thing. Doumit should only be playing catcher or DH...he should be nowhere near the OF...and he should only DH when Mauer is catching.

response to #2: Were we just talking offensive value or overall value? One could argue a catcher is more valuable, even if he plays in 20-30 games less, because he's involved in every pitch. And then there's the time used for game plan with the pitcher.

In any event, I'm not sure there's any more to throw out there. You may be right, I don't know, but it's interesting enough to think about and not, IMO, cut and dry. There's a lot of factors involved in value and what affects it.

I enjoyed the debate, thanks

Edited by ThePuck, 19 October 2012 - 01:01 PM.


#29 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:03 PM

'#1 - how many teams need three catchers?

#2 - I know it's a fact of the position that catchers get time off, but that only proves my point that Fielder has more offensive value. He's in the lineup more. '

response to #1: We only needed three catchers cause Gardy love Butera and is scared to have Doumit and Mauer playing at the same time. That's a Gardy thing. We didn't really need three catchers until Gardy decided to play Doumit in the OF or DH while Mauer was at 1B. That's a Gardy juggling lineup thing. Doumit should only be playing catcher or DH...he should be nowhere near the OF...and he should only DH when Mauer is catching.

response to #2: Were we just talking offensive value or overall value? One could argue a catcher is more valuable, even if he plays in 20-30 games less, because he's involved in every pitch. And then there's the time used for game plan with the pitcher.

In any event, I'm not sure there's any more to throw out there. You may be right, I don't know, but it's interesting enough to think about and not, IMO, cut and dry. There's a lot of factors involved in value and what affects it.

I enjoyed the debate, thanks



Natch! Good show friend.

#30 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:06 PM

I don't know what Natch means, but thanks. You as well :-)