The Tigers and Cubs were going in polar opposite directions in 2017. Detroit was headed towards a last place finish that would kick off the massive rebuild from which they’re only now emerging. Chicago was trying to defend their drought-breaking World Series title, eyeing another division championship as part of what looked to be a dynasty in the making.
Given their respective competitive windows, they made for natural trade partners as that summer’s deadline approached. The Tigers were clearly preparing to sell off some productive big leaguers; the Cubs were willing to part with young talent to bolster their push for another championship. The day before the deadline, they agreed to a deal that sent a pair of veteran role players from Detroit to Chicago in exchange for two young infielders. Catcher Alex Avila and reliever Justin Wilson landed on the North Side, while Jeimer Candelario and Isaac Paredes headed to the Tigers.
Nearly five years later, the Tigers are reaping the benefits of that swap. Candelario, who had logged the briefest of action at the MLB level in each of the previous two seasons, served as a near-ready pickup. A corner infielder, he had no path to playing time on a Cubs team with Kris Bryant and Anthony Rizzo on the roster. But the Tigers could afford to give him regular run, and he was an everyday player by September.
Candelario has been a regular for much of the time since. He played in 144 games in 2018, performing around the league average on both sides of the ball. His 2019 campaign was a disaster, as his power evaporated and he was optioned on and off the active roster a few times throughout the year. That seemed to call his long-term future into question, but Candelario has turned things around over the past couple seasons.
The switch-hitter returned to appear in 52 of the Tigers’ 60 games during the shortened 2020 campaign. He posted career-best numbers, managing a .297/.369/.503 line over 206 plate appearances. That’s a very impressive showing but it’d have been easy to write that off as something of an outlier. Not only were those numbers compiled in an abbreviated schedule, he benefitted from an unsustainable .372 batting average on balls in play.
To his credit, Candelario largely backed up that strong performance last year. He tallied a personal-high 626 plate appearances over 149 games, hitting .271/.351/.443 with 16 home runs and an MLB-best 42 doubles. As expected, a .039 point dip in BABIP dropped his overall numbers a bit relative to 2020. Still, last season’s production checked in 19 percentage points above the league average (119 wRC+), and he did that over a much larger body of work than he had the year before. He now owns a .278/.356/.458 mark (123 wRC+) in 832 trips to the plate going back two seasons.
Nothing Candelario does stands out as excellent, but he has developed into a well-rounded offensive player. His contact rate, hard contact frequency and average exit velocity are all slightly above-average. So too are his line drive and barrel rates, as Candelario has demonstrated a knack for consistently squaring balls up. He’s been effective from both sides of the plate — .299/.350/.473 as a righty hitter; .270/.358/.453 as a lefty — allowing skipper A.J. Hinch to plug him into the lineup no matter the matchup. And while Candelario’s not a great defender at the hot corner, public metrics have considered him competent there. With top prospect Spencer Torkelson soon to assume first base duties in the Motor City, Candelario should be plugged in at third for at least the next couple seasons.
The Tigers’ rebuild has been ongoing for a few years, so Candelario’s recent production has flown a bit under the radar on non-competitive teams. Yet Detroit played reasonably well down the stretch, and this winter’s signings of Eduardo Rodríguez and Javier Báez — coupled with the looming debuts of Torkelson and Riley Greene — indicate they’re hoping to turn the corner in 2022. Candelario now looks like a key piece of that effort, and he remains under club control through 2023 via arbitration.
Paredes, who was in Low-A at the time of the trade, also remains in the Detroit organization. He’s yet to find much MLB success, but he’s coming off an impressive .265/.397/.451 showing over 315 plate appearances with Triple-A Toledo. He still has a pair of minor league option years remaining and could yet develop into a productive infielder himself.
That the deal worked as the Tigers had hoped — at least the Candelario pick-up — doesn’t mean it didn’t pan out for the Cubs. As mentioned, Candelario was going to have a hard time finding playing time in Chicago anyhow. The Cubs obviously didn’t develop into a dynasty, but their acquisitions of Avila and Wilson proved successful enough. The former hit .239/.369/.380 in 112 plate appearances down the stretch, providing a strong on-base presence behind Willson Contreras before departing in free agency. Wilson spent a year and a half in Chicago, posting a cumulative 3.86 ERA/3.66 FIP across 72 1/3 frames of relief. Neither player was a franchise-altering star, but they were never intended to be. Avila and Wilson were brought aboard to fill specific areas on the roster (backup catcher and left-handed relief, respectively), and they both fared reasonably in doing so.
All in all, it seems this trade served both teams well. Going in differing competitive directions, the Cubs’ and Tigers’ needs aligned. Avila and Wilson were short-term but effective players for Chicago, while Candelario has since developed into the solid regular Detroit envisioned. After a significant rebuild, the Tigers are hoping to contend this year. Candelario continuing to perform as he did from 2020-21 would be a quiet but important asset alongside their big-ticket additions and graduating top prospects.
Tanking is good for baseball. Players only want to stop tanking because it would force the owners to pay them more money. The Tigers would only be worse now if they didn’t tank back then. If winning is expensive then losing should be cheap. Losing sucks but losing responsibly is better. Players asking even the losers to be irresponsible and pay more money for games they know they will lose anyway is just stupid.
You have zero way of knowing that. None. Not at all. Teams sneak on regular basis yearly after not having expectations of winning. Having the number one overall pick has statistically shown to be a crapshoot, at best. There is no proof yet that Mize or Torkelson will be superstars of the next Tigers postseason run. You can point to the Astros as an example of tanking, but for every Correa, there is a Mark Appel out there who was just a wasted pick. In fact, what do the overwhelming majority of World Series Champions have in common? Their high payrolls. Since 1995, just THREE teams out of TWENTY-SEVEN ranked in the bottom half of the league in payroll. EIGHTEEN of those were in the TOP TEN in payroll. There is a direct correlation between spending and winning. No one said you must go out and pay superstar salaries at every position. However, you can try a little harder to sign major league players at every spot in the field. I remember as a lifelong Detroit Tigers fan, going into the 2003 season knowing they were basically fielding a AAA baseball team. It’s really a slap in the face for owners to expect fans to purchase tickets to a Major League Baseball game when they aren’t actively trying to field a competitive team.
If you went out to a restaurant and paid $75 for a steak, and they sent out what amounts to a hockey puck on a plate and when you complained they said, “Well, it’s a Monday night, and on Monday’s we’re not that busy so we gave our best cook the night off so he could be up to performing the rest of the week and the cook we have on staff tonight isn’t well trained. Sorry, enjoy that piece of shoe leather anyway.” You would lose your crap. I guarantee it. No, you’d expect something worthy of that $75 and would accept nothing less. I mean, the owner is open for business on Mondays, correct? There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting an owner of a professional sports team, who enjoys anti-trust exemptions, publicly financed stadiums, profit sharing, not to mention revenue from TV contracts. to actually attempt to put a winning team out there EACH AND EVERY YEAR.
With ya on just about all of that, Slothy!!! 🙂
Houston Astros were the tank kings
Supersloth just about everything you wrote is complete nonsense. Here’s what the teams that have won recently have in common. They’ve got homegrown stars who were acquired through the draft via high draft picks. See Astros, Redsox, braves, nationals, Royals, Cubs.
The same people for years who said tanking would never work and rebuilds in baseball take too long are the same people complaining they should do something about tanking because they realize it’s effective.
The Tigers didn’t tank; they were a poor team and we’re mismanaged. They had a DH type at almost every position.
Drafting the best player is not a given so losing games in Baseball is not intentional.
Dombrowski had no interest in signing Fielder. Boros had Owner Mike Ilitch’s cell number and worked a deal directly with superfan/owner Mike I that kind of blew a hole in the Tigers budget and ate up money that should have been spent in other areas including the bullpen.
There was a 12 year period where the Astros did not win 90 games. Applauding them for eventually stumbling into being good is appalling. No fan of the sport should congratulate a team for this.
Losing should be expensive.
Being “good” is useless. Flags fly forever. Were the Astros just “good” or were they world champions? They were world champions. This concept of trying to force teams to just be whatever someone feels is “good” is disgusting. Those fans show up to see what they hope is a win in part of a world championship season. Nothing less. You guys try to make it seem like fans want to watch them win that night even if it costs them the ability to win a championship down the line. Nothing could be further from the truth. Everyone may want to see the team win that night but for fans that actually care, only the championship matters. The rest are just showing up because they like going out and want something to do. They get that every time they go to the park. Anyone who thinks a single fan at the stadium wishes to trade a shot at a world championship for a win that night is stupid.
Trashtros didn’t win from tanking. They won by having low character players, coaches and front office personnel.
the very fact that they didn’t win every game, especially in the postseason, and cheated other years qnd lost shows it really isnt that simple.
C’mon now. Astros have been made the scapegoats of MLB. The sign stealing scandal investigation uncovered many teams similarly cheating including the Yankees and the Red Sox.
The Astros did not do it on purpose. The former Astros owners were terrible. The league forced the team into a bankruptcy court sale to the current, highest bidder, owner Les Crane?! Once Crane was on board, he cleaned house, hired a new GM, Jeff Luhnow, who tore the whole thing down and rebuilt it the old fashioned way. Luhnow hired AJ Hinch. The Astros spent more on International signings, the draft, trades of veterans for prospects and more. They hit on some key draft picks like Jose Altulve, Carlos Correa, Alex Bregman, Lance McCullers Jr and much more. The missed on some of their top picks also. They added some key free agents and won on some trades and the rest is history.
Do you ever make any sense
“Tanking is good for baseball.” Wow. That’s certainly an opinion.
For every Astros, I’ll raise you a Pirates for the last 30 years (except for a 4 year run); KC for the last 30 years (minus a 3 year run), I remember the Tigers pre-2006. From 1989 to 2003 they were absolutely horrendous. What is more important is how the team drafts, develops, and spends their money.
Look at the St Louis Cardinals. They are routinely around the top 10-15 spending franchises in the game. They have the second most wins next to the NYY since 2000 and have two championships. Of the 30 teams in the MLB, they have the 23 ranked TV market (if you count NY, LA, and CHI each twice). They’ve never completely stripped down in those 20+ years.
Fans should be asking the owners not to tank, but the MLBPA is doing that for us. The NFL is currently looking into the Miami situation, wonder what someone would find if they looked into the MLB tanking situation?
I agree that the Miami/Cleveland NFL situations sound F’d up but they also sound like one sided stories from bitter people who lost their jobs. You’ve never heard of someone bashing an employer who just fired them? I mean… It sounds made up to me. “They offered me $100,000 for every game I lost. I refused to take the money though.” So you turned down over a million dollars to lose and then you lost anyway? I find that hard to believe. The owners are adamant it didn’t happen and I don’t see any reason to suggest it did outside of a bitter former employee. Hugh Jackson is claiming he turned down the money but he only won 1 game over a 2 year span. You’re telling me the guy turned down over three million dollars to lose games but still went 1-31 anyway? Sounds fishy to me and I think it’s obvious at least half of their stories are lies while the owners could be feasibly telling the truth. “They offered me over $3 million to lose games. I went 1-31. Then I turned down the money.” What a liar.
If “tanking” is going on like that anywhere it should be stopped. I am very skeptical that is what’s happening though. I think “tanking” has become such a common key word now that people are talking about it when teams who can’t win it all refuse to spend money just to win a few extra. If you aren’t going to be a world champion you should be making sure you will be as soon as possible. The difference between having a losing record and being .500 is meaningless. At this point people are calling teams tankers just because they want them to spend more money on players even if the team stands no chance of winning. Those would have to be pretty stupid owners. The fans want a championship. Not another more expensive .500 season.
It is so much easier to tank games in the NFL vs. MLB. Sure, you can put an inferior lineup on the field in baseball but you can’t control how your players play, especially young players who are looking to prove themselves. You can’t control if your SP has a career game or if your rookie CF hits two HRs. That’s why even the worst teams in MLB history still win 50 games per year.
In the NFL, all you need to do is trade away a few players and then coach poorly; call the wrong plays on purpose and your team loses 90% of the time. Couple that with playing backup players and you’ll lose 99% of the time. It would be nearly impossible for a MLB team to lose even 80% of their games over a season.
I think you’re right. He was referring to the new Miami Dolphins scandal where a recently fired head coach said he was offered $100k for every loss. He never said it when it was supposedly going on. He said it after he was fired and blatantly bitter about that fact. Of course he said he turned the money down. Then the former Cleveland Browns head coach said the same thing. He was offered money to tank and turned it down. Then he went 1-31 anyway. IF something like that is happening in any sport it obviously has to be stopped. I don’t see enough evidence to believe it, though. The teams flat out deny anything like that took place and the former coaches who said it have holes in their stories. You were offered $100k per loss. Then you turned that down because you are so honest. Then you went 1-31 anyway? IF those offers took place then the coaches accepted the money and aren’t taking accountability. They are adamant they didn’t take the money though. If they didn’t get paid for losing like that it’s because no one offered to pay them IMO. If some real evidence is out there I would love to see it and I will be the first to say it should be stopped. These stories aren’t credible. I’ve met tons of people who make up lies about employers that fire them. This looks exactly like that to me unless they can come up with some concrete evidence. It sounds like they are pissed off for being fired and are making excuses for sucking at their job.
I know a lot of people hate the Astros due to their cheating scandal, but if you want to look at a team who ‘tanked’ the right way, they are the model. They traded away their veteran players for promising rookies and then promoted those rookies to play in the majors vs. stashing their youngsters in the minors and signing a bunch of aging veterans. Jose Altuve developed across a couple of 100 loss seasons. The Astros also used their high draft picks and large IFA pools to draft/sign talented young players (which is not as easy at it sounds). When the time was right, they added some higher priced veterans, signed their young, performing players to early extensions and the results speak for themselves.
The problem we have today is that there are some teams who are unwilling to spend once the rebuild starts taking shape. Look no further than Tampa, Oakland, Cleveland & Pittsburgh. Once their young players develop into above average players or even stars, they are flipping them for pre-arb players vs. trying to build around them and that’s the real problem with ‘tanking’ today. While it’s admirable, it’s also a shame that Tampa and to a lesser extent, Oakland and Cleveland have figured out how to win using this new model of not extending their best young players or signing top free agents. Too many teams are trying to copy that model for success. While no team has won it all using this method, there have been plenty of deep playoff runs, especially in Tampa, so this strategy seems like it’s here to stay as it is making the owners money while keeping their teams competitive. Perhaps some steep fines or draft pick penalties for not spending $XX amount on payroll every year would help correct this some, but these teams will still figure out how to spend the least amount of money to field the best possible teams. There is no realistic solution to stop this from continuing either. It’s truly a league of the haves and have nots.
I dislike the way that Oakland, Pittsburgh and Cleveland run their teams. Tampa Bay has a lot less money on hand then they do, though. They also have a terrible stadium with low attendance. They also led the American League in wins anyway. I wouldn’t call that a shame. I would call that success. Spending less money to win is better than spending more money to win in every way. However, teams like Oakland, Cleveland and Pittsburgh clearly need to spend more money. They have more money available than the Rays do but refuse to spend it and win less. It’s important to get bang for your buck but I don’t think those 3 teams are even trying to do that. They are hoping to have a winning record while spending like Tampa but unlike the Rays they don’t do a good enough job to back it up. The A’s owner has a ton of money. Cleveland and Pitt are both far more wealthy than Tampa. Still they pretty much suck and refuse to spend money to help. Pittsburgh is so bad the money probably wouldn’t help right now anyway. They just need a new owner. Oakland and Cleveland could both be much better teams if they spent some cash though. I will say I think the “bad owner” concept is way overblown in MLB. I think those 3 teams pretty much make up all the “bad owners.” Cincinnati sucks too but I feel bad saying that because I think they try. They just aren’t very good at trying and as far as MLB owners go the Reds probably suck mostly because there owner is relatively poor. I read the majority owner only has a net total asset worth of $400 million. Alex Rodriguez easily made more money playing baseball than the Reds owner is currently worth. They need to sell that team to someone who can afford to maintain it and won’t hand out stupid contracts like Mike Moustakis. The A’s, Guardians and Pirates owners need to sell the team to a more interested owner. They can afford to pay more but they don’t because they like the nostalgia that comes along with being an MLB owner even if they suck at it. It should be about the fans. If the current owner can make billions and profit while making the fans happier with an owner willing to spend more, he should. Otherwise he literally bought the team to be his and the name in the front of the jersey means nothing to him. Sell the team to someone who is willing to put it on the line to see the name in the front of that jersey host up a world championship trophy. The other 26 owners aren’t too bad. They might make stupid decisions sometimes but from what I can tell they are doing everything other can (within reason) to make sure a world championship is coming to their town as soon as possible.
@dorothy
Teams like Tampa,.Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Cinci just do not have the market to be consistently in the top payrolls off the league. Its not necessarily that they don’t want to sign the high ticket FAs, like Bauer. Its that they can’t afford to. They have a budget that is significantly less than the CBT. A single mistake signing, like Bauer, would hurt these teams for years. LAD pretended it never happened and was able to spend even more money. Few teams can do that.
I think there is a rather simple solution. Create a real, honest salary floor, and make sure the money the owners receive I revenue sharing is spent on players. Not sitting in their bank accounts drawing interest.. simple…
The only logical thing that would work for this mantooth is if the owners made a run where if your team wins 90+ games you have to increase your payroll by at least 5% or face a harsher penalty.
There is no reason for teams like Cleveland, Oakland, Tampa and Pittsburg to change their MO. As long as revenue sharing is set up the way it is, then placing cheap mathematically sound teams on the field while manipulating service time will never end. Until options are lowered, revenue sharing is corrected and service time manipulation is cut down, there is no real recourse. The idea of a minimum salary cap is illogical because it forces teams to possibly sign pieces they don’t need in order to fulfill a bandaid solution. No.. taking away the tools that keep these teams competitive is the key. If these teams were cut off from an unlimited string of young pitchers being constantly shuttled back and forth, no longer able to make a profit off of the backs of other teams and played players when they deserved to be played, then it would be really hard to keep using this model. Trying to correct this with a lottery draft doesn’t seem logical to me either. Draft picks in baseball are just too unpredictable. I really hope the player’s union doesn’t mess this aspect up. If they do then we will be back in the same spot in a few more years.
Trading players at the trade deadline is not tanking…
Lol, good luck with ERod. Watching him pitch every fifth day is maddening. He has a pace like watching grass grow. Nibble, nibble, nibble. He does not consistently pound the strike zone. Ugh, glad he is gone.
So you don’t like watching any current baseball gotcha
Lol iverbure: “So you don’t like watching any current baseball. Gotcha.” I love some of the comments in this site. Some of the commenters really are better than the writers at least when it comes to being funny.
Really happy he is in DET. Win-win
It feels like a desperation move by Avila’s team.
I wouldn’t call it desperation, there is a big hole in the rotation.
That’s not to say, he could be the nextJordan Zimmerman. Hopefully it works out.
We’ll take whatever ERod was when he won 19 a couple years ago, here in Detroit
Candelario is indeed a bit under the radar, but he might become an interesting case for the Tigers. If he continues to be a solid 3B batting between 15% and 20% above league-average, I could see an extension at a $ 15m-AAV coming. He seems to be pretty much appreciated in Detroit. Bryant’s new contract numbers will be telling, although Bryant had better seasons and could play OF as well.
2024 could bring the huge IF shuffle for the Tigers: Both Candelario and Schoop will be FAs and Baez could opt out.
Gruß,
BSHH
I am hoping for two solid years from Baez, and then he goes FA. The Tigers have been stocking up on IF recently and should have Paredes, Pacheco, Clemens, Workman, Cruz and Kreidler up within the next two years. The article above doesn’t mention that Parades is only 21, and was in the majors at 20. Don’t give up on him too soon. He will be solid at 2b or 3b in the near future.
You are right, Paredes deserves to be mentioned. Although his development stalled a bit, he could still be the prize of this trade. He is projected to hit in a similar range like Schoop, so there might be competition for 2B already.
Among the other prospects you named, I would consider Kreidler a wild card (his last year might be a fluke, but if not, the Tigers have a huge asset) and the others merely lottery tickets. If I had to bet on the internal successor for Candelario in 2024, my money would be on Keith (besides Paredes & Kreidler). However, Candelario, Baez and Schoop generally produce WAR like average 3B/SS/2B regulars respectively (Baez even more), so it will take very good players to supplant them.
Gruß,
BSHH
They also have a couple international signings of highly rated SS prospects this year but they are farther away.
Paredes won a batting title in the Winter league. He is only 20-21. He could be a special player when he puts it all together.
If Peredes breaks through, then you could see him @ 3B and Candelario could be traded.
It’s really, really sad.
Did you know that, Chris?
Did you know that, Al?
Do you guys really know how sad it is? Not funny.
Interesting to see how a write up on how the 2017 trade deadline is benefiting the Tigers still has evolved into a discussion on tanking. First, I hate the term tanking. Tanking is intentionally losing games for some perceived benefit. It is throwing games for draft picks, money from gamblers, etc. It is putting a team together so bad that it can help us relocate to Miami. That is not what is happening. Teams are rebuilding, knowing they will be bad (but the players will be trying to win when they take the field) but hoping that by building a core of good young players that can compete and win. Businesses often sacrifice short term gain for a bigger long term game. Why is that such an issue in baseball?
It never was an issue for years. Teams have always gone through periods of rebuilding. Even before free agency, teams would trade their top talent in order to get some prospects that they could develop; So what has changed? The recent success of teams like the Royals, Astros, and Cubs, two of which are not poor teams followed that blueprint and won championships. It lead to a lot of other teams following suit, including my Tigers, who really are not a poor team either. Because of that, the mean and median salary of MLB players declined! Had that not happened, we would not be talking about his at all. And the likelihood is that it is a cyclical thing, as teams like the Rangers and Tigers spent pretty heavily prior to the lock out. This likely will correct itself if left alone.
Even if we use the term tanking incorrectly, we all understand it so won’t fight too hard the use of the term. The problem with anti-tanking measures is that it hurts teams that really don’t have any other way to build a winning team. Even if teams like the Pirates, Rays, A’s, and Cleveland spend more they are not going to be able to spend anywhere close to what the Yankees and Dodgers spend unless you force them to spend their personal fortunes on player salaries. That is not acceptable. Mike Ilitch did in order to try to bring a title to Detroit. For that I am thankful even if it wasn’t successful. We had a lot of good years. But that also lead to us having to push the reset button. What he did should not be the expected norm. Owners deserve a chance to make a profit on their teams. Teams are not operated as a community benefit.
So what is the answer? Since it is a collective bargaining issue, the answer is whatever the players and owners agree is the answer. But penalizing tanking by taking away picks or decreasing revenue sharing is not the answer. If you penalize tanking too vigorously, you will make the problem worse for the teams like the Pirates who really don’t have any other way to build a winner. If you are going to penalize anyone, it should be the better off teams for doing it, not the A’s Rays and Pirates.
“Tanking” is a logical consequence of the choices laid before most teams. Players become much more costly as they reach their prime years. Revenue needs to rise to match increasing costs. A mediocre team will be a money-losing team as it ages. The Tigers in 2015-2017 were case in point – a .500 team with a $200 million payroll.
So what do you do? You have to cut costs and attempt to build a winner. If you have Yankee-Dodger TV contracts, you can try to build a perpetual winner. If you always receive Competitive Balance picks, you get an additional high draft pick every year and seem to always have a good farm system (Rays, A’s, Twins,, Cardinals). For everyone else, trade away your aging, costly veterans and build up your farm.
Is that “tanking?” In a sense, but it is the logical consequence of the economic realities of baseball.
@Tigerdoc
I really am curious how the revenue sharing is a collective bargaining issue. Because of the vast differences in market sizes, I understand how it is an issue between the teams. It is something that the big markets and small markets have to work out, to create a somewhat more equal playing field. Why the players are involved baffles me. It shouldn’t involve them, and a third party can only make the issue more contentious. The players benefit from it by allowing 40 additional players a job where otherwise a team wouldn’t be sustainable at a competitive level. It just seems to be better left to the owners than involving the employees.
Setting aside whether “tanking” as a concept is good or bad, what the Tigers have done the past few years — I wouldn’t call it “tanking.” I’d call it getting out from under several poor decisions. Dombrowski traded the farm away for several players, some of whom helped the team succeed from 2006-2016, and some of whom didn’t. Then, he and Avila after him signed a boatload of terrible contracts. First, the Tigers had to shed Victor Martinez’ contract. Then Jordan Zimmermann. Now, as much as I love the guy, Miggy. There simply wasn’t any money left in the coffers to pay premiums for good free agents (which, being in Detroit, the Tigers would’ve had to do to attract the best free agents — see Pudge and Ordonez of yore), and the farm system had nobody to plug in even at replacement-player levels.
Until the Tigers waited out those terrible contracts, and until they were able to refill the minor leagues with serviceable players, there simply weren’t resources available to get to even a .500 record..
Now that the consequences of those terrible decisions are for the most part over, the Tigers once again have the resources needed to be more competitive. And with the E-Rod and Baez contracts, they’ve begun to spend those resources.
As long as those deals and the others to come don’t turn out to be as terrible as past decisions have been, then I see the Tigers continuing to try to improve. If, however, the decisions they make now end up costing like the Zimmermann contract did (which they might) then the Tigers will have to wait out the consequences of those decisions all over again.
That’s not “tanking.”
I happen to believe that a higher salary “cap” will necessitate mode. The Tigers are the poster child of what happens after a long period of wild spending. Eventually, the bad contracts will pile up and something has to be done to get the club back on sound financial footing.
Tigers had no choice but to rebuild. Back then, they were paying on a number of dead contracts. Dombrowski traded away anyone of value in the farm system. Sure, they could have kept Verlander, Upton, and Cespedes. But, they wouldn’t have competed. They would have been mediocre, at best. And, because they wouldn’t have reaped top draft picks, they would have been stuck in mediocrity, still, and for years to come.
Dombrowski was under orders from Mike Ilitch to “go all in” at all times and then to “double down”…..
When he deviated from the Owner’s business plan and traded some high salaried veterans (Price, Cespedes, Soria) for younger up and coming players at the trade deadline in 2015, he was rewarded by Ownership with a pink slip.
Dave Dombrowski made three bad trades but that’s all you remember. Robbie Ray and Corey Knebel both had terrible showings in DET while Tiger managers rarely played Eugenio Suarez. Still, none of these players were MiLB players.
So, which MiLB players did DD clear out of the farm system? Tiger farm hasn’t developed players since John Fetzer owned the team. DD drafted well but the Tigers rarely developed those players. It just didn’t matter because Jim Leyland copied Sparky Anderson and played preferred only veterans.
Truly hope my Tigers are done with the 8+ year contracts. Baez’s contract is pushing it.
Grossman and Fulmer would both be interesting extension candidates.- Nothing too crazy though! Would love to see them add Conforto or Winker type, & IKF. Decide Cameron, Hill, Reyes. Decide on Wili Castro, Clemens, Short. Jmo
Timing and making smart baseball decisions are everything for these rebuilds.
1) The Tigers exited their current rebuild a year or two too soon.
Two more drafts loaded with top 5 draft picks would have solidified the Tigers position player group for a longer run of contention going forward. The Tigers are in danger of being the next Phillies where they come up short on young, home grown position players and have to buy too many expensive players in free agency. There is a limit to checkbook roster building as many teams have found out.
The Tigers farm system still does not have enough position player depth. Not every player they will be counting on with become a major league star or regular.
2) The Tigers started their rebuilt 2-3 years too late.
The Writing was on the wall in 2013-2014. The Tigers gave Max Scherzer their best offer and Scherzer and his agent Boros rejected it. At that point, the Tigers knew Scherzer was going to be put on the auction block in the next offseason and they should have traded Scherzer in a block buster deal for 4-5 top young players and prospects before the 2014 season. Like Teixeira from Rangers to the Braves or Mookie Betts from the Red Sox to the Dodgers etc)This is not hindsight I and others were saying it at the time. The Tigers either received a Draft pick for Scherzer or nothing if they just inked a free agent.
3) Smarter baseball decisions and trading some of their stars at peak value for groups of top young players and prospects would have shortened the Tigers rebuild and, perhaps, turned it into a retooling instead of a full rebuild.
The Dodgers, Red Sox, Yankees and Giants have done a very good job with retooling while contending and avoiding complete teardowns. Ditto the Rays.
The Tigers made a few of these deals like Granderson which netted them Max Scherzer and others, but not nearly enough deals of that sort.
Scherzer, Verlander, JD Martinez, Victor Martinez, Rick Porcello, David Price, Annibal Sanchez etc…if traded by the Tigers at peak value in the 2014 window could have returned multiples of great young talent with big upside and formed the core of the next Tigers contender by 2018 etc..
Owner Illitch refused to allow Dombrowski to make needed baseball decisions in 2014.
Finally, Dombrowski was fired for making much needed trades in 2015: Price, Cespedes, Soria etc..were traded at the deadline. Illitch dumped Dombrowski and held onto to aging, high priced veteran stars for 2-3 years longer than the team should have thereby reducing their value in eventual trades. Firing Dombrowski set the Tigers rebuild back for another 2-3 years.
Illitch was a great baseball fan, but let his fandom and loyalty to veteran players cloud his baseball judgment and baseball decisions to the detriment of the Tigers contending long term without a complete teardown.
Not even close to a good deadline deal. Verlander, Avila, Upton, JD Martínez for Candelario. Terrible negotiations. Only reason farm system is good is because having top 5 pick for 5 years you get a couple good ones.