It’s been a quiet night for transactions and rumors, so let’s take a look at some audio looking back at the deadline:
- Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski joined ESPN.com’s Buster Olney on his podcast (audio link) to discuss the David Price trade. Dombrowski’s account is essential listening, but here are some highlights: Though Dombrowski was thinking initially about adding to the pen, internal recommendations led him to reach out to his Rays counterpart, Andrew Friedman, before the All-Star game. The sides chatted, but did not discuss a deal intensively until the evening before the deadline. Tampa had previously raised the name of young shortstop Willy Adames, was interested in some of the Mariners players, and liked Drew Smyly, but the precise package was only put together with the deadline closing in. In Dombrowski’s mind, the deal went from a “slight chance” overnight to happening quickly early in the afternoon. (Interestingly, the Detroit Free-Press tweeted that Dombrowski was notably absent from his usual seat just before the game; as it turns out, Dombrowski tells Olney that the key phone conversations were in fact taking place at that time.)
- Dombrowski had high praise for Friedman, who he described as direct and thorough. As for the idea that the haul was light for Price, Dombrowski explained that he had faced similar reactions after the Doug Fister deal, and feels that often such reactions come from a lack of information. In particular, he expressed that other clubs may not have a full read on Adames, who he calls a potential future All-Star.
- In his podcast today (audio link), Jonah Keri of Grantland spoke with Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports about the trade deadline and what it means the rest of the way. Rosenthal wonders whether the Red Sox have created a sort of new model for sellers by pursuing big league pieces instead of unproven youngsters. Of course, Boston also created a much-discussed “model” for free-agent spending before the club’s 2013 World Series run, when it added a series of mid-tier veterans who seemed to gel together in Fenway. Keri also chats with Dan Okrent, discussing his excellent (and highly-recommended) book, Nine Innings, which delivers an incredible portrait of the workings of a ballclub from the front office to the field.
- Former MLB GM Jim Duquette shared his own thoughts on the deadline — in particular, regarding the Phillies — on The Jayson Stark Show of 97.5 The Fanatic (audio link). Duquette said he thought the club “missed an opportunity” by standing pat. He also said it was surprising to hear GM Ruben Amaro Jr. say that his peers were not sufficiently aggressive in pursuing Philadelphia’s players, with Stark adding that other general managers have indicated to him that they were less than pleased with the commentary.
Good job Ruben, if you haven’t already burned the bridge with other teams with your outrageous demands, you’re surely on pace to do it when you start telling the media that you expect the world to take your side and comprehend your madness.
Good look in your future endeavors, I’m sure I’ll be seeing you at my local Walmart as the greeter in 5 months.
If I walked into a Walmart and saw RAJ greeting people I’d do the Grandpa Simpson turn and exit.
Gotta wonder if those comments will force David Montgomery and ownership to make a change after the season. He gave Ruben the proverbial stamp of approval a month or so ago, but this team isn’t moving in a positive direction and Ruben is clearly to blame. Montgomery might just be the money guy and public face of a very private ownership group, but the product Ruben has put on the field is causing the team to lose money at the gate, which Monty has said is a huge concern going forward.
Would be great if both are out after 2014 and the bring in a whole new front office. New player development and scouting departments, new minor league instructors and significantly improve their advanced metrics department, if you can really call 5 people an advanced metrics department.
Those marked down prices very well could drive him insane.
Not to open my own team up to more criticism, but is it fair to say the Sox truly “created a model” when that model’s success was immediately followed by a last-place nosedive?
Remains to be seen. A model is something that needs to be followed. Something like Moneyball. I don’t recall any team going on a spree for mid-tier free agents this previous offseason so we don’t know how front offices feel about it. I suppose the future will tell. But, this whole “Red Sox created a model” thing is too premature.
There’s also the problem that this “model” can’t really be followed. The Sox were able to sign so many mid tier free agents because they had flexibility, but they’re also a highly attractive FA destination. I doubt any other last place team would be able to sign all those guys to identical deals.
At the time the Sox had a horrible baseball reputation.. With the Chicken and beer fiasco, losing 90+ games and Bobby V at the helm, we had to overpay Victorino in years, Dempster in cash, and originally Napoli in cash until they got a loophole on him
Victorino and Dempster rejected slightly bigger contracts from the Indians and Royals respectively to sign with the Red Sox. I’m not sure how you find Napoli an overpay in cash. It was the same annual value but instead of 3 years, it was 1. Not to mention, though Napoli had a couple of subpar years in batting average before he signed, he always displayed power and on base skills. That is worth 13 million dollars. Those aren’t moves aren’t overpays. All the Red Sox did was get those guys at market value and it payed dividends in 2013.
I agree — that’s actually kind of why I threw it in there. Everybody was talking about this “Red Sox model” last year and in the offseason. I think they pretty much just targeted a few guys and things broke right. Hats off for winning, and for being adaptable when it didn’t work out in year two. If anything, that is the model — stay flexible, understand value as fully as possible.
Likewise, is Beane dealing for Jim Johnson and then Samardzija, Hammel, and Lester some form of Moneyball? Or something else? Or is it just him evaluating the market and his team’s situation and understanding the high present value of a win for the A’s circumstances?
Ahh, okay, now I’m reading it with the appropriate amount of snark xD
I’m trying my best to withhold ultimate, fiery, Sox-fan judgment until next season anyhow.
I do think the A’s are right to strike while the iron is hot. Detroit is their only real hurdle to overcome at this point, imo.
Game 7, ALCS. Lester. Price. Just how we might have envisioned it before the season started … kind of.
I’d say they didn’t create a model is because their circumstances were kind of unique. Between Ross, Gomes, Victorino, Uehara, Dempster and Drew, they added six guys to their 25 man roster including 3 to their starting 9. (Seven and four if you want to count re-signing Ortiz.) It’s tough to find a team that both needs changes at that many positions and has the flexibility to make them. If they had added only one or two of those kind of player we wouldn’t even be considering whether there is some overarching lesson to learn.
That lesser form actually happens quite a bit, especially on mid-market teams who can’t afford the huge splash. The impressive thing about Boston’s 2013 offseason was the scale, not the strategy itself.
I never thought that Boston was creating a model since this seemed to be the exact same thing that the Phillies did in 1993. Bring together a bunch of guys and get career years out of them and then completely fall apart the next year. Both teams were seen as a cast of characters and the only difference was the fact that Boston was able to actually win the World Series. It really doesn’t allow for any sustained success, so I don’t see other teams wanting to replicate it on a regular basis.
I’ve read a lot of your posts over the last week and I think we have some major disagreements about the Sox trades at the deadlines. I’m hoping for a good exchange of thoughts for the next few months. I also think we can both agree that no model was made by the Red Sox trades.
The Red Sox are in a unique position to rebuild a team quickly with money and a strong farm to use in trades or promotions) to get back on a winning franchise. Not every team will have both resources to follow the same model.
I had a very emotional reaction to the Lester trade, and I’ll admit it did put me in a foul mood most of the day (my all-day meeting didn’t help either). That said, I still feel like the returns could’ve been better, especially since I’m not a believer in Craig (someone pointed out his concerningly declining ISO). I’m willing to re-evaluate this offseason based on a variety of factors.
Regardless, I always enjoy debating with you, especially as we’re both on the same side at the end of the day 😀
The Doug Fister return is still extremely light, regardless of what Dave Dombrowski would like you to believe.
I mean, it’s possible that he wouldn’t have done better from another club. He talks in the interview about doing one’s homework, and he said at the time that he asked around for other clubs that had young pitching. For me, as I wrote extensively at the time, I felt that the Tigers did not make the right decision to simply move him for the best version of a certain kind of package (young starter, controllable pen piece, utility infielder).
But Dombrowski adapts, and makes bold moves to craft the team he wants. And it’s hard to argue with the results on the field, ultimately.
It’s hard to say he’s really setting the team up for the future though. The best thing to come out of the Price trade is that it all but guarantees that the Tigers are out of the running for Scherzer. Detroit’s payroll woes are likely to get worse as Cabrera and Verlander age.
The Tigers very sincerely face a crash and burn scenario in the years ahead. They are currently a product of a willing owner who wants a championship. I believe they overspend their market
I don’t understand the thought process behind the Verlander/Cabrera extensions. Neither was particularly team friendly and both players seem to love playing in Detroit.
Fielder was another mess. The Tigers’ 2012 success and his injury now sort of validates the deal now, but it was still the same sort of short sighted behavior that ignores the long term ramifications.
The thought process seems to be coming from an elderly owner who wants to win now. He pours his own money into a winner. Very much the opposite approach to what David Glass of KC does. They’ve chosen Price over Scherzer I’d say. It’s a good scenario a talented gm and an owner that spends
The owner is certainly generous, but he is not irresponsible. They play in the 11th largest tv market and had the fifth highest payroll.
That is reasonable, especially when you consider
how successful the Illitch family was with a huge Red Wing payroll. They know what they are doing.
Great organization and great fan friendly ownership. Detroit and Michigan are overlooked and underrated.
Detroit draws 3 million and the last Hall of Famer retired 40 years ago. They couldn’t let them walk. Why it took what it did to keep them seems high. Both sides must think the market is going much higher in the next 8 years. We will see. Both original contracts were incredibly cheap. Could be some make up going on.
You’re not saying getting rid of Fielder was a mistake are you?
This process started with the hiring of Pudge in 2003. Detroit could not beg FA to sigh with them. Once he was on board the quality players took notice and Detroit was in the World Series in 2006. Verlander and Cabera are the face of the franchise and will go into the Hall Of Fame in Tiger hats. Got VMart,Hunter and Nathan to Detroit. They sell lots of merchandise and tickets. Will probably keep Price in Detroit and continue the process. Its hard to put a Dollar value on that.
Getting rid of Fielder wasn’t the mistake. Signing him was. The trade to Texas and the Fister deal represented moves that were done to increase payroll flexibility. Now they’re essentially paying Kinsler like a 20 million + player. They should never have signed Fielder at all.
Agree. The situation was complicated by a close personal relationship between Prince and the owner when Prince was a teenager and his Dad, Cecil was with the Tigers. The signing was owner driven.
It made a great story in Detroit, but they were lucky and smart to cut bait when they did.
You may be under rating their market. They drew 3 million last year and are on track to repeat that this year. They had the highest tv ratings in baseball. They are very comfortable with a payroll of $175 million.
The owner owns half of downtown Detroit which is rebuilding big time. He makes money on the family casino and other properties when downtown traffic increases.
He “overspent” on the Red Wings and turned Detroit into Hockeytown.
They are content to break even every year but have the value of the franchise increase from $80 million to $600 million in 20 years.
I didn’t intend to indicate a slight. I do feel that Michigan is blessed to have an owner that’s willing to pile personal assets into a team. That’s the way it should be, and isn’t, in most markets. The Tigers aren’t exempt from a downturn in fan support if ownership changes financial direction in the future.
I can personally attest that Detroit is a hell of a baseball town!
I do question the value of these mlb TV contracts. They very much smell like a bubble to me. With salaries being built around them, and a general decline in baseball viewership..a likely continuing trend… baseball will have to deal with another reset. Of course… there’s multimedia money being shared. But cable wise… Soccer is out viewing baseball on FS1 even now
They solved their payroll woes when they dumped Fielder, Fister, Infante and Peralta last winter. They have enough payroll flexibility now to be able to pay Scherzer, Price or someone else $144 million and still stay on budget.
Fair point, for sure … will be interesting to see how the club shapes up in the mid-term/long-term.
Jeff, you were wrong then and you are wrong now. A team like the Tigers need to “draft for need” rather than “take the best player available”. If they got a couple top prospect position players where would they play? How would it improve their team?
They only position open at the time was left field. Left fielders are a lot easier to get than young left handed pitchers with big upside. JD Martinez.
I agree that it can make sense, depending on a team’s situation, to add near-MLB prospects based on need. But prospects are also currency to be used when, you know, you decide to acquire a guy like David Price. (Instead, now there’s no more Fister and no more Smyly. Better hope Ray pans out and steps in for the latter.)
I wrote a long post explaining how the entire offseason was shaped to an extent by the Peralta suspension. To an extent, the Fister trade was an extension of that. My critique of the deal is not just “they didn’t get enough!”, but relates to the question whether they should have dealt a fairly cheap, highly-productive starting pitcher only to go sign a more expensive, less valuable, older relief pitcher (Nathan). (The timing suggested to me that the moves were interrelated.)
But look, I am but a child at Dombrowski’s feet — especially enjoy his discussions of his decisionmaking process — and am more than open to learning from his approach.
I totally agree the Fister/Nathan deals are interrelated. But, they didn’t just get two years of Nathan for two years of Fister. They also got young, cheap Ray and Krol.
If Smyly doesn’t go to starter, they can’t flip him for Price. Smyly can’t hit the rotation with Fister there and without Krol.
Always enjoy your take on things, just don’t always see things the same way. That’s what makes Trade Rumors fun.
Absolutely. Enjoy the debate.
Good thing they got Ray, otherwise when Scherzer and Fister walked in free agency they wouldn’t have anybody to replace them.
And are good, young, cost-controlled outfielders really so much easier to come by? Getting a hit on JD Martinez doesn’t prove that. It’s extremely rare. The reason there is a premium on pitchers at the trade deadline is that so many are injured, but that also drives down their value as a long-term investment.
Yes outfielders are easier to come by. Look at how many get traded compared to good young left handlers and what they get in return when they do trade them.
You can also fill an outfield hole with established players a lot easier than you can fill a starting pitcher hole.
Stockpiling good young pitchers is a winning strategy. Dombrowski has proven it over the years.
Take Martinez out of the equation if you want. How much better would the team be with a rookie left fielder compared to a rajai Davis / Dirks platoon? None.
“Look at how many get traded …” Not sure where you get this perception from. Cards said they had no interest in dealing Taveras, even though they didn’t have an immediate need at the MLB level. Everyone called Myers-for-Shields an overpay. The Tigers (Sanchez deal, Soria deal), Blue Jays (Dickey deal), D’backs (Choo deal, Trumbo deal) and Dodgers (AGon, etc. deal), among others, have been fairly willing to deal away young, near-MLB arms recently.
Anyway, when did I suggest they should have acquired and played a rookie left fielder??? Actually, in December, I wrote about how they made a shrewd move to trade away just such a player (Avisail Garcia) to plug their unexpected SS gap with Iglesias and avoid sacrificing future control in the process.
Yes, they will sometimes trade young pitchers, almost always when they get an established pitcher back, like Sanchez, Fister, Dickey and Price. Otherwise, not so much.
I get it from Dombrowski when he said he dangled Fister for any one of what he considered the top 15 Mlb ready arms and 14 said no. Even Rizzo said no at first. You would think he would jump on it before Dombrowski changed his mind if it was as lopsided as many believe.
Once again, left field was the only position open. If the position players you recommend don’t play left, they rot in the minors for three to eight years. They weren’t going to trade Fister for someone in A ball.
When I was a kid an adult told me something that stuck with me about baseball. He said if you don’t know if you want to be a pitcher or position player, be a pitcher. A team of 25 players is half pitchers. That is the drafting model for DD. He then has maximum flexibility in grooming for team use or trade chips.
Hey just a heads up, Okrent’s “Nine Innings” is about a single game, not a season. It’s the “Ulysses” of baseball books.
I’ve read it. It’s about much more than one game. But I agree that that isn’t a very good way to describe it, I’ll edit.
Hey, I was talking to an associate yesterday about the Phillies and the associate said there’s better team in Philadelphia and they have a ‘girl’ as their ace.
I believe him, I think the Taney Dragons could not only beat the Phillies!
They have a very good chance in winning the Little League World Series.
Quite honestly from reading about them I am surprised they aren’t getting more attention then the Phillies! They are the better team! =P
Okay.
The Red Sox are among the best FO around, but they had a lot of things go perfectly last year, and it’s always a mistake to perceive good fortune as genius. Plenty of career years in 2013, plenty of over-production from solid players who just put everything together. That’s very hard to duplicate.
Small market teams can’t afford to do what Boston did at the deadline, so it’ll really only work for big market clubs.
Willy Adames a future All-Star? So say we all!
Something is up with him. Just about every club that was buying or selling scouted him and asked for him.
I was making a (bad) Battlestar Galactica joke. The name of the captain/admiral in that show is William Adama. And the way they say “amen” is “so say we all.” Hence my joke (now utterly ruined).