PDA

View Full Version : Offseason questions...!



hgtiger32
10-12-2008, 03:10 PM
-I’m a Brewers fan first off. I’m just wondering if you guys have any players “available.”

-I’m wondering who your UNTRADEABLE players are.

-Also, the guys that are available-let me know what you would want/expect for him in return.

-As well, can you put down your team needs…such as positions and stuff.

sportwiz628
10-12-2008, 06:15 PM
Did u post this in every forum? :pity:

stanpapi
10-12-2008, 11:43 PM
It's okay. Even if he did, I'd say it's a good discussion. I'd say everyone is available short of Verlander, Polanco, Granderson, Gallaraga... And hey, it's a good thing we didn't need Chad Durbin, huh? We were so rich in pitching. He had a pretty damn good year, and he made it to the post-season.

GrinderBall41
10-22-2008, 01:42 PM
There's been mention in our forum of Gavin Floyd for Granderson no rumors, just ideas. To me it seems far fetched. Thoughts?

Bondomania
10-22-2008, 04:38 PM
Granderson will not be traded.. Granderson will make the all-star team next year, i am calling it right now.. had he not been hurt to start the season he would have made the all-star team

Untradeable
Verlander
Granderson
Galarraga
Bonderman (is on that bubble of untouchable, and touchable.. i think it really depends on how he comes back, the velocity he is pitching at, and if he can continue to develop that changeup of his)
Porcello
Perry

Needs
SP
RP
SS
3B

I wouldn't be opposed to working a trade for JJ Hardy, because JJ has a real strong arm and i think he could be moved over to 3B when Iorg or Worth is ready to contribute..

GrinderBall41
10-22-2008, 04:55 PM
Granderson will not be traded.. Granderson will make the all-star team next year, i am calling it right now.. had he not been hurt to start the season he would have made the all-star team
.

He certainly should. 5 tools = :drool:

I figured he was untouchable.

mark1125
10-22-2008, 05:45 PM
I agree with Stan. Granderson to me is the most untouchable of the Tigers. young and a legit 5 tool star in te making. I would also tab Verlander and Porcello on that list. Others that I would trade if it is too sweet to pass up would be Cabrera, Galaraga and Ordonez.

I alos would have interest in Hardy.

Nizzle20
10-22-2008, 08:53 PM
Granderson is definitely untouchable. Not only for his fabulous baseball skills, but for everything else he does for the organization. He is right now a baseball embassador in China. He was a broadcaster during the playoffs. And has an on going blog with ESPN. He is THE face of Tiger baseball and will be for many many years. In my opinion, the Tigers need to think of him in the same light as the do Al Kaline. Don't let him leave. Let him have a roll with the organization for a lifetime.

hoog
10-23-2008, 12:47 PM
Granderson, Cabrerra, and Verlander are the only untouchables in my book. I'd take offers on all other players. Although, you'll never get fair market value on Bonderman with his injury last year so by nature of default he's untouchable.

jjrsle
10-24-2008, 09:15 PM
UNTOUCHABLE:

Cabrerra
Granderson
Verlander
Porcello
Perry

scottie
10-27-2008, 10:10 AM
I do not believe Granderson is untouchable at all. He's a good player, but if A-rod gets traded, Frank Thomas, Jim Thome, Griffey, CC. Sabathia, ect. Granderson can really go. He's good, but he isn't an all-star, is he? He isn't the best player on the tigers is he? Is the better than Cabrerra, Maggs, or Polonco, or Verlander. I get you guys like the guy, but untouchable is a joke.

Bondomania
10-27-2008, 02:05 PM
you are a joke for thinking that.. he would have been an all-star if he didn't miss the first month of the season.. A-Rod got traded because the rangers couldn't afford him, Frank Thomas didn't get traded, the sox chose not to resign him because he couldn't stay healthy, Jim Thome got traded because he couldn't stay healthy, Griffey got traded because he was getting old, and was entering the last year of his contract, so the reds got what they could for him. Same think with CC, there is no way the Indians could afford to keep him. Granderson is better than magglio, polanco and verlander.. Polanco is a slap hitter that will hit around .300 while hitting mostly singles.. Verlander had a horrid season and maybe he rebounds, maybe he doesn't.. Maggs is on the decline, doesn't play great defense, doesn't hit for the same power.. Granderson is one of the faces of the franchise, and the team is completely different with him in the lineup than without him

Detroit70
10-27-2008, 05:27 PM
Granderson is the best player on the team hands down.
Cabrerra
Verlander
KEEP UM!!!
Everyone else tradeable for the right package.

JackB
10-27-2008, 08:48 PM
Nice job with that BONDO!!! Summed that up quickly

scottie
10-27-2008, 11:11 PM
you are a joke for thinking that.. he would have been an all-star if he didn't miss the first month of the season.. A-Rod got traded because the rangers couldn't afford him, Frank Thomas didn't get traded, the sox chose not to resign him because he couldn't stay healthy, Jim Thome got traded because he couldn't stay healthy, Griffey got traded because he was getting old, and was entering the last year of his contract, so the reds got what they could for him. Same think with CC, there is no way the Indians could afford to keep him. Granderson is better than magglio, polanco and verlander.. Polanco is a slap hitter that will hit around .300 while hitting mostly singles.. Verlander had a horrid season and maybe he rebounds, maybe he doesn't.. Maggs is on the decline, doesn't play great defense, doesn't hit for the same power.. Granderson is one of the faces of the franchise, and the team is completely different with him in the lineup than without him

If you think a guy who has never even made the all star team is the best player on our team you are out of your mind. Maggs is better then Granderson, Cabrara in better and HE IS THE FUTURE OF OUR TEAM. You are out there. No one and I repeat NO ONE IS SAYING GRANDERSON IS NOT ANY GOOD OR NO EVEN GOOD, just that he is not UNTOUCHABLE. You just got excuses, not reasons why the other greats were traded. You can say that for anyone. HEY CLOWN O-- BABE RUTH GOT TRADED, you fool! You think you posess this great baseball wisdom, If the right offer came around the tigers would trade him in a heart beat to have a better team. If they wouldn't they're fools too. Granderson is a very good player in my mind, and he's even getting better at hitting left handed pitchers, but don't give me this crap about "HE's THE FACE OF THE FRANCHISE" when the tigers take the guy out because he has trouble hitting lefties. Grow up kid. The guy isn't untouchable. No matter what your opinion is. You too old man!

Bondomania
10-28-2008, 09:30 AM
you're dumb.. Granderson should have made the All-star team this last year if he wasn't hurt the first month of the season.. and oh yeah? Maggs is better than Granderson? put granderson in the 3rd or 4th spot in the lineup and see what number he puts up.. i certainly bet he puts up similar numbers.. and what was the tigers record without Curtis in the lineup? Curtis makes this team go.. not to mention all he does off the field being an ambassador for the game... Babe Ruth was traded because everyone kept thinking that his career was on the down side of the slope.. he obviously defied their thinking.. and i am not an old man *******.. quite the opposite

scottie
10-28-2008, 02:53 PM
you're dumb.. Granderson should have made the All-star team this last year if he wasn't hurt the first month of the season.. and oh yeah? Maggs is better than Granderson? put granderson in the 3rd or 4th spot in the lineup and see what number he puts up.. i certainly bet he puts up similar numbers.. and what was the tigers record without Curtis in the lineup? Curtis makes this team go.. not to mention all he does off the field being an ambassador for the game... Babe Ruth was traded because everyone kept thinking that his career was on the down side of the slope.. he obviously defied their thinking.. and i am not an old man *******.. quite the opposite

He would of, he would of... HE DIDN"T! Done with!

Nizzle20
10-28-2008, 06:49 PM
If you think a guy who has never even made the all star team is the best player on our team you are out of your mind. Maggs is better then Granderson, Cabrara in better and HE IS THE FUTURE OF OUR TEAM. You are out there. No one and I repeat NO ONE IS SAYING GRANDERSON IS NOT ANY GOOD OR NO EVEN GOOD, just that he is not UNTOUCHABLE. You just got excuses, not reasons why the other greats were traded. You can say that for anyone. HEY CLOWN O-- BABE RUTH GOT TRADED, you fool! You think you posess this great baseball wisdom, If the right offer came around the tigers would trade him in a heart beat to have a better team. If they wouldn't they're fools too. Granderson is a very good player in my mind, and he's even getting better at hitting left handed pitchers, but don't give me this crap about "HE's THE FACE OF THE FRANCHISE" when the tigers take the guy out because he has trouble hitting lefties. Grow up kid. The guy isn't untouchable. No matter what your opinion is. You too old man!

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad:


wow. you are an *******. The majority of your posts are attacks on another poster's intelligence, age or some other thing you can jump on.

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

For that matter, you are completely wrong with Granderson. He is the 3rd best hitter on the team behind Cabrera and Ordonez. He is the best defender on the team. And hands down the face, the spokesman and the class act the Tigers need for their organization. For the Tigers is fits the same mold as Al Kaline did those many years ago.

mark1125
10-28-2008, 09:06 PM
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad:


wow. you are an *******. The majority of your posts are attacks on another poster's intelligence, age or some other thing you can jump on.

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

.

Exactly.......which is why I wonder why people even acknowledge his posts. Ignore him.

scottie
10-28-2008, 11:07 PM
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad:


wow. you are an *******. The majority of your posts are attacks on another poster's intelligence, age or some other thing you can jump on.

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

For that matter, you are completely wrong with Granderson. He is the 3rd best hitter on the team behind Cabrera and Ordonez. He is the best defender on the team. And hands down the face, the spokesman and the class act the Tigers need for their organization. For the Tigers is fits the same mold as Al Kaline did those many years ago.

Read the post son, Bondo is the one calling people dumb and such. Lets get this straight your argument that Granderson is the best is because "He's or 3rd best hitter on the team." Thats not even correct. Polonco is a better hitter, and so is Guillen. He's 5th best in my book, and He is not the defender on the team. Hello, lights are on is anyone home. Where is his Gold glove, Polonco, Kenny, and Santiago are waaaaay better defenders. He is a well spoken guy who has been asked to do somethings in the organization. That does not make him "The Class Act of the Tigers". Your 0-for 3. This post wasn't about if Granderson is a good player, its about who is not tradeable or untouchable. And it is not Granderson. The guy can barley hit lefties.

Lionsforlife
10-29-2008, 07:09 AM
I think the point he was trying to make is that you were attacking someone's opinion originally. The question was "who's untouchable" and people answered Granderson. Yet that answer isn't your answer so you considered it wrong and attacked why it was wrong instead of just answering the question yourself.

I happen to agree that the only untouchables are probably Verlander, Cabrera and Granderson. First off, we are looking at THIS offseason only, not could they ever be traded. Even if Granderson is the fifth best hitter (as you said), Polanco, Guillen, and Ordonez are all older and are beginning to see declines in there game. Plus they all have bigger contracts (I believe-could be mistaken).

Granderson may not be the Best fielder on the roster, but once again he is near the top and the others (with the exception of Santiago) are aging. Santiago can field but does not have the consistent stick that Granderson does.

And although I beleive that Cabrera or Ordonez are truly the face of the franchise, Granderson has been a bright spot this offseason with the analyst gig and now the ambassador thing.

Let's face it, most trades are usually established stars for young guys who could be stars on the rise. Are the Tigers going to trade a guy who has All-Star and gold-glove potential, and is still fairly young for anyone better...Probably not. They would probably get an aging star who would fizzle out soon. You trade your Guillens, Polancos, Ordonez' and such first. Granderson has led the league in triples two years running and is the only speed on the team. He may not be "The Face" right now, but he is a cornerstone and is definitely not going anywhere this offseason in my opinion. The tigers would be out of their mind if they thought they could improve by letting him go. If we still had Maybin, you might have an argument, but we don't. I will await your rebuttal.

grandy28
10-29-2008, 05:04 PM
granderson is the francise player of the tigers. cabrara is also too good to trade, verlander,gallaraga ,what about matt joyce, cale iorg rick percello.i wouldnt get rid of any of them either. brandon inge is where he should be next year.we should give iorg or even holliman or santiago a chance next year at ss.with veelander,gallaraga/bondo,minor/we still need one more starter and a closer and relief pitching,get rid of rodney and zumaya also give up on farnsworth .he hates detroit anyway,that trade was stupid

JackB
10-31-2008, 07:21 AM
I was watching NESN last night and a writer for the Boston Hearld ( Sean Mcadam ) seems to think Jason Varitek is going to end up with the Tigers and probably for two years.. Hes great with calling a game and young pitchers. He's also a switch hitter but has hit well for about 3 years . If we are going to sign somebody thats 34-35 years I would rather have Pudge back.

TheUltimateGM
11-06-2008, 10:29 PM
Would you guys trade Verlander for Brandon Wood and Nick Adenhart?

JackB
11-07-2008, 08:32 AM
Wood is a guy that if he played a full season in the majors would set a record for strike outs. He has a little more power then Inge but doesn't make contact more often. He would be just another Inge that plays shortstop. He's considered an AAAA player. Too good for the minors and not good enough for the majors.
The jury is still out with Adenhart. I beleive he had some injuries that have set him back some .He like Wood a top prospect. But to answer your question NO I would not trade Verlander for those two. I would for Eybar, Adenahrt and either Mathis or Napoli. But that wouldn't happen.

TheUltimateGM
11-07-2008, 08:47 PM
^ I wouldn't say the Angels would accept that deal, but it's not too far off. They would probably do Aybar/Adenhart for Verlander. Would the Tigers want to swap Matthews Jr. for one of their bad contracts (Robertson or Dontrelle)?

mark1125
11-07-2008, 09:38 PM
^ I wouldn't say the Angels would accept that deal, but it's not too far off. They would probably do Aybar/Adenhart for Verlander. Would the Tigers want to swap Matthews Jr. for one of their bad contracts (Robertson or Dontrelle)?

I would be happy to ship Robertson off for just about anything.

JackB
11-08-2008, 09:36 AM
The Angels wouldn't do Matthews for either Robertson or Willis. They could get more for him. Being as as bad as both pitchers were last year its not like we can trade them for another outfielder. We do need pitching. And if we can't find a deal worth making we are going to be forced to run them out there every fifth day.We might get lucky and have either or both pitch well this year. We know Willis can do it and we know Robby can too. Maybe if they both get off to a good start and gain some confidence.Man would that be a shot in the arm and a boost to the pitching staff.

Bondomania
11-08-2008, 11:15 AM
one of them will be in the BP too.. there are enough spots in the rotation for them.. so one will get forced into the BP.. i would love to get Mathews Jr. for Nate.. that would be awesome.. addresses the leadoff hitter, and allows Granderson to move down in the order.. i guess we would have to move either Guillen or Sheff at that point.. so it becomes more difficult

Bondomania
11-08-2008, 11:18 AM
oh yeah, i say no to moving Verlander.. we would be selling very low on him.. he had an off year, but this is a guy, that if he can regain his control, then he is a potential 20 game winner in this league.. and if anything, i would wait until he has that huge season we have been waiting for.. then you could move him for 3 or 4 prospects.. with two of them being top tier prospects, and the other two being good prospects

TheUltimateGM
11-08-2008, 03:00 PM
I was going to say maybe package:
Matthews Jr./Adenhart/(either Aybar or Izturis) for Verlander/(either Robertson/Willis). I can envision Dontrelle going to the bullpen and becoming a very good closer if he can't get back to what he used to be. The Angels could use some lefties in the bullpen, too, since their only lefty was Oliver and he is a FA now.

JackB
11-08-2008, 04:13 PM
If Willis could get back to his old form there would be no reason to trade him. We would need a solid lefty in the rotation . As it is now we need a closer that can come in and shut the door not contiinue the inning. I don't trust Rodney or Zumaya with that task no matter if either had four or five straight solid outtings. The blowup would come when we really neede a win. My confidence in either has diminished to the point of wanting to release both and let somebody else try to straighten them out. We don't have the time for teaching at the major league level. We need help NOW !!!

Bondomania
11-09-2008, 04:29 PM
nah, that trade isn't that great for a guy like Verlander.. yeah Adenhart is supposed to be a good prospect.. but that is just what he is.. and i think he slipped this past year in his prospect rankings.. whereas Verlander is a potential ace..

TheUltimateGM
11-09-2008, 04:43 PM
You guys also would get a very good young shortstop in Erick Aybar, and the leadoff hitter you guys wanted, to be able to move Granderson down in the order. Plus the Tigers could get rid of Nate Robertson or whoever else they want to get rid of. All of this in addition to the Angels #1 prospect Nick Adenhart, who did have a poor 2nd half after dominating the first 2 months in AAA. You have to remember he is still only 21, so he is still widely considered a future #1 or #2.

JackB
11-09-2008, 06:39 PM
Pitching prospects are very hard to predict. Some take longer to develop. Some never do. Only time will tell

Nizzle20
11-11-2008, 01:56 PM
why trade for a potential 1 or 2 (Adenhart) when you already have a 2 (Verlander) with potential to be a 1?

TheUltimateGM
11-11-2008, 03:45 PM
^ Because you guys would also get the very promising young SS you guys are looking for in Aybar. Plus in my offer I proposed a Matthews Jr. for Robertson swap, since you guys might be looking for a leadoff hitter with good defense to move Granderson down in the order. I know how much you guys would love to get rid of Robertson, too.

JackB
11-11-2008, 10:23 PM
Well my friend its sounds like you are trying to deal with us in a fanasty baseball league. You are doing a selling job on your guy to get ours. I doubt we make a trade with you. Ahh I mean the Angels.
Also word is the A's who just picked up Holliday in a trade are also in the hunt for Fucal.

Bondomania
11-12-2008, 11:03 AM
we have young SS talent.. that isn't really what we are looking for. We really need a stopgap 1 year guy to allow our two young SS's to develop. We have Danny Worth and Cale Iorg, both of whom will be ready to go in 2010 most likely. I think if anything, i would be up for doing a Robertson for Mathews Jr. swap, and maybe we throw in a prospect or something... but i would skip all the other noise in that trade proposal

TheUltimateGM
11-13-2008, 07:10 PM
Would the Tigers be more interested in Jeff Mathis or Mike Napoli?

TheUltimateGM
11-23-2008, 01:24 AM
It seems like fans from both teams would be in favor of a Robertson for Matthew Jr. swap.

Bondomania
11-23-2008, 04:53 PM
i would do that swap... bad contract for bad contract.. the problem though would be that we would need to move one of the following guillen/sheffield/ordonez to make room for him.. and it isn't a bad idea, because mathews jr. still provides excellent defense.. whereas Guillen seems like he needs to be a DH

jjrsle
11-25-2008, 10:10 PM
He is an above average defensive SS and he isn't horrible offensively. Give the guy a chance. He is the right price. I bet he is good for this in 145 games:

.270 8 HR 10 SB 75 R 45 RBI

Is Jack Wilson or Julio Lugo any better....not much and they cost A LOT more!

JackB
11-25-2008, 10:17 PM
I agree. Give Santiago a chance. Move Robertson to somebody for another need.

mattd24
11-27-2008, 11:37 AM
why is this team wasting time on useless, mediocre at best SS so far? Lugo and Alex Cora?! Come on! Just let Santiago play SS full time, dont waste your money on these "D" free agents...either make a trade for a fortible SS like bobby crosby or jack wilson or let Santiago do it.

mark1125
11-27-2008, 12:01 PM
why is this team wasting time on useless, mediocre at best SS so far? Lugo and Alex Cora?! Come on! Just let Santiago play SS full time, dont waste your money on these "D" free agents...either make a trade for a fortible SS like bobby crosby or jack wilson or let Santiago do it.

I am thinking the same thing. We are REALLY loking at Cora now? Why not just go with Santiago? I hope we have more up our sleves than that. I haven't heard a whole lot.

Bondomania
11-27-2008, 08:19 PM
it has been a really slow offseason so far for everyone.. i really hope we make a move or two here in the next few weeks.. but who knows.. i think if we make a trade or anything it should be for a decent shortstop, not a salary swap.. i really like JJ Hardy, or Bobby Crosby... but those could require more than we are looking to give up