Sox Trade Possibilities

[Marqhead]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

$20 says they don't break 100.

[Noneck]

Hahn will be live on WTTW Chicago tonight tomorrow at 7pm.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by Marqhead

$20 says they don't break 100.

I'd put their over/under at... I don't know.. 89?

[SoxNation05]

Originally Posted by blandman

Everyone also forgets Victor Martinez and Tori Hunter are replacing black holes of production in that Tiger lineup (and in Hunter's case, becoming a much better corner OF defender). That lineup and that pitching staff....jeez. It would be a MAJOR disappointment if they didn't win 105 games. It's not a stretch they could break the all time record for victories in the regular season. The only "hole" is that they've got a phenom flame throwing youngster primed to be their closer. And to be perfectly honest, there isn't a reliever on our roster I wouldn't trade straight up for him.

If we're a contender, its for the wild card only. Unless we seriously address our lineup issues. Like by signing Michael Bourne, for starters.

Wow. They would need to improve 29 games...

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by SoxNation05

Wow. They would need to improve 29 games...

This it's the same guy who famously said Derrick Rose would be an "epic bust," so take his doomsday prognostications with a grain of salt.

[MtGrnwdSoxFan]

Originally Posted by blandman

Everyone also forgets Victor Martinez and Tori Hunter are replacing black holes of production in that Tiger lineup (and in Hunter's case, becoming a much better corner OF defender). That lineup and that pitching staff....jeez. It would be a MAJOR disappointment if they didn't win 105 games. It's not a stretch they could break the all time record for victories in the regular season. The only "hole" is that they've got a phenom flame throwing youngster primed to be their closer. And to be perfectly honest, there isn't a reliever on our roster I wouldn't trade straight up for him.

If we're a contender, its for the wild card only. Unless we seriously address our lineup issues. Like by signing Michael Bourne, for starters.

Aside from Verlander, their staff isn't all that special, and their bullpen is a joke. They don't even have a closer as of yet. Even if this hard-throwing youngster (which is the type of pitcher the Sox normally feast on) pans out, they still don't have anyone to get the ball to him. Let's see what happens before you crown the Tigers as the successors to the '27 Yankees.

[blandman]

Yeah. Everything that could possible go wrong for the Tigers did last year and they still won the division. They've addressed two of their holes with star players, and are benefiting now from a full year of Sanchez in the rotation, which 1-5 is probably the best in the AL. And people think their over under is the underachieving number that a much worse Tiger team put up last year? If the Tigers win only 89 games, it's because you're looking at the standings in August. The Tigers are far and away the best team in the American League now, probably the best team in baseball. I know how this board seems to hate pundits, but there isn't a ranking or listing out there that doesn't say the exact same thing. Most have the Tigers winning 100+ games.

edit: Do not take this to mean I think we should not compete this season. I don't think there's any chance we win the division, true, but there are two wild cards. And we're not prospect heavy; we need to be trying to win now. It's probably our current core's last chance at it. We're probably not as good as last year (I don't share the optimism that Danks coming back from the type of injury he is will be better this soon), and we're a few pieces away from being good enough. Like I said, Michael Bourne would solve a lot of issues for us. Marquee leadoff, great defensive OF, and gives us a great LF platoon of Viciedo (who can hit lefties) and De Aza. Solves leadoff, makes defense better, makes bench stronger, makes Viciedo's black hole at bats against righties go away. And really, the team is lacking in marquee talent compared to other teams. We need something like this.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by MtGrnwdSoxFan

Aside from Verlander, their staff isn't all that special, and their bullpen is a joke. They don't even have a closer as of yet. Even if this hard-throwing youngster (which is the type of pitcher the Sox normally feast on) pans out, they still don't have anyone to get the ball to him. Let's see what happens before you crown the Tigers as the successors to the '27 Yankees.

WHAT?!

They are the consensus best rotation in the league. I'd be interested to hear who you think isn't good in that rotation. Scherzer? Fister? Sanchez? Where do you think those guys would slot into our rotation? Because from here, they all look like obvious choices right after Sale.

[DumpJerry]

Originally Posted by blandman

WHAT?!

They are the consensus best rotation in the league. I'd be interested to hear who you think isn't good in that rotation. Scherzer? Fister? Sanchez? Where do you think those guys would slot into our rotation? Because from here, they all look like obvious choices right after Sale.

Sorry, but Verlander is the only "special" guy in their rotation. The other ones are good, but not good enough to keep an opposing Manager up at night worried about facing them.

I don't know how many more real good season Verlander has left in his shoulder. He's a fireballer who packs in the innings each season. If he does not change this, his shoulder will start barking at him big time.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by DumpJerry

I don't know how many more real good season Verlander has left in his shoulder. He's a fireballer who packs in the innings each season. If he does not change this, his shoulder will start barking at him big time.

Kind of ironic you're so eager to jump on any member of the "WSI Medical Staff" who brings up the concerns scouts have had with Chris Sale his projected longevity but have no problems advancing baseless medical diagnoses about Verlander.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by DumpJerry

Sorry, but Verlander is the only "special" guy in their rotation. The other ones are good, but not good enough to keep an opposing Manager up at night worried about facing them.

I don't know how many more real good season Verlander has left in his shoulder. He's a fireballer who packs in the innings each season. If he does not change this, his shoulder will start barking at him big time.

I don't know where to begin.

Verlander is not breaking down. He's not shown any signs of that, and is never injured. I don't know where that's coming from. That's like looking at Roger Clemens or Randy Johnson at age 28 and saying "boy they throw hard, bet they're out of the league in a few years".

Do you know who led the AL in strikeouts last year? Verlander of course, being his normal self. Know who was just barely second? Max Scherzer. And he did it in fewer innings. In fact, Scherzer had a better second half of the season than Verlander did, and was the obvious ace of that rotation. And no, Verlander didn't have a down second half. Scherzer's that good, and is an ace on probably 20 other teams in the league.

Do you know what Doug Fister's ERA was the last two seasons? 2.83 and 3.45. Not a misprint. Other than Sale, we don't have a starter that can claim something like that. He's an ace or a 2 on most staffs. He's a 3 or 4 for the Tigers.

Ah yes, and Annibal Sanchez. Who many claim isn't as good as Gavin Floyd. Despite the fact that in a decade in the league, he's always had an ERA in the 3's.

Not that special. Right....

[Chez]

I agree that going into this season that Detroit is "the team to beat." I also thought that in October, the Lakers were the team to beat in the Western Conference. You gotta play the games, right?

[DumpJerry]

Originally Posted by blandman

I don't know where to begin.

Verlander is not breaking down. He's not shown any signs of that, and is never injured. I don't know where that's coming from. That's like looking at Roger Clemens or Randy Johnson at age 28 and saying "boy they throw hard, bet they're out of the league in a few years".

Do you know who led the AL in strikeouts last year? Verlander of course, being his normal self. Know who was just barely second? Max Scherzer. And he did it in fewer innings. In fact, Scherzer had a better second half of the season than Verlander did, and was the obvious ace of that rotation. And no, Verlander didn't have a down second half. Scherzer's that good, and is an ace on probably 20 other teams in the league.

Do you know what Doug Fister's ERA was the last two seasons? 2.83 and 3.45. Not a misprint. Other than Sale, we don't have a starter that can claim something like that. He's an ace or a 2 on most staffs. He's a 3 or 4 for the Tigers.

Ah yes, and Annibal Sanchez. Who many claim isn't as good as Gavin Floyd. Despite the fact that in a decade in the league, he's always had an ERA in the 3's.

Not that special. Right....

They have a one-stud rotation. The others are pretty good, but not studs. Also their defense is horrendous and they are one the most streaky teams in MLB.

Other than that, crown them.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by Chez

I agree that going into this season that Detroit is "the team to beat." I also thought that in October, the Lakers were the team to beat in the Western Conference. You gotta play the games, right?

Yeah but the Lakers had a ton of issues, including depth and attitudes. This is a Tigers team that severely underachieved, but meshed at the right time, pulling together to both make the playoffs and then get into the World Series. Now they took that team and added great players to their few deficiencies.

I don't know where the holes are. Some people say pen, but their pen is solid. They just lost their closer. They've got a great rookie ready. Suppose he falters...the Tiger's system is not bereft. This would be an issue for maybe two months. They'll be plenty of closers available, just as there are every year.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by Chez

I agree that going into this season that Detroit is "the team to beat." I also thought that in October, the Lakers were the team to beat in the Western Conference. You gotta play the games, right?

Pretty much and even if Detroit wins 105+ games next year (which I am going on the record now that I am highly, HIGHLY skeptical of), so what? Nobody gets an award for being the best team in the regular season. If the 2012 Tigers, a miserable collection of talent that spent most of the season under .500, can win the pennant then the only goal really does seem to be to just find a way to get to October.

Originally Posted by blandman

Yeah but the Lakers had a ton of issues, including depth and attitudes. This is a Tigers team that severely underachieved, but meshed at the right time, pulling together to both make the playoffs and then get into the World Series. Now they took that team and added great players to their few deficiencies.

I don't know where the holes are. Some people say pen, but their pen is solid. They just lost their closer. They've got a great rookie ready. Suppose he falters...the Tiger's system is not bereft. This would be an issue for maybe two months. They'll be plenty of closers available, just as there are every year.

This is a ridiculously inconsistent argument in that every prognisticator that you bow down to about Detroit a few posts ago also had the Lakers as a lock to be one of the top teams in the West. So you can't have it both ways. If you're going to cite how all the "experts" out there are drinking the Tiger Kool-Aid hard then you have to also be willing to live with the fact that the "experts" are wrong plenty of times. I mean ****, last year, every baseball expert around told us how the addition of Prince Fielder would make Detroit one of the top teams in the AL and they only won the division and finished in the top 1/2 of the AL because thanks to the Sox's pathetic September meltdown. Would we all be talking about Detroit as a surefire lock to dominate the Central if the Sox could have even gone .500 against KC and won the division?