D Backs are some big winners. They would not be in the playoffs if it were not for Hudson and Kenndy.
Dodgers Fan since 1982
Originally Posted by MrPoon
The idea of a perfect trade has existed a lot, but I don't think this constitutes as one.
There are a lot of trades where both sides equally improved because of the move, but received production in an area of need and removed production from an area of surplus, for both parties.
I've seen it happen (can't recall off-hand any in particular though).
I wanna wait another year before we start saying who was "definitely" the winner in this trade.
Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
Red Sox hater since 10/2011
It is anyway, not anyways.
I am not sure why PSD posters have this need to annoint "winners and losers" in a trade. You do realize that it IS possible for a trade to benefit all parties?
-Kennedy turned out great for Arizona while Hudson is solid. Kennedy probably wouldn't have fared so well for NY.
-Granderson is great for the Yankees, but his HR's in the joke of a Yankee stadium are flyball outs in Detroit.
-Jacksons gold glove calibur defense and nice running are invaluable to the Tigers who are slow and generally poor on D. However, he would likely have been a 4th OF or maybe a platoon OF for the Yanks. Scherzer and Schlereth are still young and under team control for awhile. Coke....if nothing else is a workhorse and can be effective if used in the proper role (IE not starting).
D-backs got 2 starters that are good. Yanks got a player who will be top 5 MVP likely who benefits in that stadium. Tigers got 4 players that played a role in their division title.
Lets pretend for a second that this deal never happened. Granderson would be hitting 20-25 HR with a .260ish average for the Tigers. Good but not spectacular. Those "majestic" Yankee HR's would be flyball outs now. Jackson would either be the 4th OF or dealt elsewhere by now. Kennedy would be getting shelled in NY. Hudson, Schlereth, Scherzer, Coke.....they would probably be performing about the same had they stayed where they were.
I am going to say win-win-win for al parties. In case I missed something, all teams made the playoffs. Is that not the goal of making deals? Take off your homer hats for 2 seconds and think about it. I know that is a foreign concept for most here so I don't expect I have swayed anyone.
Last edited by mark1125; 09-30-2011 at 07:37 AM.
I remember how EVERYONE bashed the DBacks for this trade - said their GM was a moron....
Funny what a year does in terms of looking back on a particular trade.
The Tigers had to trade Granderson as his contract was escalating and was coming off of a season that saw him post a mediocre 2.9 WAR. Was he worth the $5.5m? Probably. However the Tigers have made that up in Jackson, who was worth 4.1 WAR in 2010 and then 2.9 in 2011. Yes, Grandy was worth a whopping 7 wins this season (and you can even go all the way back to 2007 to find another 7 win season) however for most of the time, Grandy's a 3-4 win player.
In the trade, the Tigers also added Scherzer, Schlereth, and Coke. Schlereth is nearly worthless (-.1 WAR according to FG, .1 WAR on BP), Coke was worth 2 wins in 2011, Scherzer worth 2.7. There's your 7 wins on Granderson (although, as well, shipping out Jackson, a 3 win pitcher). However, what also comes into play is money. By going with the league minimum salaried players of Jackson, Scherzer, Coke and Schlereth, the Tigers saved nearly $16m this season allowing them to afford.....Victor Martinez who added that 2.9 WAR that was lost with factoring in Edwin Jackson. While still having a surplus of $4m. And that number is probably only going to continue to rise as Granderson is slated for another $1.25m increase and Edwin Jackson is probably going to make around $12m next season, meaning $22m spread between two players while the Tigers will continue to play the 4 players gained near league miniumum salary (with slight increases based on salary arb in Jackson and Scherzer's case if they hit super-2, but I'm not fully familiar with Detroit to say either way) who produce very similarly to the two expensive veterans.
You're wrong. The Tigers didn't lose anything. In fact, in terms of 2010, Austin Jackson out preformed Granderson alone. By himself. For $5m cheaper. And honestly, I don't think Granderson's 7 wins will continue (probably falling closer to 4 - 4.5 wins). The Tigers probably made out best out of all the teams gaining 4 players, under team control for 6 seasons who were almost as good, if not at times better, than those who they shipped out, and saved a huge sum of money.
Last edited by 1908_Cubs; 09-30-2011 at 09:39 AM.
Miggy Montero BelievesDo you?
Sleeper Draft Pick
You also absolutely can't compare three players in a trade and say they equaled one player like you did saying a 3 WAR player + 3 WAR player + 1 WAR player = 7 WAR player. That's not how it works, there's no way that if they kept Granderson, they'd have just trotted out replacement level players at the other positions the trade filled, you can't just make that hypothetical comparison. It's a million times easier to find a 3 win CF, and a 2 win pitcher than it is to find a 7 win CF. Trading elite players for role fillers is not an effective way to run a franchise.
Last edited by VRP723; 09-30-2011 at 12:13 PM.
Tigers lost that trade.
Big THX to MJ's Bulls and pheagles10 on the sig help!
I miss you.
The Tigers got the **** end of the stick, but it's still not a very "****" covered end either. Hopefully Jackson will become the leadoff hitter we need, Arizona made out like Bandits, and New York got an MVP caliber player in Grandy.
Tigers got 4 key players that individually are not great, but filled glaring holes. Again.......as much as many of you that can't grasp the concept of a win-win-win, this is one of them.
If you want to be so absolutely picky, than fine. Jackson is an 8.0 UZR/150 while Granderson is a -3.3. While Granderson is absolutely pounding Jackson in SLGing a lot of that is probably due to Yankee Stadium - he's posting a career high FB% and an insanely high 20%(!!) HR to FB ratio. Flat out, this ain't gonna happen again this season. Granderson is the better player but not by this much. Not one bit.
2) Yes that is how WAR works. In the end, WAR attempts to determine how many wins a single player brings to their team over average replacement player. Perfect? Again, no, but it's a fantastic quick metric and I really didn't feel like spending 4 hours showing how silly of a comment you made. You can add 3 players up and get their cumulative WAR.
Also, I never mentioned anything about the Yankees and what they won and didn't win, it wasn't the discussion. You said "The Tigers clearly lost", thus, it doesn't matter who Granderson replaced in New York, because it wasn't integral to the discussion. What was integral is who the Tigers traded and what they received.
Lastly - do you really think Curtis Granderson is a 7 win CF'er? There's almost no chance he repeats as a 7 win CF'er. As I've already pointed out, he's a product of Yankee Stadium and a short left field porch this season. He's hitting the ball into the air at a career high rate and they're flying out....at a career high rate. He's also been a poor defender this season, as well as 3 out of the last 4 seasons (2010 is the only season in 4 year's he's finished as a plus defender). Granderson's wOBA is literally .30 points above his career average. When it's all said and done, Grandy's a 4-4.5 win player. Jackson probably in the 3 - 4 win range. Who would I rather have right now? Jackson based on salary. A 3 win Jackson gives you a $10m surplus (essentially, two wins, as each win is rated out at $5m roughly). Granderson's at best, going forward, probably a 4.5 win player.
To sit there and say the Tigers, in any way, after coming out with Jackson, Scherzer, Coke, Schlareth and the money to sign Victor Martinez easily "lost that trade" is inane. They only lose that trade if you're high on drugs and think somehow Curtis Granderson keeps up an improbable season.
Last edited by 1908_Cubs; 10-02-2011 at 11:05 AM.
Miggy Montero BelievesDo you?