Rosenthal: Sheffield to Rangers Makes Baseball Sense

by Ian Casselberry on Dec 22, 2008 1:00 PM EST in Detroit Tigers News

Following up on a rumor that circulated during the winter meetings, FOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal thinks the Texas Rangers and Gary Sheffield are a good fit.

Gary Sheffield to the Rangers makes baseball sense — the Rangers are too left-handed and the Tigers too right-handed. Problem is, the Rangers are short on money, making it particularly unwise for them to invest in a 40-year designated hitter who will earn $14 million next season. If the Tigers are motivated to move Sheffield — as it appears they are — they will need to include a significant amount of money ...

And that's probably why such a trade won't happen. Why would the Tigers pay Sheffield all of that money to play for another team next season? It's not like they'd be saving money that could then be used on a closer.

If they needed to clear a spot for a younger player to get a look, such as they did years ago when Damion Easley was released with $14 million remaining on his contract, that would be one thing. But Matt Joyce has been traded, so the Tigers don't need to make room for him. Do they want to get a look at Jeff Larish so badly that they'd shed Sheff? Would they like to use the DH spot to give Carlos Guillen and Magglio Ordonez more rest during the season?

(I'd be mildly intrigued by some sort of package that might include Frank Catalanotto coming back to Detroit, but even if he provided a left-handed bat off the bench, I'm not sure how much he really has left to give the Tigers. Hank Blalock might also be an intriguing possibility.)

SB Nation's Rangers blog, Lone Star Ball, isn't too enthused about the idea of getting Sheffield, either.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good riddance

I may be the only one – but I think any way Detroit can git rid of Sheffield it will make their 2009 better. I don’t care if the Rangers send us a box of baseballs. Sheff has been on every team in the league for a reason – he is not a good locker room guy. I could get past the chemistry if he was tearing the cover off the ball. But if the Rangers are willing to take a guy with a terrible attitude who hit .225 last year – fine with me. Having Sheff also clogs up the DH spot – if Leyland can give Guillen, Cabrera, Thames, and Maggs a DH rotation everyone would have a better shot at staying heatlhy.

by jkagey on Dec 22, 2008 1:11 PM EST reply actions

Winning breeds chemistry

I’m not happy about having Sheffield on the team in 2009 for $14m, but giving him an extension is Dombrowski’s fault, not Sheff’s.

That being said, no one is going to care what Sheffield says or does if The Tigers are winning and The Tigers won’t win without better pitching, so all in all Gary Sheffield is fairly inconsequential aside from the fact that his contract is draining much needed resources.

Keep in mind however that the guy hit 11 HR in August and September which may be a sign that he was getting healthy towards the end of the season. In September alone he hit .231/.341/.487 but with a seriously depressed BABIP (.197!). With a bit more luck and a healthy shoulder I think he can put in a good season for us next year.

And if there’s one thing I think you have to admit about Gary it’s that he has a lot of pride and won’t coast through a season just because it’s his last. If he’s healthy, he’ll hit.

by MacRae on Dec 22, 2008 1:50 PM EST reply actions

A few cases:

1.) Pitching/defense stays rough, Sheff hits like he did overall in 08. Not great from a winning standpoint, but he could be benched freely, and cups of coffee could be passed out as desired. Likelihood of a deadline trade: Who knows? The Reds managed to move Griffey at deadline and only paid half his remaining salary and buyout. However, Griffey was hitting slightly better than Sheff did last year, which is what I’m considering “08 Sheff”.

2.) Pitching/defense stays rough, Sheff hits like he did in late 08. Depends on just how rough the pitching is. If we’re nowhere near contention, this would be the optimal scenario for a deadline trade.

3.) P/D good, Sheff bad. A bit like #1, but maybe with a little more desperation on our end near the deadline, to see if we can free up resources to get us some playoff parts.

4.) P/D good, Sheff good. Best case, obviously.

Personally, I think he’ll come into the season healed up and ready to go. I’m sure he doesn’t want to end a good career by getting thrown out on his ass. And whether he is or not, I think we’re likely to get better deal for him at or near the deadline than we are right now. Moving him right now, in a market where Dunn and Burrell are still at large, would probably require us to pay so much of his contract, we might as well keep him around to see if he ends up good.

by cherub_daemon on Dec 22, 2008 3:07 PM EST up reply actions

I believe when I see it

I think Blalock will be there DH this year. Rangers outfield is full but they do have an small opening at 3B. Do the Tigers have a spare 3B? Too bad this was not the 08 free agent season.

by Barry2 on Dec 22, 2008 2:38 PM EST reply actions

T'is a "contract year....

for the Shef, so who knows? I am sure he thinks he can get another two year deal out of somebody if he hits the ball this year, plus if he is healthy…….BUT, I would fine (more than!) with him doing it for somebody else.

by Zappatista on Dec 22, 2008 6:39 PM EST reply actions