Sale to the Red Sox

[KirbyDome89]

 

The entire point of this thread was not to say that one method or the other was better. The point of the thread has been that Detroit has done a great job doing it this way and people have been saying the same things for 10 years. You may not remember it happening but it did. And despite all of this concern about the terrible Tiger's farm system it still routinely produced decent to good players/prospects that were later used to fill holes or in trades.

 

Ironically there have been several times that Dombrowski traded off older players (like Granderson, and Price among others) to restock the farm system or make the team younger and cheaper. He has done a great job although it is fair to say that some of it has been due to luck but that would likely be true of any GM that has been successful. 

Whether they said it ten years ago or I'm saying it now, it doesn't change the reality of that team today and moving forward. 

 

Yeah I must be forgetting all that homegrown talent they've been bringing up through their system to plug holes over the years. Go back and look at those rosters, its nearly all signings and trades. Right now I see McCann, Castellanos, Verlander, Rondon, and some bullpen arms sprinkled in. Those are the players on the 25 man that Detroit has drafted. 

 

I wouldn't call it a restocking if they're still ranked 25th. Younger and cheaper? In that 10 year span the lowest their payroll ranked was 9th, they finished in the top 5 in seven of those ten years. That wasn't a team that was plugging in prospects, thats a team that was signing FAs.  

[kab21]

I didn't say the Tigers currently (or really ever did) have a homegrown roster from their weak farm system. I also didn't say that they brought up a lot of players. I said that they have used what has always been a weak farm system to make the team better.

 

The list below is not a trivial list of prospects nor were they traded for terrible players (well some were like Greene and Simon). The argument all along has not been that one way is better than another but that Dombrowski's method worked for a decade (and possibly more) despite people saying that their long term future was very much in doubt.

 

For example:

Matt Joyce came up and was productive for a season and was traded for Edwin Jackson. Jackson and Curtis Granderson were traded for Scherzer and Austin Jackson. The Tigers got younger and ultimately this paid off big time.

 

Austin Jackson (previous trade) and Drew Smyly (farm) (and Willy Adames - now a big deal) were traded for Price. Price was then traded for Daniel Norris and Matt Boyd (plus one other). 

 

Avasail Garcia (prospect) was traded for Iglesias

 

Giovanni Soto (prospect) was traded for the previous shortstop Jhonny Peralta

 

some prospects were traded for Doug Fister (later traded for prospects that flopped though)

 

Jacob Turner (prospect) plus two others were traded for Anibal Sanchez and Omar Infante (and a comp pick - see below)

 

Knebel (comp pick above) and Jake Thompson traded for Joakim Soria

 

prospects were traded for Shane Greene (who sucked in Detroit)

 

prospects were traded for Alfredo Simon (who sucked)

 

Porcello (prospect many years ago) was traded for Cespedes was traded for Fulmer plus one

 

In addition guys like Avila, Raburn, Castellanos, McCann and a handful of others have come up and contributed from this weak farm system. 

 

This is an alternate team building method but you have stuck by your argument that homegrown is the best (and possibly only) way to long term success. The Tigers have had long term success using this method. 

 

 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

Look at that list you just posted. Nearly every trade apart from the 2015 deadline is sending younger players away and bringing in older MLB players. Those teams weren't getting younger and they certainly weren't getting cheaper. They didn't actually start to bring in prospects until they tanked in 15'.

 

So I guess we have a very different definition of what it means to restock if we agree that the farm system has been weak. When you said that their farm system routinely produced decent to good players/prospects to plug holes or be traded you weren't talking about bringing anybody up? Why not just say they traded prospects to bring in MLB players then...

 

Nobody questioned whether the method could work. Where did you read that? You can point out a negative without revoking credit. I'm a Sano fan, but I criticize his defense at 3B. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate him as a player. You're conflating criticism of one aspect of a rebuild with disdain for everything involved in it. 

 

I would prefer a different rebuild style and I've stuck by that, in the same way you've stuck to the Detroit side. Whats your point? Again, the 2017 Tigers aren't those teams of the last decade. They aren't even close. You're obviously of the mind that their long term future is set. i disagree. I see a core that has aged past their prime, FAs that are aging or underperforming, and a serious lack of young players to bring up. I wouldn't say their future is set. 

 

 

 

 

 

[kab21]

The point of the list wasn't to say that they were restocking the team with young talent or the farm system. The point was that they continued to use one of MLB's worst rated farm systems to add talent to their roster. If their farm system was so bad how did they manage to do that?

I have never said that I prefer Detroit's style of rebuild. I have given them credit for doing what they do and doing it very well. Perhaps 2017 is finally the year that they suffer from trading off their prospects but I have them projected for about 85+ wins and contending for a playoff spot. If this is the downside for their method then it is brilliant.

 

Other teams have done what Detroit has done and it has backfired badly. The long term negatives that you keep stressing happened to them before they had anywhere close to a decade of success. In some cases they barely even had short term success. The point here is that Dombrowski did an amazing job at holding off the negatives that you are talking about while he was in Detroit. It is very likely that we also wait for a long time for these negatives to impact the Red Sox.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Look at that list you just posted. Nearly every trade apart from the 2015 deadline is sending younger players away and bringing in older MLB players. Those teams weren't getting younger and they certainly weren't getting cheaper. They didn't actually start to bring in prospects until they tanked in 15'.

 

Trading for Scherzer and Austin Jackson was getting younger and cheaper.

 

Some of the listed deals were basically lateral moves in terms of age/cost too (for example, trading Ray for Greene, or Garcia for Iglesias). Fister was another minimum salary player when they acquired him.

 

And why should we ignore the deals where they eventually flipped some of their vets for prospects in 2015?

 

Once again, I don't think the Tigers actual strategy so neatly fits your theories about them.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Trading for Scherzer and Austin Jackson was getting younger and cheaper.

Some of the listed deals were basically lateral moves in terms of age/cost too (for example, trading Ray for Greene, or Garcia for Iglesias). Fister was another minimum salary player when they acquired him.

And why should we ignore the deals where they eventually flipped some of their vets for prospects in 2015?

Once again, I don't think the Tigers actual strategy so neatly fits your theories about them.

Go look at those team salaries and tell me how cheap they became....they had the 4th highest salary in baseball the last couple seasons to boot. 

 

I'm not ignoring them. The 2015 trades weren't the type they were making during that mighty ten year run so Idk why you're trying to make that comparison. 

 

I don't think your idea of the Tigers building a younger/cheaper team through the years fits at all...

[KirbyDome89]

Their farm system is bad because they continued to do that....

 

Yeah we clearly have different ideas of where this team is at...

 

Idc if they've held off the "negatives," longer than most teams (although Idk how you would even determine that) the point was to rebuild in a way that doesn't set you up to face those challenges down the road. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Go look at those team salaries and tell me how cheap they became....they had the 4th highest salary in baseball the last couple seasons to boot.

 

I'm not ignoring them. The 2015 trades weren't the type they were making during that mighty ten year run so Idk why you're trying to make that comparison.

 

I don't think your idea of the Tigers building a younger/cheaper team through the years fits at all...

I never said the Tigers built a cheaper team. But Scherzer, Fister, and Austin Jackson were cheaper players when acquired, contrary to the theme you suggested about their deals.

 

The Granderson for Scherzer/Jackson trade looks a lot like their 2015 trades, in fact. Part of their strategy throughout appears to be identifying veterans to move and when to move them.

 

The Tigers had high payrolls because they acquired a future HOFer at age 25 in Cabrera, and drafted and developed another borderline one around the same time in Verlander, and they have so far made a commitment to try winning throughout their careers. Usually that has meant adding salary, but it has also meant looking for ways to acquire talent that don't involve simply waiting 5 years hoping for it to percolate from the draft. And they have done pretty well in that regard -- forfeiting 3 late first round picks to add impact vets for playoff seasons, grabbing Price and Cespedes for a playoff drive then flipping them for very good MLB ready prospects, etc.

[KirbyDome89]

 

I never said the Tigers built a cheaper team. But Scherzer, Fister, and Austin Jackson were cheaper players when acquired, contrary to the theme you suggested about their deals.

The Granderson for Scherzer/Jackson trade looks a lot like their 2015 trades, in fact. Part of their strategy throughout appears to be identifying veterans to move and when to move them.

The Tigers had high payrolls because they acquired a future HOFer at age 25 in Cabrera, and drafted and developed another borderline one around the same time in Verlander, and they have so far made a commitment to try winning throughout their careers. Usually that has meant adding salary, but it has also meant looking for ways to acquire talent that don't involve simply waiting 5 years hoping for it to percolate from the draft. And they have done pretty well in that regard -- forfeiting 3 late first round picks to add impact vets for playoff seasons, grabbing Price and Cespedes for a playoff drive then flipping them for very good MLB ready prospects, etc.

You just said they restocked the farm system to make the team younger and cheaper. When they consistently had one of the highest payrolls in baseball that isn't true. You can trade for less expensive contracts but if you're pouring money into other players you aren't getting cheaper. That isn't a theme, its exactly what Detroit did....

 

The strategy might be the same but I would hold off on the comparisons until Fulmer turns into a pitcher who wins muiltiple Cy Young awards..

 

Your last paragraph is exactly my point. They committed to winning now and it was often at the expense of the "later." Now that "later," is starting to become a reality. The challenges this team faces are a direct result of those decisions. 

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Comparisons of Fulmer to what? I didn't compare him to anyone.

 

If you actually do an inventory of their moves from the past ~10 years, I think you might be surprised at how many were forward-looking (as well had present benefits). They were also trying to win in the present, so their payrolls grew and they put less value on late first round picks for a couple years, but the acquisitions of Scherzer, Austin Jackson, Fister, JD Martinez, Fulmer, and Norris look like a pretty good influx of young and/or controllable talent. (Plus the role players developed internally as mentioned by kab21.)

 

Look at those 2010-2012 forfeited first round picks again. They would have been lucky to get a Fulmer and a Norris with those picks. But you know what? They got great present day value with the FA they signed instead, and STILL wound up with Fulmer and Norris contributing by 2016 anyway.

 

To the extent that their farm system is weak and they are not in a perfect position, I'd argue that is more about "normal" failures of baseball judgement/development than it is about embracing one strategy and ignoring another. They've made most of their draft selections, they have traded away practically zero prospects worthy of regret, and they have added a few good ones. Their failures seem to be a few poor baseball decisions that had little or nothing to do with win now vs the future (i.e. betting on Gose over Travis), plus mixed/poor returns on a few FA contracts that did not involve forfeiting a first round pick (Sanchez, now Upton and Zimmermann, maybe Pelfrey on the modest end).

 

And even with those failures, they have some great MLB assets and are still looking a mid 80 win projection, which is hardly a terrible coda to their 10 year run.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't really understand what the argument is here: is it really possible to deny that Detroit has bucked traditional MLB thinking and been successful doing so for the past decade?

I've been one of the doom-sayers of Detroit for quite some time and I have to admit I've been wrong about them.

 

They've shown a high rate of success in trades and free agent pick-ups and they deserve tons of credit for those moves. They routinely flip prospects for better players, trade decent vets to restock a depleted system, and get quality performance from mediocre prospects.

 

Given how most MLB teams operate, what Detroit has done shouldn't have worked and it may not continue to work... But it worked for a long time. That can't really be disputed, IMO.

[KirbyDome89]

You just said the 2015 trades look a lot like the Granderson/Scherzer swap...thats a comparison.

 

Brennan Boesch, Andy Dirks, McCann, Infante, and Ramon Santiago over a 10 year span isn't exactly inspiring. Porcello had a good year in 14' but he certainly wasn't anything special overall during his time in Detroit.Trading away prospects for Fister isn't getting younger or cheaper. Were some of the players they brought in either young or prospects? Sure, but was that the norm? No. Again, go back and look at those rosters over that span of time. Its dominated by FA signings and players they brought in via trade. Making trades to get younger, cutting payroll, and developing their own players to plug in clearly weren't top prioritized. Roster construction and team payroll clearly indicate that. 

 

I can go back and point out players that a team has missed on due to losing comp picks and use that as evidence against giving them up if thats the game we're going to play. If there is risk involved in both signing FAs and drafting prospects why double down on it? If your plan to acquire young talent is to sign big FAs, have them live up to or exceed the contract, then trade them at the right time for prospects equal to or better than you would have been able to draft you're assuming much risk than either drafting or signing. Its one thing to buy low and sell high, its another to pay a premium price and think you'll get equal to greater value back. The Granderson trade worked out, and the Norris and Fulmer very well might end up in the same boat but I wouldn't hold those deals up as examples of a great way to acquire young talent to build a farm. 

 

Wasn't the argument just that they used their good drafting to bring in the proven players via trade? Now their farm has been bad all along yet they've been able to trick other teams into giving them MLB talent for peanuts? I would give them a little more credit than that. Its obviously more difficult to mine talent in later rounds; then when you add the fact you're trading multiple prospects per 1 MLB player that puts a lot of stress on the development staff. Even if prospects really are just a coin flip, having those picks in your system increases your chances of developing talent. 

 

Ugh Pelfrey...don't know if they forgot about his time with the Twins or what but that contract was highway robbery. That said it didn't really hurt them apart from having to suffer through watching him "pitch." Zimmerman likely won't be as bad as last season. 

 

What win projection system has them at 85 wins? 

[KirbyDome89]

 

I don't really understand what the argument is here: is it really possible to deny that Detroit has bucked traditional MLB thinking and been successful doing so for the past decade?

I've been one of the doom-sayers of Detroit for quite some time and I have to admit I've been wrong about them.

 

They've shown a high rate of success in trades and free agent pick-ups and they deserve tons of credit for those moves. They routinely flip prospects for better players, trade decent vets to restock a depleted system, and get quality performance from mediocre prospects.

 

Given how most MLB teams operate, what Detroit has done shouldn't have worked and it may not continue to work... But it worked for a long time. That can't really be disputed, IMO.

I don't why everybody is so hung up on "10 years." That was never the argument and I've never said they weren't successful during that run. So its time to move past that. 

 

Like you said they made trades and signed FAs, and yes it was successful, but it was also at the expense of the farm system. They have an aging core and aging FAs who are being shopped or will soon walk. i think the lack of young, cost controlled talent to promote to the MLB team hurts them. The point of the argument isn't about their teams 10 years ago, its about where this team is today and moving forward. I think the challenges they face are made more difficult by actions earlier in the decade.

 

I can criticize the negative aspect of their approach but still recognize their level of success. Those are not mutually exclusive.

[TheLeviathan]

No, they aren't mutually exclusive, it's just that many people have been making your exact argument for about ten years and been wrong. It might be time to talk with less certainty about how much a weak farm system really matters with the right people in charge.

[biggentleben]

I will just keep saying that the Tigers have a great reputation in the industry for their development of players. I had a quote in my recent system rankings on the Tigers that I heard in various ways from people around the game. Their system may not be deep in guys, but they get the most out of the players in the farm system.

[KirbyDome89]

I realize that, but like I said the 2017 Tigers aren't the 2012 Tigers. Whether they said it ten years ago or I'm pointing it out now, it doesn't make the challenges this team faces less real. 

[KirbyDome89]

Honestly if their talent identification and development was that superior you would think it would be in their best interest to keep their prospects. Good players on rookie contracts would be a huge advantage. 

[biggentleben]

Honestly if their talent identification and development was that superior you would think it would be in their best interest to keep their prospects. Good players on rookie contracts would be a huge advantage.

They have kept many over the years. They've also made the most of other teams' players (Scherzer, JD Martinez, Iglesias). However, when you don't have a spot for a guy, you develop him to the point where he presents strong trade value and then flip him. Really, who have they missed that they traded away?

[KirbyDome89]

 

They have kept many over the years. They've also made the most of other teams' players (Scherzer, JD Martinez, Iglesias). However, when you don't have a spot for a guy, you develop him to the point where he presents strong trade value and then flip him. Really, who have they missed that they traded away?

If they've kept so many and they're also great at developing them then why hasn't there been an influx of young players on the MLB team?

 

It has gone from they traded away talented prospects for proven MLB players, to the farm was never that great, to they're excellent at talent development and they've kept plenty of young players. It can't be all three. I think Detroit did trade away talented prospects; Rick Porcello, Jair Jurrjens, Drew Smyly, and Andrew Miller are just some of those players. What I'm skeptical of is the notion that Detroit is superior to other teams in drafting and developing. If that were the case why would they not use that to their advantage and build a team full of young talent on cheap contracts? Why constantly overpay for FAs if you're that capable? It makes no sense to me that you state they have such an advantage in that area, but then assert they can't miss any of the prospects they've traded. 

 

I agree, if you don't have a spot for a prospect you trade that prospect. However, the question becomes did they not have a spot for a prospect because a FA signing was in place already, or did they sign a FA because there wasn't a prospect to take that spot? 

[The Wise One]

In a 10 year run of greatness Detroit had lost 2 world series, 2 ALCS and 1 first round exit. Entertaining, but more like a few years behind the Twins' arc of almost greatness.  As long as the core group of geezers show that age curves are meaningless the team will be competitive.  As long as they all stay healthy, they will be competitive. Play the games and find out

 

[kab21]

 

Honestly if their talent identification and development was that superior you would think it would be in their best interest to keep their prospects. Good players on rookie contracts would be a huge advantage. 

You really didn't look at the trade list that I posted. They had marginal prospects come up and fill holes out of what was considered an awful system. They got great value for other promising but not highly ranked prospects and traded them for very good MLB players.

Right now you are fixated how the weak farm system is going to doom them. They have shown that they can trade prospects from a terrible farm system to fill on the MLB team. That has been my entire point all along. For the Tigers it isn't about having a strong young core. It is about taking a Fernando Romero or a Lewin Diaz type and trading him for a solid (let's say 2.5 WAR) OF'er with 2-3 years left on his contract. These kinds of trades are still possible with a universally accepted depleted farm system. They just keep finding ways to get value out of terrible farm system. Other teams haven't been able to do that. That is the credit that we are giving them and why some aren't so eager to write them off yet.

[biggentleben]

 

If they've kept so many and they're also great at developing them then why hasn't there been an influx of young players on the MLB team?

 

It has gone from they traded away talented prospects for proven MLB players, to the farm was never that great, to they're excellent at talent development and they've kept plenty of young players. It can't be all three. I think Detroit did trade away talented prospects; Rick Porcello, Jair Jurrjens, Drew Smyly, and Andrew Miller are just some of those players. What I'm skeptical of is the notion that Detroit is superior to other teams in drafting and developing. If that were the case why would they not use that to their advantage and build a team full of young talent on cheap contracts? Why constantly overpay for FAs if you're that capable? It makes no sense to me that you state they have such an advantage in that area, but then assert they can't miss any of the prospects they've traded. 

 

I agree, if you don't have a spot for a prospect you trade that prospect. However, the question becomes did they not have a spot for a prospect because a FA signing was in place already, or did they sign a FA because there wasn't a prospect to take that spot? 

 

They used Andrew Miller to acquire Miguel Cabrera. They make that trade every day and twice on Sundays, similarly with Smyly for Price.

 

The team develops players for the purpose of trading or playing them. You can believe it or not, but they have had a tremendous track record with guys from other organizations that they acquired through trade. They have been mislabeled as signing so many guys via free agency, but be real about where their players have come from...

 

Current "big contract"/starting guys:

Trade - Miguel Cabrera, Ian Kinsler, Anibal Sanchez, Francisco Rodriguez, Jose Iglesias, Shane Greene, Anthony Gose, Daniel Norris, Matt Boyd, Michael Fulmer, JaCoby Jones

Drafted/Developed - Justin Verlander, Nick Castellanos, James McCann, Steven Moya

FA Signing (year) - Justin Upton (2015-2016), Victor Martinez (2010-2011), Jordan Zimmermann (2015-2016), J.D. Martinez (2013-2014), Mike Pelfrey (2015-2016), Mark Lowe (2015-2016)

 

So, on the current roster, all but two FA signings on the team is from one offseason.

 

Previous players that were "impact" players:

David Price - Trade

Yoenis Cespedes - Trade

Rajai Davis - FA (2013-2014)

Alfredo Simon - Trade

Joakim Soria - Trade

Cameron Maybin - Trade

Austin Jackson - Trade

Torii Hunter - FA (2012-2013)

Max Scherzer - Trade

Rick Porcello - Draft/Develop

Drew Smyly - Draft/Develop

Joe Nathan - FA (2013-2014)

Joba Chamberlain - FA (2013-2014)

Phil Coke - Trade

Robbie Ray - Trade

Prince Fielder - FA (2011-2012)

Omar Infante - Draft/Develop

Jhonny Peralta - Trade

Doug Fister - Trade

Joaquin Benoit - FA (2010-2011)

Jose Valverde - FA (2009-2010)

 

So, outside of a handful of free agents, the majority of big guys were acquired via trade, and that's how those prospects were used.

[biggentleben]

Because I have a feeling that quote hasn't been looked up, I'll post it...

 

One rival scout told me about the Tigers’ Kyle Funkhouser, “I was watching the draft board fall, and I just had a sinking feeling because I knew the Tigers would get him, and when they got him, he’d either turn into an ace for them, or he’d end up becoming the trade chip that brought them in Clayton Kershaw or some ridiculous trade piece.”

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

They used Andrew Miller to acquire Miguel Cabrera. They make that trade every day and twice on Sundays, similarly with Smyly for Price.

 

The team develops players for the purpose of trading or playing them. You can believe it or not, but they have had a tremendous track record with guys from other organizations that they acquired through trade. They have been mislabeled as signing so many guys via free agency, but be real about where their players have come from...

 

Current "big contract"/starting guys:

Trade - Miguel Cabrera, Ian Kinsler, Anibal Sanchez, Francisco Rodriguez, Jose Iglesias, Shane Greene, Anthony Gose, Daniel Norris, Matt Boyd, Michael Fulmer, JaCoby Jones

Drafted/Developed - Justin Verlander, Nick Castellanos, James McCann, Steven Moya

FA Signing (year) - Justin Upton (2015-2016), Victor Martinez (2010-2011), Jordan Zimmermann (2015-2016), J.D. Martinez (2013-2014), Mike Pelfrey (2015-2016), Mark Lowe (2015-2016)

 

So, on the current roster, all but two FA signings on the team is from one offseason.

 

Previous players that were "impact" players:

David Price - Trade

Yoenis Cespedes - Trade

Rajai Davis - FA (2013-2014)

Alfredo Simon - Trade

Joakim Soria - Trade

Cameron Maybin - Trade

Austin Jackson - Trade

Torii Hunter - FA (2012-2013)

Max Scherzer - Trade

Rick Porcello - Draft/Develop

Drew Smyly - Draft/Develop

Joe Nathan - FA (2013-2014)

Joba Chamberlain - FA (2013-2014)

Phil Coke - Trade

Robbie Ray - Trade

Prince Fielder - FA (2011-2012)

Omar Infante - Draft/Develop

Jhonny Peralta - Trade

Doug Fister - Trade

Joaquin Benoit - FA (2010-2011)

Jose Valverde - FA (2009-2010)

 

So, outside of a handful of free agents, the majority of big guys were acquired via trade, and that's how those prospects were used.

I'm not really sure what the argument is that you're making. First you said they've kept a lot of their talented young players. Now, you're going on about how many they've traded away. I've been saying this entire time that they've sacrificed prospects for FAs and trades. You seem to be reinforcing that....so we agree?

 

You also didn't address the question I asked. If Detroit is so much better at finding and developing talent, why would they be so eager to let it go? If you can develop elite young talent at the rate you suggest, and have them on rookie contracts why would the Tigers be interested in trading them for older, more expensive players? That makes 0 sense...

 

I think a much more likely scenario is that they did have talent in the minors, but the system has been thinned out due to trades and losing picks and as a result they're consistently rated as one of the worst farms in baseball. They very well may be one of the better teams at recognizing talent, and that would explain how they've been able to pull off some of those trades, but I think the degree to which you think they have an advantage is exaggerated. I really doubt that a smart team like Detroit could have such an edge but continually choose to pay more. 

 

They're mislabeled? 

 

Magglio Ordonez

Ivan Rodriguez

Johnny Damon

Kenny Rogers

Victor Martinez

Prince Fielder

Torii Hunter

Joaquin Benoit

JD Martinez

Justin Upton

Jordan Zimmerman

 

These guys seem like pretty "real," players to me.....

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

You really didn't look at the trade list that I posted. They had marginal prospects come up and fill holes out of what was considered an awful system. They got great value for other promising but not highly ranked prospects and traded them for very good MLB players.

Right now you are fixated how the weak farm system is going to doom them. They have shown that they can trade prospects from a terrible farm system to fill on the MLB team. That has been my entire point all along. For the Tigers it isn't about having a strong young core. It is about taking a Fernando Romero or a Lewin Diaz type and trading him for a solid (let's say 2.5 WAR) OF'er with 2-3 years left on his contract. These kinds of trades are still possible with a universally accepted depleted farm system. They just keep finding ways to get value out of terrible farm system. Other teams haven't been able to do that. That is the credit that we are giving them and why some aren't so eager to write them off yet.

You must've forgotten the comment otherwise you would know I read it. Those 4 were/are fine players. Castellanos was good last year, Avila had a couple nice years, but if Ryan Raburn and James McCann are two of the better players you can point to them calling up over the last 10 years I don't see reason to applaud. That to me says more about a lack of talent than development acumen. I realize they brought in value via trades, that was never in dispute. 

 

At some point you need to have that core. Even the Tigers had players that they built around. Bringing in a solid 2.5 WAR OF'er is nice, and they did a great job of bringing those players in, but those are support players. The Tigers won massively in the Scherzer and Cabrera trades and that laid the foundation for the 2011-2014 playoff run. There is a huge difference between squeezing value out of a depleted farm system and trading for a 1st ballot HOFer and a two time Cy Young winner. Credit to Detroit for snagging those guys but if the argument is that they don't need to build because they can continue to make those kinds of trades I'm going to disagree. 

[Oldgoat_MN]

 

...

The team develops players for the purpose of trading or playing them. 

...

This little nugget right here.

Terry Ryan was said to have initiated very few calls. He wanted the other GM to be the one 'wanting' a trade. Perhaps he felt that put him in a position of strength.

 

Detroit has traded away prospects for players they wanted.

 

When I read this line my immediate thought was, "The Twins develop prospects to either play them or have them stop playing pro baseball".

 

It is seldom that I recall the Twins ever trading someone who is in AA or lower. They don't ask another team to gamble, they just ride their prospects until they either play or fail to make the MLB roster some day.

 

Great line in that post, biggentleben. It will be interesting to see if the Twins begin to be more aggressive with trades in general.

[kab21]

 

You must've forgotten the comment otherwise you would know I read it. Those 4 were/are fine players. Castellanos was good last year, Avila had a couple nice years, but if Ryan Raburn and James McCann are two of the better players you can point to them calling up over the last 10 years I don't see reason to applaud. That to me says more about a lack of talent than development acumen. I realize they brought in value via trades, that was never in dispute. 

 

At some point you need to have that core. Even the Tigers had players that they built around. Bringing in a solid 2.5 WAR OF'er is nice, and they did a great job of bringing those players in, but those are support players. The Tigers won massively in the Scherzer and Cabrera trades and that laid the foundation for the 2011-2014 playoff run. There is a huge difference between squeezing value out of a depleted farm system and trading for a 1st ballot HOFer and a two time Cy Young winner. Credit to Detroit for snagging those guys but if the argument is that they don't need to build because they can continue to make those kinds of trades I'm going to disagree. 

I am not sure how you continue to miss the entire point. The entire point hasn't been about homegrown players making the team younger. They have used their terrible farm system to constantly trade for veterans that make their team better immediately. And they have done this many times with a farm system ranked almost last every year. They have zigged where the common sense direction is to zag.

If you are giving a lot of credit to the Tigers for their big trades that brought them a 1st ballot HOF'er and a 2 time Cy Young winner then you should be applauding the Red Sox trade of Sale since he is at the same level as Scherzer. 

[biggentleben]

 

I'm not really sure what the argument is that you're making. First you said they've kept a lot of their talented young players. Now, you're going on about how many they've traded away. I've been saying this entire time that they've sacrificed prospects for FAs and trades. You seem to be reinforcing that....so we agree?

 

You also didn't address the question I asked. If Detroit is so much better at finding and developing talent, why would they be so eager to let it go? If you can develop elite young talent at the rate you suggest, and have them on rookie contracts why would the Tigers be interested in trading them for older, more expensive players? That makes 0 sense...

 

I think a much more likely scenario is that they did have talent in the minors, but the system has been thinned out due to trades and losing picks and as a result they're consistently rated as one of the worst farms in baseball. They very well may be one of the better teams at recognizing talent, and that would explain how they've been able to pull off some of those trades, but I think the degree to which you think they have an advantage is exaggerated. I really doubt that a smart team like Detroit could have such an edge but continually choose to pay more. 

 

They're mislabeled? 

 

Magglio Ordonez

Ivan Rodriguez

Johnny Damon

Kenny Rogers

Victor Martinez

Prince Fielder

Torii Hunter

Joaquin Benoit

JD Martinez

Justin Upton

Jordan Zimmerman

 

These guys seem like pretty "real," players to me.....

 

Using J.D. Martinez immediately negates your argument. He was only signed to a major league free agent contract because that was the way to get him over other teams only offering a minor league deal. He was cut and signed two days later by the Tigers. It was no "big money" sort of deal. Please be honest and real about your examples if you're heading down this road.

 

I also never once said they kept all their young players. I said they utilized them in their team or in trade and that the majority of their major acquisitions were via trade, which they clearly were if you look at that list. Free agents were very rare in their team structure.

[biggentleben]

 

Credit to Detroit for snagging those guys but if the argument is that they don't need to build because they can continue to make those kinds of trades I'm going to disagree. 

 

Then you've somehow missed how they turned Rick Porcello into Victor Alcantara (via Gabe Speier, who was flipped for Cameron Maybin), Alex Wilson, Michael Fulmer, and Luis Cessna. That's a great trade already, let alone the future value they'll get from just Fulmer and Wilson.

[KirbyDome89]

 

I am not sure how you continue to miss the entire point. The entire point hasn't been about homegrown players making the team younger. They have used their terrible farm system to constantly trade for veterans that make their team better immediately. And they have done this many times with a farm system ranked almost last every year. They have zigged where the common sense direction is to zag.

If you are giving a lot of credit to the Tigers for their big trades that brought them a 1st ballot HOF'er and a 2 time Cy Young winner then you should be applauding the Red Sox trade of Sale since he is at the same level as Scherzer. 

That farm system is terrible BECAUSE they constantly trade for veterans....The Tigers farm in 2007 wasn't the same as the 2017 version. Every trade and every forfeited pick adds up. By 2014 the headline players they gave up (Porcello, Smyly) in trades were already in MLB. In 15' prospects netted them Cameron Maybin (who was good), and in 16' they picked up Erick Aybar. Apart from the Maybin revival, those moves aren't the same type as the earlier trades that brought in guys like Cabrera, Gose, Anibal Sanchez, Johnny Peralta, Iglesias, Fister, ect... 

 

You're treating those 2 trades as if they're the same as flipping some prospects for a 2.5 WAR player. They stole Cabrera from Miami and Scherzer blew up into a Cy Young pitcher. Those type of trades are extremely rare and they definitely set them up for that playoff run. I'm not missing the point, I disagree with the notion that you can lump all their trades into the same category and say "they've done it before and were successful, they'll continue to do it." Banking on those types of trades isn't reliable. Its like looking at the Twins and thinking they'll find another Johan for Jared Camp. You need a base from which to build.