in the mixed messages department, the Tigers signed Verlander to a 5 year contract. They did not sign Polanco ,who wanted to stay and was a solid contact hitter. They need someone like Polanco because they strike out way too much. They did get rid of 160 Ks when they traded Granderson though. But I do not understand the Tiger narrative. What are they trying to do?
I think they were trying to lock up a very solid pitcher for a good rate. Would you rather have Verlander at 5 for $80 mil or CC Sabathia at 7 for $160? I thought it was a good move - I think verlander has #1 starter stuff.
This.
A good pitching staff is the core of a contending team. If they ever decided they wanted to take the Verlander money and spend it on hitters the way you described, Verlander’s trade value with that kind of contract would be worth much more than free agent dollars in the budget.
And if they got a bigger budget, they’d have Verlander and ADD to that.
Definitely a good move, unless Verlander flames out, but of course that’s true with any contract extension.
The more obvious comparison is to Felix Hernandez who was also signed for 5 years and around $80 mill. King Felix is a few years younger, but maybe hasn’t had quite the same level of performance as Verlander so far in their respective careers. In general I’m opposed to anything more than 2-3 years for a pitchers, but if you have to go 5 those two are clearly the type to do it for.
Comparing this to not signing Polanco is a bit silly - Verlander is significantly more valuable than Placido.
Right. Locking up Verlander to a long term contract (and also avoiding arbitration) is a good thing.
Are you actually bitching about signing Verlander? You be nuts.
No ,I am definitely on board with the signing. But they did not spend money on Polanco, Huff, Edwin Jackson, Thames, Granderson and others. It appeared to be unloading expensive contracts, which in Detroits unemployment problem would make sense. Then they spring for Verlander . I just don’t quite get where they are trying to go.
It appears they are unloading expensive contracts for players not likely to be worth them (Polanco, Huff, Thames, and Granderson absolutely fall in this category, MO).
Jackson I’m not as sure of - I might have wanted to keep him around. Also worth considering that two of the five years for Verlander were arbitration years where they were already likely to owe him quite a hefty salary.
The combination of letting the old over-paid guys go while spending cash to lock up the young studs should make you happy about the direction your team is taking.
. Granderson is 28. Polanco was not dropping off yet, and was a very dependable hitter. I don’t see the players they got rid of as overpaid. Teams were happy to get them.
I suspect the Tigers figured Sizemore is the 2nd baseman of the future and decided to pull the trigger. But they got nothing for Polanco.
There’s still an assload coming off the books next year. Big picture, father. Big picture.
And don’t forget that Edwin Jackson wasn’t just jettisoned; he was a part of the deal that brought Austin Jackson, Scherzer, Schlereth and Coke.
If nothing else, getting rid of Polanco and Granderson is consistent with the Verlander deal in that they were made to free up the salary space to keep Verlander. The common theme in all those transactions is that they wanted to keep the 26-year old 99 MPH-throwing ace, which as an organizational philosophy could be worse.
Polanco’s gotten worse for two straight years (admittedly, from a career-best year in '07) and is 33 years old; not a great risk.
**gonzomax **doth protest too much. We’ve got some serious questions about defense right up the middle, but let’s see how everything shakes out.
Everett is back at short. He is a crappy hitter but a good glove man. At least they claim he is. But Sizemore is recovering from a broken ankle and may not be ready. He also has not played at the Major league level. So at best ,he is a question mark. Polanco was a known. Gold glove 2nd baseman who could hit and had at least 3 good years left.