• Trade Talk: Detroit Tigers

    Buyers or Sellers

    The Tigers are certainly buyers at the trade deadline. They have completely stocked up over the last two seasons to make a World Series run. They acquired and then retained Anibal Sanchez. They added Torii Hunter this offseason. After missing all of 2012, Victor Martinez is back in the middle of their lineup. Their top four starters (Justin Verlander, Max Scherzer, Doug Fister and Sanchez) are the envy of the rest of the league. Most believed that the Tigers would run away with the AL Central, but at the All-Star break, they have just a 1.5 game lead over Cleveland.



    What they Need

    The Tigers have spent to win in the very short term. They have a powerful lineup, a tremendous starting rotation and a Joaquin Benoit and Drew Smyly have been terrific in the bullpen. However, the back end of the Tigers bullpen has caused a lot of issues. Bruce Rondon showed that despite a 100-mph fastball, he wasnít ready. Things got so bad they brought back veteran Jose Valverde, only quickly to be reminded why they didnít bring him back at the start of this year. Phil Coke, Al Albuquerque, Darin Downs and Jose Alvarez all have ERAs over five. Octavio Dotel is on the disabled list. The Tigers can use bullpen help. The only other thing the Tigers may need is be another utility infielder who would play very little.

    What Might Work


    Jamey Carrollís playing time has been limited enough in the first half that he will become a free agent after the season. Although his numbers this season are well down, his inconsistent playing time may play a role in that.

    If there is a team where Glen Perkins makes a lot of sense, it is the Detroit Tigers. If the Tigers were in any other division, it would make even more sense. Perkins has a terrific contract that any team would be happy to take on. Both teams will be leery about dealing with each other. Obviously, the Tigers want to win now, but they wonít want to see one of their top prospects in a starring role for the Twins against them for the next four to six years. The Twins wonít want to see Glen Perkins coming in for ninth innings against them. So, it would be interesting to see if the two teams can make a major trade. Minor trades are one thing, but blockbusters rarely occur within a division.

    Sleeper Targets


    Dixon Machado - 21 - SS Ė High A
    Two years ago, I saw Dixon Machado playing in Beloit for West Michigan. I recall thinking that I may not have ever seen such a smooth defender at shortstop. He is 6-0, and he is rail thin, almost Alexei Ramirez-like. However, he doesnít hit like Ramirez. In 2012 in the Florida State League, he hit just .195 with a .535 OPS. This year, repeating the level, he is hitting .231 with a .558 OPS. Heís not going to hit, but his glove makes him a potential utility infielder.

    Jose Ortega - RHP- AAA
    Ortega is probably in the middle ground of prospects that make him an unlikely candidate to come to the Twins. The hard-throwing right-hander has an impressive 1.47 ERA in AAA right now and has had time with the Tigers. In 30.2 innings this year, he has 33 strikoutsÖ to go with 19 walks. Sound familiar? To me, he sounds a lot like another hard-throwing reliever that the Twins acquired from the Tigers, Lester Oliveros.

    Dream Target

    Nick Castellanos was a supplemental first round pick in 2010 out of high school. The Tigers gave him $3.45 million (about $2 million over slot) to sign. Recently, the Tigers have said that Castellanos could be available in a trade for a top closer. Perkins would certainly fit into that category. Drafted as a third baseman, the 6-4 potential power hitter was moved to outfield a year ago when Miguel Cabrera moved to third base. Because heís 6-4, he could be a first base option as well if the Twins have enough outfielders. With AAA Toledo, he is hitting .281/.353/.455 with 29 doubles and 12 home runs this year.

    Outfielder Avisail Garcia, who played well for the Tigers in the playoffs last year, is also said to be available. Bruce Rondon throws 100 mph but often without great control. He would also be worth inquiring about. If heís available, thatís a great arm to consider replacing Glen Perkins with, if thatís the direction the Twins were to go.
    This article was originally published in blog: Trade Talk: Detroit Tigers started by Seth Stohs
    Comments 50 Comments
    1. SurroundedByTigers's Avatar
      SurroundedByTigers -
      If the Twins send Perkins to the Tigers, then the Twins are essentially giving the Tigers the World Series. The Twins have to demand something like Castellanos and another prospect up front, hopefully a starting pitcher, and a player to be named later. The player to be named would depend upon how far the Tigers advance in the playoffs, so the farther the Tigers go, the better the prospect the Twins would receive. Castellanos absolutely has to be part of the deal, because he can play 3B, OF and 1B as needed.
    1. Top Gun's Avatar
      Top Gun -
      If the Twins would have sign a ace free agent they would be up with clev now and won't be worried about this.
    1. Top Gun's Avatar
      Top Gun -
      Just think where we would be if we signed Sanchez and Hunter, we would be ahead of them. Ryan is to blame.
    1. MichiganTwins's Avatar
      MichiganTwins -
      We might be .500 with Sanchez and Hunter. Also, why would the Twins have signed an OF? we already have too many to try to get them playing time.
    1. Boom Boom's Avatar
      Boom Boom -
      Quote Originally Posted by IowaTwins View Post
      We might be .500 with Sanchez and Hunter. Also, why would the Twins have signed an OF? we already have too many to try to get them playing time.
      Huh? The Twins only have two outfielders on the roster right now.
    1. Seth Stohs's Avatar
      Seth Stohs -
      Sanchez got 5 years and $85 million from the Tigers. How much more would the Twins have had to offer him for him to come to Target Field? And, sadly, I don't think one solid #2/3 starter was going to make up a 14-15 game difference.
    1. gunnarthor's Avatar
      gunnarthor -
      I'd love for the Twins to get Castellanos. And I think he's the high end type of guy they should be looking for. Not sure if it gets done since it's a steep price and Tigers aren't in any danger of playing the play in game. But hopefully it happens.

      Let's hope a bunch of teams' bullpens start imploding after the break.
    1. MichiganTwins's Avatar
      MichiganTwins -
      Quote Originally Posted by Boom Boom View Post
      Huh? The Twins only have two outfielders on the roster right now.
      I agree at the moment we have only two. But we have two OFers on the DL. Arcia and Parmalee just got sent down. I am sorry if I was not clear, but I meant this season in general, we have had too many OFers for some of them to get consistent playing time.
    1. MichiganTwins's Avatar
      MichiganTwins -
      Quote Originally Posted by gunnarthor View Post
      I'd love for the Twins to get Castellanos. And I think he's the high end type of guy they should be looking for. Not sure if it gets done since it's a steep price and Tigers aren't in any danger of playing the play in game. But hopefully it happens.

      Let's hope a bunch of teams' bullpens start imploding after the break.
      Tigers are only up a game and a half. And the race for the two wild card spots is not a guarantee either. (if they would lose the division)
    1. ThePuck's Avatar
      ThePuck -
      Hard to believe we only have two OF right now of the active roster. Of course there's always catcher/DH Doumit and 3B Plouffe we can put out there.
    1. Willihammer's Avatar
      Willihammer -
      Quote Originally Posted by Seth Stohs View Post
      Sanchez got 5 years and $85 million from the Tigers. How much more would the Twins have had to offer him for him to come to Target Field? And, sadly, I don't think one solid #2/3 starter was going to make up a 14-15 game difference.
      No, but in years 2-5 of that contract, that value added could have been a critical difference. Doubly critical by denying that value to a division rival.
    1. ThePuck's Avatar
      ThePuck -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      No, but in years 2-5 of that contract, that value added could have been a critical difference. Doubly critical by denying that value to a division rival.
      And that pitcher, like all players, is a tradeable asset, like all quality players are. No rule says you need to keep him all five years. You could flip him two, three years down the road for a quality prospect or two or whatever. Not signing a player like him gives you no options. No quality pitching in any years nor the ability to trade him for more prospects down the road. By signing him, the only thing you lose for sure is money for awhile which is not a problem right now anyway, or in the foreseeable future.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      No, but in years 2-5 of that contract, that value added could have been a critical difference. Doubly critical by denying that value to a division rival.
      While I don't disagree with the idea of picking up a guy and thwarting a division rival (mostly I disagree with some here on the timing of such a move), you're assuming that Sanchez will continue to be a value. There's a good chance he will spend years 3-5 of that contract as an albatross. In that case, who "won"?
    1. Sconnie's Avatar
      Sconnie -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      While I don't disagree with the idea of picking up a guy and thwarting a division rival (mostly I disagree with some here on the timing of such a move), you're assuming that Sanchez will continue to be a value. There's a good chance he will spend years 3-5 of that contract as an albatross. In that case, who "won"?
      Good points. It's silly to spend money on free agency, when your whole plan is to blow the team up, and there's still time for Sanchez to stink up Detroit...
    1. Willihammer's Avatar
      Willihammer -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      While I don't disagree with the idea of picking up a guy and thwarting a division rival (mostly I disagree with some here on the timing of such a move), you're assuming that Sanchez will continue to be a value. There's a good chance he will spend years 3-5 of that contract as an albatross. In that case, who "won"?
      The Twins. 2 years of Anibal is better than 2 years of whatever sub-replacement scrub he'd be keeping off the roster, yeah?
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      The Twins. 2 years of Anibal is better than 2 years of whatever sub-replacement scrub he'd be keeping off the roster, yeah?
      Not if the team is going to miss the playoffs either way, which they would this season. Anibal doesn't change that.

      Now mind you, I am not advocating the "they're not going to win anyway so don't pick up anyone good" argument, I'm just making an observation.
    1. ThePuck's Avatar
      ThePuck -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      The Twins. 2 years of Anibal is better than 2 years of whatever sub-replacement scrub he'd be keeping off the roster, yeah?
      And that pitcher, like all players, is a tradeable asset, like all quality players are. No rule says you need to keep him all five years. You could flip him two, three years down the road for a quality prospect or two or whatever. Not signing a player like him gives you no options. No quality pitching in any years nor the ability to trade him for more prospects down the road. By signing him, the only thing you lose for sure is money for awhile which is not a problem right now anyway, or in the foreseeable future.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by ThePuck View Post
      And that pitcher, like all players, is a tradeable asset, like all quality players are. No rule says you need to keep him all five years. You could flip him two, three years down the road for a quality prospect or two or whatever. Not signing a player like him gives you no options. No quality pitching in any years nor the ability to trade him for more prospects down the road. By signing him, the only thing you lose for sure is money for awhile which is not a problem right now anyway, or in the foreseeable future.
      Which is a fine argument but the "sign 'em and trade 'em" argument is great in theory and incredibly difficult to execute in reality, particularly in multi-year contracts.

      When do you trade Anibal? After year one? Two? Three? And what happens if he gets injured the year you "planned" to trade him?

      It's a tightrope walk and not one a team should aggressively pursue when $100m is on the line. For the Feldmans, Pelfreys, and Bakers of the world, sure. It's a one year deal. Risk is incredibly low, almost zero. But a five year deal? That's dancing with the devil.

      You sign a guy you want with the idea that he will help your team when you need it. Trying to extrapolate 100 different situations from there is just going to lead to option paralysis and bad decisions.
    1. ThePuck's Avatar
      ThePuck -
      Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
      The Twins. 2 years of Anibal is better than 2 years of whatever sub-replacement scrub he'd be keeping off the roster, yeah?
      So we can say let's save money at a time when money is plenty available for the forseeable future, which does the fan no good, but the owner plenty good. Or spend it on a player who likely helps now, likely helps later and could also help later by being a valuable trade chip to get more pieces. Downside, we lost money that didn't hurt us to spend in any way and that wouldn't have been put into payroll somewhere down the road if we hadn't spent it.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by ThePuck View Post
      So we can say let's save money at a time when money is plenty available for the forseeable future, which does the fan no good, but the owner plenty good. Or spend it on a player who likely helps now, likely helps later and could also help later by being a valuable trade chip to get more pieces. Downside, we lost money that didn't hurt us to spend in any way and that wouldn't have been put into payroll somewhere down the road if we hadn't spent it.
      It hurts if Anibal spends 2015 on a Jamaican beach while earning $16m that could be going to a pitcher to help an 88 win team make the playoffs.

      Let's not pretend that there is no risk in signing a guy right now. There is a risk. There is always a risk when you drop $100m on a single player. Whether you want to take that risk should be the argument.
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.