Could Curtis Granderson Be Available For Trade, As Well?
by Ian Casselberry on Nov 11, 2009 5:05 PM EST
in Detroit Tigers Hot Stove
Email
PrintIf the Detroit Tigers are making Edwin Jackson available for trade offers in hopes of trimming payroll, should it be a surprise that they could be doing the same with centerfielder Curtis Granderson?
The New York Post's Joel Sherman heard from a National League executive (Lynn Henning in disguise?) that the Tigers are dangling Granderson around baseball, telling teams that he could be theirs in return for the right trade package. And as someone who covers the Yankees, Sherman believes the World Series champions might be extremely interested.
(via MLB Trade Rumors)
The Yankees will very likely have a vacancy in the outfield with Johnny Damon's contract expiring. And along with the seemingly imminent departure of Hideki Matsui, Sherman thinks Granderson would provide a much needed left-handed bat. Not to mention that he'd be an upgrade over Melky Cabrera and Brett Gardner in centerfield.
Sherman did clarify in his report, however, that the Tigers don't want to trade Granderson or Jackson. But as we said in last night's post about Jackson, you can only trade players other teams want. And no one wants any of the bad contracts Detroit would love to shear off their bloated payroll. So if the Tigers need to make a deal to fit players they need under their budget, maybe it's worth checking out what other teams might offer in return.
What could be in this for the Tigers? If they want to shed some payroll, Granderson is scheduled to be paid $5.5 million next year (and $25.75 million over the next three seasons, with a $13 million option for 2013). Perhaps Detroit is also worried about his regression at the plate this season, especially against left-handed pitching, and just isn't sure he can turn it around.
Granderson hit .183/.245/.239 against lefties this year. (There's a word for that, and "good" isn't one of them.) He also had a .234 batting average in August and September combined. And while he did hit eight home runs in that same span (and 30 for the season), that's probably indicative of an approach far too inconsistent (and strikeout-prone) from someone expected to be one of the Tigers' best hitters. For the year, he batted .249/.327/.453.
But it's not just about the bat with Granderson. He provides excellent outfield defense (though it didn't look that way at times, late in the season), in arguably one of the more difficult centerfields to play in the majors. UZR ranks him among the top centerfielders in baseball.
That's not something easily replaceable. Especially when there don't appear to be any suitable replacements in the minors. (Maybe Casper Wells disagrees with that.) A replacement centerfielder might be part of the return trade package, of course. Sherman names Austin Jackson as a top prospect that the Yankees would presumably give up in a Granderson deal.
You're also talking about someone who's made an impressive effort to help out the local community. Granderson won the Marvin Miller Man of the Year Award for the work he's put in with his Grand Kids Foundation, as well as through the Detroit Tigers Foundation, to raise funds that help provide books, supplies, and athletic equipment to inner city schools in Detroit and throughout Michigan.
Those efforts might not be tireless, unfortunately, as Lynn Henning and Jim Leyland both raised concerns that Granderson wore himself down with his off-field work, and perhaps needs to devote more of his focus to baseball.
No, that charity work might not result in wins on the field (and ultimately, maybe that's what matters most). But you'd like to think that sort of thing goes a long way toward a team ingratiating itself with a community, and building some support and devotion among fans. Trading a player who's arguably the face of the team to many fans (especially the young ones Granderson helps) isn't something that should be taken lightly. Surely, the Tigers know that.
Once again, this raises the worst fears about next year's budget. What exactly are the Tigers looking to do? What figure are they looking at? On one hand, I'd like to say this is smart business, looking to see what a marketable young player might yield in return. On the other, it sends a pretty bad message to your fanbase.
72 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
are they freaking insane?
Wait what? An All-Star pitcher and All-Star CF (who is under a nice cheap contract BTW!). NOOOOOO. Seriously, no.
Trade Granderson?
I feel like a new hitting coach would be a better remedy for his weak LHP efforts than trading Grandy away………
I know that he’s a fan favorite, but this is not a ridiculous notion. This all depends on what direction the Detroit Tigers are heading in 2010. I can see it happening, to be honest. And, I wouldn’t be totally against it depending on the context.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
i posted this in another thread....
But moving grandy and jackson for cheap prospects sends us on a one-way trip back to baseball siberia. All the goodwill the team has built since 06 would be toast. And the stadium would be half empty for the entire season. If we could get proven players back, that is one thing. But giving away all stars for prospects turns us into the Pittsburgh Pirates. Detroiters will not go to the park to watch that kind of baseball.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 5:26 PM EST via mobile reply actions
a pessimist...
Is just an optimist with experience.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 6:25 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
half empty
Because the numbers will be going down. If they were trending up, it would be half-full.
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
Call me fool if you like..
but I’ll still be there. I love our boys. I’ve always loved this team. Play good, bad…win, lose or whatever. I’ll watch always have, always will. If the CoPa is half empty, I’ll get a better seat…
I'm not good at speculating on trades.
Would asking for Phil Hughes and Austin Jackson be too much? Not enough?
not that i would know...
But asking for hughes would be a lot.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 5:45 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Meh
I don’t like Jackson- his power evaporated this year and many people question whether or not he’s overrated. I’d personally want Montero and either Hughes or Chamberlain. We’re talking all star, superstar CF here.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
This is why I have gray hairs
I know it’s appropriate to listen to any and all offers and I can understand some reasons for considering trading Jackson (bad down the stretch 2 years in a row) and Grandy (bad against lefties) and I trust DD would bring back some good players in return. But I don’t want to hear. You tweak a few things with these guys and ride out 2010. Maybe we contend because the division should be bad again and maybe we don’t. All I want is for DD to not add any multi year deals unless they decide to give JV or Jackson a deal. After 2010 we will have so much more payroll flexibility it’ll be crazy. Why deal any of the positive parts we have going forward when we could be in great shape after 2010. I can already tell I am not going to enjoy this off-season.
I can't believe I ate the whole thing!
by tigerfaninChicago on Nov 11, 2009 5:54 PM EST reply actions
much of this goes through...
It will be tough to enjoy next season, nevermind the off season.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 6:01 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
ding ding ding ding ding!
After 2010 we will have so much more payroll flexibility it’ll be crazy. Why deal any of the positive parts we have going forward when we could be in great shape after 2010.
This is the important point to me. Don’t get rid of someone that you will just be trying to replace in another year – at a higher price I’m sure than the people they already HAVE!
Maybe Granderson did spread himself too thin. He’s not an idiot – if he did, he knows by now, and next year will be able to scale back his community work so he still has a positive impact, but not to the detriment of his play. He’s smart enough to figure out what he needs to do.
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
But who are they going to be spending that money on? The free agent class after next year looks, well, as uninspiring as this year. The big catches would be Albert Pujols (no way he gets to FA), Carlos Pena and Joe Mauer. Pujols/Pena are “no’s” with Miggs there (unless Pena/Miggs are DH’ing) and Mauer’s going to cost A LOT. So I don’t think sitting on our hands just waiting for money to untie itself will solve our problems. We still lack young talent in the entire system. I guess you could argue that money will be available for the draft, but it’s not like we haven’t spent a lot of money in the draft going over slot just this past year for guys like Daniel Fields. So I’m not buying that, either.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
It's not about who we will get
It’s about what we can do. Let’s go ahead and say 2010 the Tigers go 81-81. We see positive things from Avila, Sizemore, Perry, Raburn and perhaps another young arm in the Bulpen emerges. We will have a top three to our rotation that consists of JV, Jackson and Porcello (I will defer to Demondeaconfan for an ETA on Casey Crosby), Miggy will be at 1b, Grandy will be in CF. So potentially our lineup card may look like this:
1b. Miggy
2b. Sizemore
SS. ?
3b.?
LF: Raburn ?
CF: Grandy
RF: Clete?
DH: Gullien
Starters: JV, Jackson, Porcello, Crosby?, ?
Bullpen: Perry, ?
Seems like a lot of ?s right? I would argue though that there is a solid foundation there and trading pieces away now may only add more question marks if the guys we get in return don’t work out. I’m not expecting them to land a major free agent in 2011, but having a foundation you believe in will mean that we can hopefully fill in the roster with 2nd tier players effectively. The system is lacking talent but it’s not baron. I liked a lot of what I saw out of guys who were called up this past year and if a few of them pan out we will be in good shape.
I can't believe I ate the whole thing!
by tigerfaninChicago on Nov 11, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions
Crosby in 2012
Along with Turner. We may get Oliver up in 2011.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 10:20 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks
I can't believe I ate the whole thing!
by tigerfaninChicago on Nov 12, 2009 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
So essentially you’re hanging on to the core of a team that is probably a 75 win team, max. Adding wins is a difficult business (remember how the 2007 Tigers team was supposed to be BETTER?), so we’re probably going to be adding, max, another 3 wins to a team of that core between SS and 3B.
I’d prefer to rebuild then be stuck in the wonderful world of mediocrity.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Pythagorean record- third order
81-81 last year. We lose the below replacement 4th and 5th starters, put a replacement level player in LF (a healthy Guillen or Raburn), hope Ordonez improves over replacement level in RF and use someone who can hit as a DH.
Gain a win in the 4th starter role, a win in the 5th starter role, a win in LF (at least), a win in RF (hopefully) and a win at DH, and that’s 5 easy wins- if you maintain the status quo. You telling me 87 wins can’t compete in the Central?
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 12, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions
Who’s gaining a win in the 4/5 starting roles? I full expect Edwin Jackson to regress next year (not buying the first half of the year and I’m putting my money on him going back to career norms over just being tired/abused in the first half — even though Leyland killed him with long outings in the first half) and Porcello to maybe improve. I’m not expecting a huge jump from him as he was actually pretty awful in 2009 (thought 90% of Tigers fans won’t admit it).
Where are you getting a win at DH? Is Jim Thome coming to Detroit? Probably not. There’s not the room on the payroll for him. Will Maggs improve? Probably. But is that the real Ryan Raburn? I don’t know. Is Scott Sizemore’s defense going to submarine any offensive upgrade he gives over Polanco? I don’t know. Who is playing SS? I don’t know. Is Carlos Guillen/whoever else is in LF going to be giving positive production? I don’t know. Was Clete Thomas’ supreme defense last year for real? I don’t know.
I think there are a whole lot more questions on this roster than anyone’s really saying. I don’t think this is anything more than the 81-win team with little room in the payroll to upgrade.
Essentially we’re just going to have to roll out the same lineup (with some changes in rookies getting starting job at 2B and maybe C and then injury risks in both corners spots in the OF, a 3B coming off major knee surgery which could lower his range which would lower his total value … if his defense slips, his value really plummets) and just crossing our fingers.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Bonderman/Robertson/a healthy Galaraga/Marte
They each pick up a win near the back of the rotation. Raburn picks up a win in LF, Guillen picks up a win at DH.
There may be questions on this roster, but there are just as many on the other AL Central rosters.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 15, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions
Trading Granderson doesn’t make us the Pittsburgh Pirates . It just makes us a team looking to rebuild and just bide your time until your rash of terrible contracts come off the books in a couple years.
And lets not dance around it: Dave Dombrowski is the GM most handcuffed by the economy (maybe Toronto and their new GM Alex Alphahatetotrytospellhisname). Even though Granderson is a bargain given his production and what he’s actually being paid, he is still, in fact, being paid. And that’s money that Mike Illitch is putting up out of his pocket and I know that he’s continued to pine for a title in baseball, but at some point he has to put business first — because this is a business. He’s losing money and hell, the Yankees lost money this year. And they won the World Series (a.k.a. had a deep playoff run + playoff revenue).
If Dave Dombrowski thinks the best thing to do moving forward is to rebuild, then I see no reason to really not explore trading Granderson and Jackson (who’s regression in the 2nd half I think is legit — he was way over his head in the first half and the 2nd half was much more in line with his actual production in the past) and look to build younger.
No fans want to root for terrible teams but the Detroit Tigers 100% WILL HAVE TO rebuild at some point. And that’s likely in the near future given the dearth of high-end talent in the minors (or even major league talent, for that matter) and the old lineup that only is getting older next year.
2010 is probably the final year to even make the playoffs. But going into 2009 the projections were Detroit was a-mid-80’s win team and we won that. It was only through the miraculous mediocrity of the AL Central that we were even in a division title race. I think being in a race is clouding the judgment on the team: they were mediocre and were even worse than their record indicated.
The more and more I think about it, the more I think it’s time to rebuild. And if moving Curtis Granderson is apart of that … well, it happens. No one is expendable, really (though Granderson is close to).
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
by that logic.....not to be argumentative..
Why keep cabby or jv or porcello? Why not dump everyone? And I said that trading grandy and jackson for prospects would turn us into the pirates, not trading them out of hand. But you have two relatively cheap established players. You aren’t going to get much cheaper for similar quality. And wasting prime years of jv or cabby is silly if you aren’t trying to win.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 6:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
+1
Rebuilding involves keeping core players that are locked up for long periods of time for cheap. If we were going to rebuild, you’d trade Inge, Verlander, Jackson and Laird, since they’re either old or not locked up (and in the cases of Verlander/Jackson, you try to lock them up).
It may be time to rebuild, but you don’t sell the 28 year old centerfielder with young player skills on a team friendly deal unless you get a steal.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 6:56 PM EST up reply actions
You lock of EJax already? Is everyone convinced he’s a No. 2 starter? What do you lock him up for? He just had a career year in his mid-20’s, but his second half was in line with his career norms. So, do you over pay for a career year and then sit on the contract like you’re doing with Jeremy Bonderman, Dontrelle Willis, Nate Robertson?
I am surprised with the amount of bad deals Dombrowski’s handed out that everyone isn’t more gun shy about signing someone who’s had one great half of a season, and the rest all about the 4-5 starter level a contract.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Or trade him
Either or. You just missed the entire point- you keep what you lock up and jettison everything else.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
No, I got the point. It just seems like no one is even open to the discussion of dealing the Grandy’s or the EJax’s (still stunning amounts of love that he gets). That’s just an unrealistic viewpoint.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Rebuilding is still trying to win. It’s just a matter of win now.
You don’t dump Miguel Cabrera because his contract is so large that he’s unmovable. Porcello is making league minimum. Granderson’s getting a raise in his annual salary but is cheap enough to still be attractive to other teams in what’s been a rough 15 months or so in the economic climate but valuable enough to net a bevy of talent to help the team — some of that I’m sure will be able to help immediately.
And trading Justin Verlander isn’t happening because we have not signed him “long term” like we have Granderson. Granderson’s income is escalating at an agreed rate. Verlander’s income is still escalating but we don’t know to what. He’s likely to get a big raise in arbitration this year if he doesn’t get a long term contract.
Add in that we don’t know the exact budget for the Tigers. It very well could be Granderson OR Verlander. There’s a chance, given that Verlander’s getting a raise, someone’s going to have to go. As much as we wish someone would take on the dead weight contracts out of charity, it’s not happening.
Someone of value would have to go.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
In that case
Why not just trade Verlander? He’d probably command more, and pitching is notoriously more volatile than position players.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 6:59 PM EST up reply actions
I never said I was against that either. EVERYONE is tradeable in theory. Cabrera is the safest because his deal is the largest so few teams could take him on. Outside of him, everyone can be logically traded depending on Dombrowski’s mindset. If he thinks it’s time to kick in the rebuilding mode, then it might as well be time to at least explore moving one or the other/both.
And what no one else is answering (or asking, really) is what we do with the roster in the future? Sure money is coming off the books but FA’s after 2010 aren’t promising/aren’t of needs for us. So, we just hope the money coming off the books is going to cure the holes our roster has?
At some point, we have to rebuild. This is one of the older lineups in the AL and the window’s closing fast (I’m saying it’s shut, for what it’s worth…) to make a run for a title. Most teams won’t be contenders for decades upon decades.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
No, I mean practically
If we assume that a rebuilding team sacrifices two years of development, aren’t we better off losing the more volatile assets (and the ones we’re deeper in) as opposed to the stable asset locked up for a long period of time?
Essentially, pitching for hitting and more pitching prospects (E-Jax for Brandon Wood and an Angels pitching prospect, for instance).
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions
What are you considering the volatile assets?
And I’m coming off way scatter-brained at the moment. This is mostly me just trying to figure out how I’d like to see the team go in the immediate future.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Pitching is volatile
Injury risk is huge there. So you sell the ace and the number 2 (knowing full well that we have a better shot at developing more pitching to replace them) for position prospects (our weakness) and some more live arms.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
Oh. I can get behind this. Depends on the mindset of Dombrowski/the front office. I want to go full out if we’re going to rebuild (I don’t think we are).
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
any deal for anyone must include immediate help
Or we are rhe pirates. And worse, that would make all the statements about committing to fielding a competitive team a song and dance. We sat through 16 seasons of non-competitive baseball. The franchise won’t survive another period like that.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 7:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
It does not make us the Pirates. The Pirates, in my opinion, have been well run since Neal Huntington took over. And lumping in all of the GM’s in that 15 year span with Huntington is unfair to him and the good deals he’s made.
If we do it poorly, that makes us the Pirates. Why can’t make shrewd trades and be Seattle? in a better position 12 months after starting to rebuild than we were before? Or the Rockies who have change directions and gotten better after giving Dan O’Dowd time? Why does it always default to the Pirates. Dombrowski started collecting the talent in florida after being forced into a fire-sale after the 1997 season.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
the pirates are well run...
In the sense that they grow prospects and then dump them for more prospects when they refuse to pay them. No thanks. I would take being the rockies, I guess. I am not trying to slam any individual gm but there is zero point in being a pirates fan. They will never win under that model. They break out the party hats if they are within 10 games of 500 by memorial day. No thanks.
by rook34 on Nov 11, 2009 7:13 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Misnomer. Again, you’re lumping in the current front office with the past and that is wrong. That’s like saying the Tigers are poorly run for having 1 post season appearance since 1990 and lumping Dombrowski and Randy Smith together.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
Yeah
This is pretty much right. A rebuild wouldn’t be a horrible strategy- but losing a superb 28 year old CF at the bottom of his value is.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
It’s not the bottom of his value. He was as valuable in 2009 as he was in 2008. He’s a 3-4.5 player depending on luck.
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
I know that
But other teams will point to his slash stats and say he’s less valuable- common knowledge still tends to prevail in front offices (except for Boston, Oakland, Seattle, TB, and a few others).
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 12, 2009 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t know about that. I’m not sure of the actual number, but I’m fairly certain upwards of 20 teams have quantitative analysts to help with decisions (though the amount they trust those guys varies from team to team, obviously) and even if they don’t like the offense that much, everyone pretty much agrees he’s a good defender in the scouts eyes (as far as I know).
Also, if the teams are as simple as looking at the slash stats, they’ll see he walks at a good clip with good power and that he was good offensively in he past and will hope for a rebound because he’s “in his prime” even though the prime is normally 26-28 (sometimes 30-32).
And now at Beyond the Boxscore and Project Prospect!
so the Tigers are making it known players are on the table
I’m not understanding the uproar and the white flag for 2010 talk. Jackson and Granderson are two players that many teams would like. What’s the harm and seeing what can be had in return? Unless a deal comes along that DD can’t refuse Grandy and E-Jax will be wearing the Old English D next year.
http://www.fromthecopa.blogspot.com
by rock n rye on Nov 11, 2009 6:32 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Wow
let’s see if I can figure out the 2010 defense.
First base: Cabrera
Second: ??
SS: ????
Third: BInge
Left field: Guillen
Center: ??
Right Field: Maggs
Catcher: ??
Pitching: Can we go with a 2 man rotation. heehee JV, Porcello
Tammy
ROOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!
I can't believe I ate the whole thing!
by tigerfaninChicago on Nov 11, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions
FFS
now heyman’s including binge in the mix. I wish it were possible to just boycott the baseball related corner of the internet until april. http://bit.ly/1gjGfp
at this point I'm not about to speculate the worst
I feel pretty confident neither inge or grandy are going anywhere.it kind of feels like they’re just messing with us now. haha
I have calmed a bit.
I am now of the mind that DD might indeed say, “You can have Grandy. But you get Carlos Guillen, too!”.
That ain’t happening.
No sane GM would trade for Inge.
He’s now coming off two major knee surgeries and was among the worst hitters in baseball this season.
Getting rid of Granderson or Jackson as a salary dump makes no sense—you don’t make that kind of move unless a bankruptcy judge orders you to.
Trading them to restructure the team might make sense, but it would depend on the deal. Not something to be done casually.
“No sane GM would trade for Inge.”—so, you’re proposing to trade him to Kansas City?
We deal them Ordonez
Or Willis.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 11, 2009 10:22 PM EST up reply actions
There's a huge gap between Magglio and Willis
Maggs is overpaid but the potential to contribute is definitely still there. I mean, when all was said and done the guy finished the year at .310, and we wouldn’t have gotten to a playoff if it wasn’t for him. In contrast, Dontrelle has won one game as a Tiger.
by SabreRoseTiger on Nov 11, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
MAKES NO sence
Grandy Ed Jackson and Longoria were the 3 lowest paid all-stars last yr..you cant get a better price for these kind of players…grandy is a very good player,and a GREAT young man Tigers would be stupid to trade him..Jaba and Hughes proved they are OVER-Rated Jabas ERA vs .500+ teams(including playoffs) was 7.88 and Hughes was OVER 12.50…
Is this how we're going to spend the offseason...
Wondering just how long our boys are going to remain “our” boys? I came home from work half-convinced that in the ensuing four hours, Granderson had been traded to the Yankees for Francisco Cervelli, Ramiro Peña, and Nick Swisher. Anyone else want to return to two days ago when all we had to do was bemoan Polanco’s departure (cuz if the payroll situation is dire enough to start trading away EJ and Grandy, there’s not a chance in hell we offer any of the FAs arbitration)?
I really think...
EJ and Grandy are being hung out there on contingencies-trying to get someone to take one of the toxic contracts as well.
these trade rumors are too stressful for me...
my blood pressure can’t take it!
My Music: Some Sorta Giant
New Song: One Days Work
We only have to bridge the gap of 2010
Then the worst contracts will be coming off the books. Grandy is only owed $5.5 next year, and Jackson MIGHT make $4 million. These are absolute steals for next year.
If we are this desperate to save money for 2010, a better idea would be trading Guillen and paying for half his contract. True, we’d probably end up subsidizing at least $6 million of what he is owed, but at least we would keep our core players together and stay competitive. Plus, we have PLENTY of good replacements for someone like Guillen, but none for Grandy and Jackson. We should trade where we are deep, not where we are shallow.
A lifelong Tigers fan
I refrain from buying jeresys
for this exact reason… But, with our boys in first place for so long I was inspired to drop $175+ on a Grandy jersey at the CoPa…. Thinking about putting it on eBay before a deal is done… I hate MLB… Wish we could go buy a WS too…
by MrPants20 on Nov 12, 2009 5:27 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Ebay
I got my Grandy for 50 and my Cabby for 40.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Nov 12, 2009 8:18 PM EST up reply actions
They ain't trading Kaline or Tram.
Those are the only two I’ll ever buy.
Have faith. Grandy may not be going anywhere just yet.
Now the rumor is...
there are discussions of dealing him to the Angels…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
