Rays to sign Carlos Pena
I am angry, very angry. This takes away arguably our best option to replace Victor.
4 months ago
TartanElk
92 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
And it was for a deal the Tigers could have afforded
I think Carlos prefered to play in the field though and not DH and he should be able to get that opportunity in Tampa.
In response...
…to the person who asked about Abreu vs. Delmon defensively in the fanpost I made about the Pena signing that was taken down…
Abreu’s UZR was actually worse (-5.2) than Delmon’s (-2.8). So by that metric he’s actually worse defensively. I don’t Abreu is a very good option.
That rug really tied the room together.
Thanks
Always liked Abreu’s patience at the plate. Wouldn’t have been too bad to have him at the 3 spot as opposed to Delmon/Boesch
by NintendoPlaystationNumbers on Jan 20, 2012 12:51 PM EST up reply actions
Heard that the Indians offered more money, but he wanted to go to Tampa
If that was the case than Detroit wasn’t going to be a viable option anyway
by NintendoPlaystationNumbers on Jan 20, 2012 12:47 PM EST reply actions
I would too
The AL East is more or less slow-pitch softball.
by metatron5369 on Jan 21, 2012 6:25 AM EST up reply actions
Would have preferred to get someone that played OF anyway
Aside from that Cuban guy, our best option now is JD Drew IMO. Sign him and hope for a Berkman-like comeback
by NintendoPlaystationNumbers on Jan 20, 2012 12:53 PM EST reply actions
Carlos Lee isn't actually that bad
And I think he’s a better #5 fit than Pena. After doing some research, Lee was my #1 choice to strictly replace VMart.
The other sports are just sports. Baseball is a love. ~Bryant Gumbel, 1981
I'll take the other Lee
I think Derrek Lee provides more flexibility for Leyland, which he covets. Giving Cabrera more days off in the field should help too.
Yeah
This wasn’t going to happen. It made too much sense for this front office (and that’s not really an insult- just not how DD operates).
I’d like Carlos Lee. We’ll probably get Johnny Damon.
"You, on the other hand, make Eeyore look like Rainbow Brite." -johnmoz
"I think of you more as the blue book style essay of sports journalism."-Kurt Mensching
You know
Not so much Dombrowski, but rather Ilitch.
by metatron5369 on Jan 21, 2012 6:29 AM EST up reply actions
Friedman & Epstein
These guys sign all the guys I want…in Mr. Dombrowskis’ defense…i think Penas desire to play first contributed to this one..
by Wolverine119 on Jan 20, 2012 1:01 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Like Dejesus,mahaloum,pena, & scott
by Wolverine119 on Jan 20, 2012 1:47 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
If the difference
between Success and Failure this season is the difference between Carlos Pena and whoever we end up getting instead, we were in far more trouble that we initially believed.
by Big Z in Orlando on Jan 20, 2012 1:06 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
The best option is not a DH nor a first baseman
The best option is a 3B or a 2B, or even a starting pitcher. Pena is as good as any of the free agents, which are all DH types apart from Betemit, but I wouldn’t go that direction.
Avila and Boesch can bat third and fifth, or vise verse, and replace most of Victor’s production in the five hole while upgrading the three slot in a big way. We can then add production either down the lineup along with Delmon and Peralta, whom I’d have in the six and seven spots- so we’re now down to the 8 slot, or we could try to upgrade the 1 or 2 slots, and improve defensively as well.
Getting Delmon off the field is an improvement. Moving Raburn to the outfield, platooning with Dirks or someone is an improvement, and we haven’t spent a dime or traded a prospect yet. Replacing Inge/ Kelly with anyone decent or replacing Santiago against RHP’s would both be huge upgrades.
"King of Minutiae"
^this
SP, 3B, 2B, OF should be looked at. With Turner sounding decent, I move my wishlist to “that guy from Cuba” :)
Don't drive angry!
zackly!
You can’t spell Delmon Young without “D-H” (actually you can, but it sounds good). I still believe the Angels would be open to trade Macier Itzuris. Oswalt is still out there. We don’t have to trade to get a DH when we can fill that from the roster we have.
And the guy who said we should go after J D Drew should be banned.
"i think it will be mostly feast the rest of the year,"
The best option is not a DH nor a first baseman
The best option is a 3B or a 2B, or even a starting pitcher. Pena is as good as any of the free agents, which are all DH types apart from Betemit, but I wouldn’t go that direction.
Agreed, but there’s no one available that plays those positions, or at least no one good. And before you start on trading for Aybar, etc., I think there would have been some sort of option explored if DD were actually interested in upgrading those positions.
They won't trade Aybar. Maybe Maicer Izturis.
Scutaro just got traded. All depends what they want and what DD is willing to give up. Things may have changed with Victor being lost, and if so, I’d like to see the shuffle of Delmon to DH, Raburn to LF barring a Carlos Lee type acquisition, etc.
"King of Minutiae"
Matt Murton?
Anybody know if we are even considering him? What is he asking for dollar-wise?
He already has had success as a Tiger…in Japan.
"i think it will be mostly feast the rest of the year,"
Appearently, Tampa only signs former tigers
Pena, Farnsworth, Rodney, Joyce, Rhymes, damon(last year)
Appearently they are just a Detroit cast off squad. Wonder if they are calling Sheff and Todd jones to fill in the final gaps
Tired of generic music??? Exterminate All Rational Thought is here to help!
Want a DH versus RHP? Can't afford Carlos Pena?
2010-2011 versus RHP
Pena .231/.360/.469
Betemit .298/.367/.501
If I felt like I could trust leyland to keep him off defense
I would be all about it. He is almost as bad at 3B as Raburn is at 2B…I don’t understand why people think one should be no where near the infield but the other might be a solution to 3B.
I enjoy watching WB play D
Tremendous entertainment value.
mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=17143705
Can we go after Vladdy now
"Goaltending is a normal job, sure. How would you like it in your job if every time you made a small mistake, a red light went on over your desk and 15,000 people stood up and yelled at you."
-Jacques Plante
Didn't finish my post, but whatever, the point is there
"Goaltending is a normal job, sure. How would you like it in your job if every time you made a small mistake, a red light went on over your desk and 15,000 people stood up and yelled at you."
-Jacques Plante
by DetroitSports on Jan 20, 2012 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
It's getting interesting
The Tigers spent very little in the draft. They haven’t spent at all this off season. They had the 4th largest DECREASE in payroll in all of MLB from the ’10 season to the ’11 season.
Meanwhile, the Tigers went to the playoffs going to the ALCS. Big influx of cach.
Second meanwhile, ‘someone’ is buying up property like crazy in a certain area of town where it’s rumored an Arena for hockey and/or basketball is possibly being considered.
Do you believe in conspiracies? Has Mr I spent to build up his MLB franchise and is now taking the profits for other endeavors? Is Mr I done reinvesting into this team?
Is what we see now what we’re going to get?
I don’t particularly care for what is trending, concerning the Tigers. If Cespedes slips away without the Tigers making a serious bid, it might be time to investigate a thing or two about a thing or two concerning Mr I’s continued want to actually build a winner. Never thought I would say that, but I’m beginning to question.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
I hope you still get MLB broadcasts inside your sealed bunker.
by lesmanalim on Jan 20, 2012 5:09 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Lmao
"Goaltending is a normal job, sure. How would you like it in your job if every time you made a small mistake, a red light went on over your desk and 15,000 people stood up and yelled at you."
-Jacques Plante
by DetroitSports on Jan 20, 2012 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
If you're not careful
You’ll cause me to take off my tin foil hat.
Mr I hasn’t been spending on the team for a while now. Like it or not, it appears his want to go above ‘normal’ payroll has waned.
From $135MM in ’10, to $108MM in ’11 and now $108MM in ’12.
Cause for conern? Or, can blunt skulls like you see the difference? Inquiring minds want to know.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
Joker, my skull's so sharp, Klingons won't headbutt me.
by lesmanalim on Jan 20, 2012 7:12 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
It could also be the fact
that the tigers haven’t be profitable in years….
but that isn’t nearly as intriguing or conspiracy theory enough so you are obviously right with your thoughts.
You know for a "fact" that the Tigers are unprofitable?
You are pretty sure of yourself while you espouse things as “facts” that you truly have no idea of.
Also, define a “loss” for me if you would. If a corporation loses $10MM that year while the owner drew a salary of $20MM … would you suggest that the business “lost” money?
Maybe you are so knowledgable of the books, you can educate me. Please do. You obviously have knowledge of the Tigers inner workings that not many here do.
I’ll await your very educated answer on how much money the Tigers have truly “lost”.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
Forbes is a fairly reliable source, no?
Only three teams had a negative operating income in 2010: the Detroit Tigers (-$29 million), Mets (-$6 million) and Boston Red Sox (-$1 million), which collectively spent $475 million on players (including benefits and bonuses). Each ranked among the top six biggest spenders last year…
Forbes reports on a guess, and on accounting measures. In other words, the books.
Let me ask. Again, let me ask: if an owner takes $20MM in salary and his business loses $20MM … did the business lose money?
If the busness pays for many expenses of the owner, did the business(and thereby the owner)lose money?
If an owner pays say $200MM for a business, draws a salary of say $10MM a year for ten years and the business “loses” $20MM a year but that business is worth $400MM after ten years, is the business “losing” money?
Yearly, the books will say the business is. The expenses will our weigh the revenue.
But is the business truly “losing” money?
Some people get the impression that if the Tigers lose $20MM, Mr I is writing a check at the end of the year to cover the losses. That’s not the way it works.
Mr I had a VERY nice year in ‘11 with the Tigers, I’d bet. I won’t call it a “fact” as some are want to do. But with a payroll that went down $27MM, and getting to the ALCS? It was a good year.
It appears to me Mr I is taking those profits and using them elsewhere. Not on the Tigers. You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to come to that conclusion.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
I would venture a guess that Mr. I pots his personal profit from more places than just the Tigers' franchise
So I went by the books and am stopping there, because you clearly can’t be convinced otherwise.
I can't be convinced that it's a "fact" that the Tigers "haven't been profitable in years"
Which is the quote above I am disputing.
We don’t know if the Tigers took a one time charge for anything, if Mr I made a large payment on his stadium, whatever.
To say it’s a “fact” the Tigers haven’t been profitable for years is disengenuous, IMO.
If anyone has followed the Frank McCourt case, it is astounding. I don’t think Mr I runs his franchise anything like the McCourt, but McCourt was taking 5-6MM a MONTH out of that franchise. If someone suggests “yes, but they are bankrupt” I’d come back with “they wouldn’t be if Bud Selig had allowed him to sign that contract with Fox.”
Frank McCourt was making around $70MM a year in salary for a franchise that is “losing money.” How much does Mr I make?
There’s a reason owners in MLB won’t open their books. And it ain’t because they are losing money.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
That's all well and good
I don’t think it’s correct to accuse Mike Illitch of not wanting the Tigers to be a winning baseball club. Recent trends (and I’m talking since we signed Pudge in ’04) indicate that Illitch would like his team to contend for a championship.
If your original theory is correct, we may see a continued dip in the Tigers’ payroll. I would contest that, however, with the fairly extensions offered to Justin Verlander and Miguel Cabrera. Illitch could have easily let Verlander walk after his arbitration years if he were only interested in the profits that the franchise brings in. I don’t think the Tigers would have agreed to the Cabrera trade in the first place, let alone the extension, if they weren’t interested in building a winner.
Going forward, I would predict that the Tigers’ payroll hovers around the $100 million mark. I think that the $135 million spent in 2010 was more than Illitch intended on spending when he started loosening his pockets back in ‘04 with the aforementioned Pudge signing. I believe that there are business interests involved with any MLB team, and I don’t think that Illitch is an exception to this belief. However, I don’t know that I would predict that Illitch is looking to make a profit off of the Tigers to build a stadium at the expense of trying to win a championship.
by Rob Rogacki on Jan 20, 2012 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
Employee salaries
Including the owners, are part of a business’ operating expenses and are to be calculated into the total operating cost of a company. So, even is Mr. I has a salaray of 400 billion dollars and the Tigers as a business are 20 million in the red, then yes, they are in fact losing money.
Just because you don’t agree with the salary an owner, CEO, COO, or any other employee down to the janitor is making doesn’t mean that you can deduct it from the red line to make your argument work.
The Tigers are not currently a profitable company as of last reports.
The Tigers are a privately held corporation
You have no idea whether they are “profitable” or not. Unless you work for them and have seen the books.
Do you?
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
Apparently Forbes is not a reputable source when it comes to monetary figures
See the all-knowing comments above.
Rob, don't be sore
The quote was, it was a “fact” that the “Tigers haven’t been profitable in years.”
No one knows if this is a “fact” or not. The Tigers are a private company.
Is this a bit too complicated?
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
Someone knows
Quit spreading false information. I am sure there is someone in the Tigers organization that gets to look at the books…
That comment I just made? Just as silly as yours but whatever man, go on believing that “the man” is out to get you and that everyone is just spreading lies about how much money the Tigers do or don’t make year to year. It doesn’t change the fact that they are operating this way if they are losing money or not….deal with it.
You said it was "fact" that the Tigers have lost money "for years"
I’m trying to show you, it is indeed not “fact”.
You continue to muddy the waters with a bunch of other stuff. I’m not sure why.
My original point about conspiracy theories was tongue in cheek, and I doubt many read it in any other light.
Let me try and explain it as simply as I can. If you own a business that lost $2 after all expenses were paid and revenue was added, but you as sole owner were paid $3 dollars … did you lose money? The CEO, COO, CFO, and janitor don’t matter. Their salaries are already in the expenses. We’re talking about the owner here. And whether he lost money. You do know there’s a difference between the owner and the CFO, right?
So to say it’s a “fact” that the Tigers have lost money “for years”? I’m guessing that neither of us knows what the “facts” are.
But again, MLB teams don’t open their books to the public for a reason. If a franchise comes up for sale there are plenty of people standing in line to purchase. Even a “bankrupt” franchise like the Dodgers.
If you’re still confused, you can go on calling me some stuff. But the “fact” remains.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
I haven't called you anything...
Yes, even if the company is 2 dollars in the red, and the owner makes 3 dollars, the company lost money. What you don’t understand that the company and the owner are not the same thing. Even if it is a company of one, they are legal and literally two separate entities no matter how you try say it they are separate and different you are wrong, and just because one makes money doesn’t mean the other isn’t losing money.
The Tigers have lost money for years, it is as much a factual statement as we can make about their financial situation. I am sorry you don’t want to believe it, but just because you don’t want to believe it doesn’t make it a false statement. You do know the earth is round right? Just because you have never actually been in space and seen for yourself that the earth is round doesn’t make it any less round.
Does Forbes get an actual look at the Tigers books?
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
No ... I don't.
Ummm, the point was we don’t know what the “facts” are regarding the Tigers profitability.
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
I was going to comment here
but I choose not to waste my time any more than this line.
by Kurt Mensching on Jan 21, 2012 6:07 PM EST up reply actions
Yes.
The Tigers lost money.
They’re a business that has relied on backing from the ownership for some time now. This has been common knowledge for some time now.
by metatron5369 on Jan 21, 2012 6:34 AM EST up reply actions
"Common knowledge"?
Please, how long is “some time now”. Cite the source.
The Tigers are a private enterprise. We have no idea whether they lost money “for some time now” or not.
Maybe the owner wants the idea floated that they are losing money?
If your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either
It's no secret that Illitch is trying to find room for a new arena for the Red Wings
He’s been doing that for years. If you think that he’s somehow not interested in making the Tigers into a winner after last season, then I won’t stop you.
I'm ecstatic!
I’ve made it well known that I don’t want Pena. And TigerDog’s explanation summarizes my feelings.
Fine. If not Pena, then who?
I understand that signing a 1B is not as appealing as aquiring a 2B or 3B or LF, but we won’t sign anybody if we sit around and wait for a player who is the perfect fit. There are NO FA’s available that meet that criteria. We can dream all day about trading for Prado, Headley, Callaspo, or Either – but those are long shots at best. Of this list of reasonable aquisitions, who would you prefer over Pena:
Free Agents:
Magglio Ordonez (still broken)
Johnny Damon (ummm…. okay…..)
Hideki Matsui (2011 was U-G-L-Y)
Vladimir Guerrero (okay I guess, doesn’t excite me)
Trade targets:
Carlos Lee (massive salary, surrender prospects)
Bobby Abreu (three consecutive seasons of declining offense, surrender prospects)
Internal options:
Dirks to LF, Young to DH (okay I guess, doesn’t excite me)
Ryan Strieby (unproven, big question mark)
If you are “ecstatic” about not signing Pena, the surely one of the above must excite the hell out of you.
Add to the list above: Yoenis Cespedes
(Good chance we won’t win bidding, and may have to play a significant portion of 2012 in the minors).
suspect we'll hear something back about upgrading 2nd or 3rd base
Hey, I’d love for that to happen, too. Unfortunately, you can’t pull a rabbit out of a hat in the offseason.
by Kurt Mensching on Jan 20, 2012 5:55 PM EST up reply actions
That is their escape
People have no idea if DD is in talks with teams to upgrade those positions. So if a trade doesn’t happen they can complain that DD didn’t make a trade even if that is all he tried to accomplish all off season. Then if he does pull off a trade, they will complain that he gave up too much. Or that he traded for the wrong guy. Or they will continually offer trade ideas that involve 750-800 OPS guys on other teams for Delmon Young and two obscure minor league filler guys.
Not really
Of all of the names on my list, I think Lee will put up the best offensive numbers in 2012. However, I don’t believe for second that the Tigers are in a position to add $18,500,000 in payroll. Despite the beating that Singledigit is taking above, I tend to agree that there is plenty of evidence pointing to the fact that the organization is tightening the purse strings. And yes, Houston is willing to eat salary – but then the prospect cost goes up. Are we willing to part with Smyly, Crosby, and one or two others for 1 year of Carlos Lee?
I agree completely
I think there’s a fine line that the Tigers will walk between compensation and prospects to give up if they are interested in Lee. I don’t think it would take more than one prospect, however. Houston seems pretty intent on moving him.
just a guess,
but if one prospect if offerred, I’ll bet they only eat $3.5 – 4.5 mil. Still too pricey if you can grab Vlad for $5mil.
How much would you be willing to give up if Houston was willing to part with Lee and Wandy, and chip in a fair amount of cash?
Not much, because I don't want Wandy (and didn't at the 2011 trade deadline either)
If I’m Mr. I, I’d rather eat a little more salary and give up a lesser prospect for Lee alone.
Looking further into the stats, I'm leaning more towards Lee (as opposed to Vlad)
Carlos Lee’s OBP relative to his batting average (is there a stat for this?), while better than Vlad’s, isn’t anything to write home about. He takes some walks, but not at the same rate as Carlos Pena or Derrek Lee. Carlos Lee’s defense was better than Vlad’s last season in terms of UZR, but Lee was Delmon Young-esque in 2009 and 2010. Vlad has consistently been hovering around a 0.0 UZR.
One important factor to consider is that Lee has spent time at first base in recent seasons. This could provide some versatility for Leyland. Lee could play in the outfield, putting Delmon Young at DH (which may or may not be a good thing, based on UZR). Lee could also play 1B, giving Cabrera some days off while keeping his bat in the lineup.
The advantage that Vlad has is that he will be much cheaper. He will likely continue to hit for a high average, but won’t draw many walks. His power may or may not be gone, so his 2011 stats are a bit worrisome. He’s got a bazooka for an arm, which is cool. There really isn’t anything relevant to that last sentence, other than me wanting to call his arm a bazooka. Vlad also plays better RF defense than Brennan Boesch, according to UZR. The downside to this is that Boesch is better in RF than LF, also according to UZR. Vlad has never played first base.
At the end of the day, it all depends on what type of prospect is needed to pry Carlos Lee from the Astros. If we’re talking a guy like Crosby or Smyly, I’d take Vlad in a heartbeat. If it’s some low level guy (or Daniel Schlereth oh please oh please oh please oh please), I’m going for Lee.
TL/DR:
Versatility – Lee
Hitting – push
Fielding – Vlad?
Arm – Vlad
Intangibles – just get rid of Schlereth
by Rob Rogacki on Jan 20, 2012 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
Wait...
You mean that we might be able to a) get rid of Schlereth and b) add someone useful?
DO IT NOW DAVID DOMBROWSKI. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO IT NOW.
"You, on the other hand, make Eeyore look like Rainbow Brite." -johnmoz
"I think of you more as the blue book style essay of sports journalism."-Kurt Mensching
by David Tokarz on Jan 21, 2012 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
If we had to give up more than PTBNLs for Lee, that'd be robbery.
by TartanElk on Jan 20, 2012 7:20 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Houston is willing to eat salary, apparently
So it depends on the balance between salary eaten and prospect sexiness.
I'm satisfied with at least the internal options
Vlad is my first free-agent choice. I just can’t deal with CPena’s low batting average. Sure he gets on base and can hit HRs, and has a better glove than Cabrera at 1B, but he didn’t answer enough questions overall for the team.
by H2OPoloPunk on Jan 21, 2012 10:03 AM EST up reply actions
Eh
The more and more I look at it, the more I think we can solve this internally. It’s only a year, and if it fails horribly, we can make a no-frills trade to even things out.
Even if we don’t get Cespedes, letting Young DH and Raburn play in LF isn’t the end of the world.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
