Morning lede: Is Nate Robertson the odd man out of the Tigers rotation?
There's a little more than a week left in spring training. Time is running short. The regular season starts in 10 days, and there is a large decision looming. One that is not going to be easy to make.
There's 3 pitchers vying for 2 rotation openings, and the Tigers have yet to announce who will be the 4th and 5th starters. Someone has to be the odd man out.
If certain writer is to be believed, we know who it may be.
Former Tigers beat writer and current Fox Sports MLB pundit, Jon Paul Morosi, had lots to say about the Tigers rotation via Twitter Friday night:, and status of Robertson was a big part of the discussion.
Amazing how little conversation there has been about Eddie Bonine. He was the Tigers' third-best starter at end of last year.
Obviously, the Tigers don't feel the same way, as Bonine's being used as a reliever. If he goes north with the team, it'll be as a long/middle relief man (Odds are good Bonine takes Zach Miner's bullpen slot if Miner's arm injury lingers). Not that it matters where Bonine starts the season, he's the first option if one of the starters is injured or throws the equivalent of batting practice.
Why is Bonine the first option? You'd think the pitcher who doesn't make the rotation would get the first shot at any openings. Not according to Morosi, as he says in his next tweet...
Three people have told me today that the Tigers are shopping Nate Robertson. Would have to eat money in order to move him.
So much for the old baseball bromide, "You can never have enough pitching."
Even though Robertson has pitched the best of all the rotation contenders (between himself, Jeremy Bonderman and Dontrelle Willis), he's being shopped? So what gives?
The D-Train is trade kryptonite, and I don't need to explain why. Bonderman has a bigger contract than Robertson ($12.5M compared to $10M), and has had injury issues for 3 seasons.
Robertson may be hard to trade, and the Tigers will have to eat much of his contract, but the former Mr. Gum Time is still the most tradeable of the starting pitchers.
2 seasons of highly paid, injury filled ineffectiveness hasn't made Robertson a hot property. But of the 3 pitchers mentioned, Robertson should be the easiest to unload.
After the jump...you guessed it. Another tweet!
And if the Tigers are willing to trade Robertson, you wonder if they are convinced that Dontrelle Willis belongs in the majors.
I'm not sure if the Tigers are convinced, or it's the $12M ($29M overall) the D-Train is owed making the decision for them.
Admittedly, this spring Willis has pitched better than he has in over 3 years, putting up a 1.20 ERA in Grapefruit League action. But the sample size is a whole 15 innings. Not nearly enough to wipe the slate clean of 2 seasons of epic wildness. It's not as Willis has recovered full command of his pitches, as 8 BBs and 2 HBP attest.
But the Tigers would love to get something out of their investment (in both time and money), and the D-Train, despite his bouts of wildness, is getting batters out. It's not as if he can be traded.
It's unrealistic to think the Tigers will carry one of the aforementioned pitchers as a long reliever. At anywhere between $10M and $12.5M, he would be the highest paid mop-up man in baseball history. It's not the best use of resources, to say the very least.
Which is why I'm guessing, starting with Nate Robertson, the Tigers will explore any and all trade options in hope of receiving a remotely useful player in return.
The first thing which comes to mind is Dave Dombrowski's own words back in 2002.
(paraphrasing) "Nate Robertson, who's a solid player, is going to make $10 million next year. You try to trade him!"
Dombrowski really has his work cut out for himself in cleaning up this roster mess. Then again, it is his own mess in the first place...
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
$2 million is less than 2% of the Tigers entire payroll (in other words, NOTHING), so I highly doubt that Willis’ $12 M would dictate a decision in his favor over Robertson’s $10 M — they’ll eat whoever they think is really not worth keeping. Robertson seems to have better command at this point, so with such a small dose of innings to base a decision off this spring, I’m sure that’d make him more attractive to other teams who may need a lefty.
All in all, I’m just glad they’ve pitched well this spring to allow such a conversation. It’d be nice to get something out of one of these guys, even if the Tigers have to eat 3/4 of their remaining dollars owed.
Detroit Bad Boys- SB Nation's Detroit Pistons Blog
Twitter
I would think he would be real tough to "unload"
being as he is the oldest by 5 years and coming off 2 injuries (elbow and groin). Willis should be in the pen to start, and if Nate or Bondo falter, he’s there. I read in a recent post he said he would be happy to just contribute. Let him, and until Minor and Seay get healthy, it’s reasonable to keep him.
by 77bestrookieclassever on Mar 27, 2010 6:33 AM EDT reply actions
Bonine
Amazing how little conversation there has been about Eddie Bonine. He was the Tigers’ third-best starter at end of last year.<<
-—————
Seems reasonable after the all the hype that AG received after the 2008 season and look at where he is now.
Exactly
He’s 28, and if he was a can’t miss, then why are we talking about the fourth and fifth spots, not just the fifth. He looks to be sufficient to be a long reliever/spot starter, but probably not a lot more than that.
by 77bestrookieclassever on Mar 27, 2010 6:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Gum Time
I’m not shocked the Tigers are trying to trade Robertson. I think his age and the fact that he’s trying to transition into a different kind of pitcher are influencing their decision. I don’t think they believe he can be an effective soft-tossing starter. It kind of goes against their philosphy, too, of power pitching.
Lots of teams looking for rotation depth...
But not at front of the rotation price tags…
But hey, I’d ship him to the M’s to get Robles back…
by DetroitTigersGeek on Mar 27, 2010 8:26 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
What's the bounty?
So if we trade Robertson what exactly would we be looking for in return?
by mlaw94 on Mar 27, 2010 8:42 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Somewhere between PTBNL and C-level prospect
and that’s if the Tigers eat a lot of salary. There really isn’t going to be any real return on it. It’s more like paying for half the contract to move the other half, I suspect.
by Kurt Mensching on Mar 27, 2010 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Worth about . . .
. . . a mid-rank prospect, I would think.
You try to trade Nate because
he is the most attractive to other clubs. The Tigers would have to eat less money by dealing him than either of the other two, and significantly less than just releasing one of them. As I mentioned on my site, trading Nate gives the Tigers the best chance to maximize their return, while limit the cost of moving a player. No, the haul won’t a top-prospect, more like a mid-level guy instead, but the team could save roughly $5MM in the right deal.
In short, any kind of a trade is smarter than just cutting a player, even if that player, likely Willis, is not quite as good as the guy you’re trading. The Tigers obviously think the difference between Willis and Nate is small enough to warrant a trade here.
I'd would imagine
that the Tigers end up eating about half of what he’s owed. Also I am not looking forward to seeing Dontrelle in the rotation. It won’t last.
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
they both pretty much
stink it up in the regular season
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
by Detroitchik on Mar 27, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Stil neither......
….can pitch that well….robertson got his huge deal after one mediocre season…..Hes never pitched well in a tigers uniform except for the one season……Also if you want to bring up injuries….Willis got hurt in his 2nd career start for detroit and has been overcoming that as well as knee injuries……so saying Nate had an injury isnt an excuse for nate becasue they have both been hurt.
by BennieBladesFan on Mar 27, 2010 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
and before tweaking his knee, Willis had seven walks in five innings
Continuing his struggles with the strike zone that had been apparent for the previous two years.
by Kurt Mensching on Mar 27, 2010 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh I agree....
……as had nates with getting people out….thats all im saying
by BennieBladesFan on Mar 27, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
after returning from surgery
Robertson’s ERA was under 4. Actually, 3.72. This spring, he’s had nearly a strikeout per inning and an ERA of 3.68.
I’m not saying he’s going to do that for a whole season, but he’s going to be capable at the bottom of a rotation.
Since joining the Tigers, all Willis has managed to do is self destruct.
by Kurt Mensching on Mar 27, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Remember other lefty's
Remember Tanana & Rogers. They both pitched pretty good even after they lost volocity. I say keep Robertson, he will help the team. If Bonderman can master the Split Finger/Fork Ball he will become very good & hard to hit. I say keep all three until Sea & Miner return, then make a decision. Trade or plain waivers…….We also have too many position players that could be added to a pitcher to make a trade more inticing…..
by TigersFan1957 on Mar 27, 2010 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
If you are going to trade Robertson AND eat most of his salary
why not just release Willis? You are eating $ either way, and I really think Nate has the better chance of performing well come April. It’s also unlikely you’ll get anything of value in return.
becasue they.....
…..can get a low level minor leaguer in return…..Possibly a young 3rd scaker…..We need poistion players and we can get a player for Nate…..If we release Dontrelle we wont get anything in return…..Trading Nate and eating half his salary plus a player is a better deal.
by BennieBladesFan on Mar 27, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Willis is....
…lightning in a bottle. He may break the bottle..(AGAIN!) or he may be a very pleasant surprise (Not holding breath!) Robertson has never been more than a journeyman .500 pitcher and never will be any better than that. If they can get something for him above a box of balls then they should do a deal for him.
trade
They should add Guillen to the Robertson trade and bring up Casper Wells to play in left full time. The guy is way past ready! DH Damon full time. Of course that leaves us with what to do with Maggs, as you want to see Raburn and Kelly get in there as well. Sure wish Raburn had the glove for 3rd base!
You know why Robertson has value and Willis doesn't?
Other teams think Robertson can actually help them win, and they don’t believe that about Willis. If this was a rebuilding season for the Tigers, it wouldn’t matter. But seeing as they’re going to be in a very close battle with two other teams for the division, they’re going to need every edge they can get .
As far as Robertson being a journeyman pitcher, yes. And a guy who gives you 150+ innings of league average pitching is pretty valuable at the bottom of your rotation.
Take the known quantity.
I will give you that kurt
and I concede regarding my comment, above on Nate being injured. You’re right about that. He’s been injured for so long, i forget that he was outstanding previously
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
& the beginning of 07
He pitched outstanding ball in the beginning of 07, just got no run support. I think he lost confidence in the teams offence to back him.
by TigersFan1957 on Mar 27, 2010 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions
This
And it’s why we shouldn’t trade Robertson. Because he might actually recover and supply some stability to the back of the rotation.
"[M]aybe he’s hoping we’re distracting each other while he elopes with pie. I’m on to you Kurt."- madpoopz
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Mar 27, 2010 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions
You are right
Keep him….He will help us win the division….Nobody will offer us anyone who can/will help us win the division, so keep a good guy, get rid of any person that is a hurdle….DTrain, Miner, or Seay.
by TigersFan1957 on Mar 27, 2010 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions
How much do you guys trust Jayson Stark?
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/03/starks-latest-trade-block-mets-phillies-tigers-royals.html
I don’t have ESPN Insider, but MLB Trade Rumors reports Stark saying that in addition to Robertson, the Tigers are shopping Brad Thomas and that they’re looking for a second baseman because they have concerns about Scott Sizemore (that’s news to me).
I really don't know too much about Stark
But I am beginning to have a little more faith in Sizemore, i would like to say, not true? (regarding Scotty)
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
I guess I should be more clear
According to MLBTR, the Tigers are concerned with Sizemore struggling offensively in spring, not injuries.
by SabreRoseTiger on Mar 27, 2010 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions
well
let’s see if either reply. I tweeted Tom Gage and Jason Beck and asked it’s true.
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
Come to think of it...
If they were THAT concerned about Sizemore, I don’t see why they couldn’t just give Dlugach a shot.
by SabreRoseTiger on Mar 27, 2010 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions
as I recall he did pretty good over there.
third baseman he is not. OF and 2b, not horrible apparently.
My Music: Some Sorta Giant
My Blog: Strike Three Mechanics
Heres the answer we've been waiting for Re: Sizemore
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
by Detroitchik on Mar 28, 2010 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Willis vs. Robeertson
Willis would be a better draw at the gate than Nate. More revenue.
I don't think that's true
at this point in time. I also don’t think there are many other fans who would go to the game specifically to see Willis pitch. I hit a lot of games and I can say the only time I ever think about who’s going to be on the mound is if it’s JV or Kid Rick. Personally I would rather see Nate out there, since previously he actually earned his pay with this team at one time.
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
Whats changed from last year?
The last two years we’ve had two of our starters riding the bench for like what $22M. Remember Nate wasnt a starter opening day last year. Now, the injuries are over (supposedly) so lets now trade someone. Why? Well I do understand why, lets make “some” of our money back and get something for him (Nate). I see a different Nate then the last couple of years. Whats wrong with keeping him and him maybe turning the corner and being an effective starter and in fact sign him again next year? OK, dont laugh, but why is everyone betting on the negative. If the tigers are serious about contending this year they should keep all 3. At least this year we may be able to get some service out of these contracts. Players can be traded at any time. If these guys are still performing and performing reasonably well during the MLB season with real games wouldnt thier value go up? In the mean time we can let nature take a its course and see who steps it up when the games begin. Yes we may have to throw one maybe even two away. But, if these guys didnt bounce back we were going to do that anyways. The MLB season is a long one. Pitchers can get fatigued around August, a lot can happen during this marathon, you DO need all the arms you can get. So, it doesnt look good having a $10M long reliever on paper. Well, its better then having a $10M riding the AAA pine. If these 3 guys get back to just who they were, we wil have no problems with value. If not there was no value left and they were going to be let go. I say keep em all and lets see how it shakes out.
The calender has changed.
None of those three is going to be under contract next year and maybe not signed. So, the idea is to get something while there is perceived value. Even if it nets a few risky prospects it could be more than what the Tigers came in with – trying to balance the needs of now with known holes that could really be bothersome down the road is a GM’s job.
There is also Armando and Bonine down on the farm to consider.
Dontrelle Willis apologist.

by 

























