Article: Trade Talk: Detroit Tigers

[MichiganTwins]

Back on topic, speakly purely hypothetically, would folks here accept Castellanos and Rondon in exchange for Perkins?

 

I think that would be close to acceptable. Throw it a bag of balls and I might consider it.

[Willihammer]

I looked at the wrong page.

 

No matter how much impact Anibal has, 12 games is too much for one player. Replacing Joe Mauer with Drew Butera and giving Joe to the Tigers will not result in 12 games in half a season.

 

This is why the WAR stat exists. It's incredibly difficult for a player to have a WAR of 10 over one season, much less a WAR of 18 (extrapolating the 55% of this season into 100%).

 

Do you really want to argue the validity of WAR? I hesitate to engage on this but suffice to say the World Series champs had less WAR than the last place Red Sox last year. You can't just tally the individual p layer WARs and say "this team will win xx many games."

 

The math doesn't even add up. Replacement level team should win 55 games right? Then the Tigers should have won 80 games last year instead of 88. The Giants shoudl have won 67 instead of 94.

[Brock Beauchamp]

So you have no issue with the WAR stat, a stat some people say is so arbitrary there isn't even a consensus into how it's calculated. I like the WAR stat, myself, but talk about a stat that seriously takes into account advanced metrics being right on the ball.

 

I use the WAR stat when the sample size is large enough to compensate for some of the incredible weirdness produced by the statistic. It's hardly the One True Metric To Rule Them All but when used in the right situations, it's useful. Especially in a situation like this where the argument basically boils down to "how many wins do you get by replacing a below replacement level player with a very good player". If you can't use WAR there, you can't use it at all.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Do you really want to argue the validity of WAR? I hesitate to engage on this but suffice to say the World Series champs had less WAR than the last place Red Sox last year. You can't just tally the individual p layer WARs and say "this team will win xx many games."

 

The math doesn't even add up. Replacement level team should win 55 games right? Then the Tigers should have won 80 games last year instead of 88. The Giants shoudl have won 67 instead of 94.

 

I didn't even quote the WAR of Sanchez (or of Pelfrey for that matter). I used the metric to loosely show just how bloody difficult it is for one player to basically amount to a 20 game swing in the standings in one season.

 

Think about that for a second. 20 games? Really?

[Willihammer]

Brock, you have to accept the possibility that the Twins could have run the table and won all 15/15 games that Anibal would have started, regardless of the differences in WAR. Unlikely, but definitely possible. Certainly Anibal gives you a better chance than Pelfrey.

 

You can't just state "the Twins would have missed the playoffs anyway" as a matter of fact. Its impossible to know.

 

edit: I'd even add that the 15 start baseline is a bit presumptuous. Maybe in this parallel timeline Anibal doesn't strain his shoulder and starts 19 games? Maybe he starts zero? Again, impossible to know.

[Ozziedavisfan]

If any trade partner made sense it's this one. They need a top line closer we have one. they allegedly want to win now, so if that's true it is within reason to ask of one of if not their top prospectCastellanos.

[ThePuck]

Especially in a situation like this where the argument basically boils down to "how many wins do you get by replacing a below replacement level player with a very good player". If you can't use WAR there, you can't use it at all.

 

But when talking about the kind of quality you've gotten from a starting pitcher, the MLB defined stat of quality start can't be used and we can clearly understand how to come up with it. Got it.

 

That also doen't explain away the arbitrary nature of the stat WAR.

[Brock Beauchamp]

But when talking about the kind of quality you've gotten from a starting pitcher, the MLB defined stat of quality start can't be used. Got it.

 

You're treading a fine line between debate and condescending antics with this post.

 

These are two completely different arguments and you know it.

 

One argument is "how well has Kevin Correia pitched" and you used an inferior statistic to about a dozen other available statistics, which I called out, using other statistics that show that no, he wasn't all that bad.

 

The other argument is "how many wins would the Twins have if they signed Anibal Sanchez", in which I didn't even use the WAR statistic to prove anything, only to illustrate the difficulty in one player essentially "winning" 20 games for their team in one season.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Brock, you have to accept the possibility that the Twins could have run the table and won all 15/15 games that Anibal would have started, regardless of the differences in WAR. Unlikely, but definitely possible. Certainly Anibal gives you a better chance than Pelfrey.

 

You can't just state "the Twins would have missed the playoffs anyway" as a matter of fact. Its impossible to know.

 

edit: I'd even add that the 15 start baseline is a bit presumptuous. Maybe in this parallel timeline Anibal doesn't strain his shoulder and starts 19 games? Maybe he starts zero? Again, impossible to know.

 

No, one can't say it with utmost certainty.

 

But the odds of Sanchez propelling the Twins to the playoffs in 2012 is mighty, mighty low.

[diehardtwinsfan]

While Castellanos is a great prospect, the Twins already have a log jam at those positions in the next few years. Detroit's system, outside of Castellanos, sucks. I'm not seeing the benefits of this arrangement, especially with the intra-division thing. I think I pass here.

[Ozziedavisfan]

castellanos could move to first a postion the twins don't have and you can never have to much hitting.

[ALessKosherScott]

Back on topic, speakly purely hypothetically, would folks here accept Castellanos and Rondon in exchange for Perkins?

 

No. Minor league closers have such a low success rate as prospects, so Rondon is a pretty big risk. You have to really believe in Castellanos' star potential to do it. You're better off getting Castellanos and two deeper prospects. But if the Tigers called, my initial offer would by Smyly and Castellanos.

[YourHouseIsMyHouse]

There is nothing the Tigers could offer us to get Perkins. Nothing. I wouldn't accept Castellanos from them. I do NOT want Perkins pitching against us and neither do the Twins.

[Ozziedavisfan]

There is nothing the Tigers could offer us to get Perkins. Nothing. I wouldn't accept Castellanos from them. I do NOT want Perkins pitching against us and neither do the Twins.

I don't either however hypotheticlly if they were going to trade with the tigers. If I was general manager, which I would demand their top prospect for my closer, which is Castellanos i think. With the tigers the was i see it is that if they see their bullpen as a weakness then perkins is ever some much vauleable to them. One, he only started closing this year, and maybe some last year. so you can put him anywhere in you bullpen. two we don't have to trade him. so to me unless your going to give what we want I'm not going to just give him to you because your asking, and offer me some guys that have some projection.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, if somehow we managed to get Castellanos from Detroit, but we believe our system is already deep at that spot, we could flip him to another team that feels they have an excess of pitchers or infielders. There have been a few big deals in recent years where prospects were flipped quickly.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Also, if somehow we managed to get Castellanos from Detroit, but we believe our system is already deep at that spot, we could flip him to another team that feels they have an excess of pitchers or infielders. There have been a few big deals in recent years where prospects were flipped quickly.

 

I can think of Garza/Young and Montero/Pineda. Am I missing others?

 

It's still pretty rare to trade prospect-for-prospect, especially good ones.

 

I'm not a fan of getting cute and crafting elaborate plans. You go after a guy you need when you need him, end of story. Trying to plot out ten moves in advance often ends up in disaster because something unpredictable happened after move two.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Brock: you're right, there haven't been a lot of prospect-for-prospect deals.

 

The Roy Halladay deal was like this, though -- the Blue Jays got OF Michael Taylor from the Phillies, and immediately flipped him to Oakland for 3B Brett Wallace.

 

Earlier this year, in a 3 team deal, Arizona traded P Trevor Bauer and got SS Didi Gregorius.

 

Also, I was just thinking of prospects who had been flipped quickly, but not necessarily for other prospects -- Andy Marte was flipped rather quickly in this manner (primarily for OF Coco Crisp, who already had a couple seasons under his belt).

[Otto von Ballpark]

Additionally, I wasn't suggesting trading for Castellanos and then hoping to set up another deal later. I was thinking arranging something up-front -- a three-way trade like Bauer-Gregorius, or an immediate flip like the Halladay deal.

 

I doubt the Twins would be that aggressive -- it will be very surprising if they trade Perkins at all -- but it's another option if one team is aggressive about getting Perkins now, but their offer isn't a great match for the Twins needs.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Additionally, I wasn't suggesting trading for Castellanos and then hoping to set up another deal later. I was thinking arranging something up-front -- a three-way trade like Bauer-Gregorius, or an immediate flip like the Halladay deal.

 

This is totally different and something I think more teams should explore. You can really expand your options if you try to get a third team in on the deal.

 

I doubt the Twins would be that aggressive -- it will be very surprising if they trade Perkins at all -- but it's another option if one team is aggressive about getting Perkins now, but their offer isn't a great match for the Twins needs.

 

Agreed. While Ryan is a pretty shrewd trade partner, I don't see him actively pursuing a three-way trade.

[B Richard]

Agreed. While Ryan is a pretty shrewd trade partner, I don't see him actively pursuing a three-way trade.

 

Yeah, as much of a free spirit as old Terry is, I could think of more willing partners for a three-way.

[mudcat14]

Also, if somehow we managed to get Castellanos from Detroit, but we believe our system is already deep at that spot, we could flip him to another team that feels they have an excess of pitchers or infielders. There have been a few big deals in recent years where prospects were flipped quickly.

 

I firmly believe that if we could get Castellanos for Perkins, you fall to your knees and thank the maker! At worst he's on par with Arcia, both a rung below Buxton. Plus he's as close to MLB ready as he can be. I'd have no problem at all going into 2014 with Nick, Hicks & Arcia from LF to RF. Let Parmelee, Colabello, Doumit & Willingham slug it out for 1B/DH duties. Clete, Mastro and/or some other ham & egger can handle back-up OF duties. If Sano, Buxton or somebody else starts to push the issue before 2015, what a wonderful dilemma!