Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now?

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:43:37 -0500, "Steve" <steveoneill.RemoveThis@alltel.net>
wrote:

>After seeing what the Tigers did.
>
>If Willis is healthy and gets back to where he was,
>and Cabrera puts up his usual numbers, the Tigers
>look to be very strong in 2008.
>
>Of course, Willis stunk it up in late 2007, and Cabrera
>looked a bit overweight, so time will tell.
>
>Interesting trade.
>

their bullpen still sucks, and this was accentuated by their
rotation's inability to get past the 6th inning. so unless DW can
pitch complete games AND pitch relief, they're still susecptible IMO
until they address the bullpen - but they've got a few spare parts
left to offer as trade bait.

even DW didn't average 6 innings a start - 205 innings (which is nice
- but over 35 starts). of course, that might change since he's coming
to the AL and there's a DH here so he might not get pulled in the late
innings for a pinch hitter.

of course, it may only mean that they win games 10-8 intead of 10-3.
renteria is going to make their sinkerball pitchers happy. but i'd
hate to see what they're going to look like 3 years from now as their
aging starters move out of their prime and there's nothing in the farm
system to replace them.
----------------------------------
as for us, there's not much we can (or should) do IMO - we won 96
games and everyone is coming back and we have great chemistry.

P - we've got an excess of starting pitching. we *could* trade
somebody but i like the idea of stockpiling. *somebody* is going to
get hurt or flame out.

sabathia - if we can't sign him, i say trade him if we can get
somebody like hughes from the yankees. carmona and hughes as our #1 &
#2 for the next five years would be pretty enticing. bottom line is
that we don't settle for prospects only - we'd take young pitching
(and maybe a proven corner OF or 3B) that's already been in the majors
- and if possible, trade him to the NL.

bullpen - we were very good and everyone returns

C - a lot of people want to see martinez at 1B - good thing these
people have no say since martinez has the respect of the pitching
staff and calls a pretty good game. with shoppach we have the
strongest tandem in the majors. along with sizemore, an untouchable

1B - where you typically park a good hit, no field kinda guy, in other
words, garko. if he can play LF, that would sure improve his value
though - if we can't get a fulltime power hitter, he could play LF
when shoppach gets playing time and martinez plays 1B.

SS 2B - we've got cabrera, peralta & barfield. something has to give
there. i think most of us would love to see cabrera at short as he's
clearly a better defender. will peralta be willing to move without
pouting (SS is the premier defensive position and i don't want to
underestimate the latin machismo thing). i would hope bafield is
playing winter ball to regain his stroke/confidence/whatever. if
barfield plays well enough to start, we have a nice dilemma.

3B - i know how much you love blake, but IMO he's still not the answer
and i'm hoping marte will finally get together. marte's been a bust so
far but all throughout the minors, he's held his own while being one
of the youngest players in the league. that has been a pretty
effective barometer/indicator as to how well he'll do in the majors.
i'd hate to see him eventually blossom somewhere else like brandon
phillips. the good thing is that we really haven't missed crisp all
that much based on his lack of production with the red sox. but if
barfield hits, i want him at 2B & cabrera at SS. could peralta make
the switch?

regardless, the IMO best case scenarios make blake a man without a
position again.

RF - i want to see gutierrez get a chance to earn the position - but
if ends up platooining with blake, so be it.

CF - grady. 'nuff said

LF - shapiro proved with broussard & perez that a well thought out
platoon system CAN work and we should have gotten similar results in
2007 but dellucci getting hurt made a big difference - had he been
healthy and produced an average of his production in 2005 & 2006, we
would have gotten roughly .280, 20 HRs & 80 RBIs in a platoon system
with michaels. (i did the math in a post back on oct 24th if anyone
wants to see the rationale) that's middle of the pack for MLB for a
LF, but within our system, more than adequate since we get above
average production from our SS & C positions.

the other benefit from the 1B platoon was that it was a temporary
stopgap measure so that garko could get another year to mature. i'd
like to see us give francisco & gutierrez a chance to prove their
numbers were no fluke - projected over 400 AB's (michaels batting
exclusively against LHP) we're talking 20 HRs and 75- 80 RBIs for both
of them.

but if we trade for a corner OF, we need to move players to do it. but
who is going to take michaels & dellucci?



--------
"any words spelled incorrectly are probably typing errors"
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:49:59 -0500, "GOBUCKS!" <GOBUCKS.DeleteThis@tOSU.net>
wrote:

>
>"Steve" <steveoneill.DeleteThis@alltel.net> wrote in message
>news:92916$4756b8e9$438c6480$24408@ALLTEL.NET...
>> After seeing what the Tigers did.
>>
>> If Willis is healthy and gets back to where he was,
>> and Cabrera puts up his usual numbers, the Tigers
>> look to be very strong in 2008.
>>
>> Of course, Willis stunk it up in late 2007, and Cabrera
>> looked a bit overweight, so time will tell.
>>
>> Interesting trade.
>
>I thought I read somewhere that the Tribe was interested in Cabrera and then
>WHAM he's a Tiger. I don't think there's any doubt that Detroit is better
>today than yesterday.
>

i'll start worrying if and when they address their bullpen. if their
starters still average only 5+ innings (even DW averaged only 6+ but
then he probably also got pulled for a PH which won't happen in the
AL) that's 3+ innings that the bullpen has to fill per game. and we
know firsthand what happens when a bullpen implodes.

--------
"any words spelled incorrectly are probably typing errors"
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

There was a blurb somewhere of getting Bay and a C from the Pirates
for Gutierrez, Lee, and Shoppach..!!

Didn't sound good to me at all.
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

I agree with most of what you say Barry..

The 2006 platoon system worked well, I agree.
But - you still end up having two players for one position.
And I'm not real happy with either of the current LF options.
Michaels or Delucci.

Quite honestly, I'm not sure that an OF of Francisco,
Sizemore, and Gutierrez is all that bad of an option.

You're right, I like Blake.
But more offense from 3B would be a good thing.

At some point in time Marte is gonna have to produce.
Peralta is not gonna be an SS long term.
Hopefully he knows this today. Everyone else does.
So - the decision will become, in theory, Peralta or Marte at 3B.

Heck, it's December...The Tribe has plenty of time to work on this:

1B - Marte
2B - Barfield
SS - Cabrera
3B - Peralta

RF - Gutierrez
CF - Sizemore
LF - Garko

C - Martinez

Maybe the cold and snow and kids out of school have affected my thinking.
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:28:48 -0500, "Steve" <steveoneill.DeleteThis@alltel.net>
wrote:

>I agree with most of what you say Barry..
>
>The 2006 platoon system worked well, I agree.
>But - you still end up having two players for one position.
>And I'm not real happy with either of the current LF options.
>Michaels or Delucci.

i note that shapiro signed both of them so that their contracts end
next year. given that bruossard was given only a one year contract and
garko became ready, that suggests to me that he was buying time
until our prospects were projected to be ready. and if JM & DD hit
their projected #'s, they do so for only $5 a year. any full time
player with those numbers would probably make closer to $7 mil a year
- and want a multi year contract which would keep our prospects in
AAA.

michaels numbers against LHP actually improved in 2007. we play him
and pinch hit exclusively against LHP or against RHP that he's
historically hit well. we'll leave that to the stats people. if
dellucci isn't healthy, i'd give his AB's to francisco.

>Quite honestly, I'm not sure that an OF of Francisco,
>Sizemore, and Gutierrez is all that bad of an option.

brad snyder is also in the mix, but for BF & FG, their numbers in 2007
both project out to about 20 HRs & 80 RBIs over only 400 ABs in 2008.
that would allow us to spot start michaels about maybe 250 ABs, and
maybe give garko 150 ABs in LF when shoppach spot starts, and
hopefully protect those guys against the real ball busters pitching
wise, build up their confidence. best case scenario, in 2009, full
time, we've got corner outfielders cranking out 30+ HRs & 120+ RBI's a
year - gazellles who can run down drives to the corners and in the
gaps.

if only one of them pans out, it's still gold - but the flexibility of
having michaels/dellucci/blake alllows to play only one if one
flounders.

>You're right, I like Blake.
>But more offense from 3B would be a good thing.

his numbers aren't impressive but i credit him with stabilizing the
infield defensively.

>At some point in time Marte is gonna have to produce.

marte is out of options, and i doubt we'll be able to sneak him
through waivers.

>Peralta is not gonna be an SS long term.

his shortcomings defensively are offset by his hitting, which puts him
in the top 25% offesnively. as a 3B, those numbers are middle of the
pack. but as a 2B, they're up in the top 10 or so.

what cabrera & barfield don't offer in power, they make up in speed,
and we're a pretty slow team in terms of the base paths.

i'm intrigued by the prospect of cabrera & barfield bceoming a poor
man's vizquel & alomar in terms of the DPs they collaborate on. and
given that westrbook and carmona rely on their sinkers, any grounder
hit away from the corners has the potential to be a DP with men on
base.

peralta can hit, though. i think another team would trade for him and
turn him into a 2B.

>Hopefully he knows this today. Everyone else does.
>So - the decision will become, in theory, Peralta or Marte at 3B.
>
>Heck, it's December...The Tribe has plenty of time to work on this:
>
>1B - Marte

he can play 3B, but can he hit?

>2B - Barfield
>SS - Cabrera
>3B - Peralta
>
>RF - Gutierrez
>CF - Sizemore
>LF - Garko

it'd be nice but it might be too much to ask for someone originally a
catcher?

>C - Martinez
>
>Maybe the cold and snow and kids out of school have affected my thinking.
>


--------
"any words spelled incorrectly are probably typing errors"
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

"Steve" <steveoneill.RemoveThis@alltel.net> wrote:
> There was a blurb somewhere of getting Bay and a C from the Pirates
> for Gutierrez, Lee, and Shoppach..!!
>
> Didn't sound good to me at all.
>
I'd like to see them keep Kelly unless the deal is too sweet to pass up.
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:43:37 -0500, "Steve" <steveoneill.DeleteThis@alltel.net>
wrote:

>After seeing what the Tigers did.
>
>If Willis is healthy and gets back to where he was,
>and Cabrera puts up his usual numbers, the Tigers
>look to be very strong in 2008.
>
>Of course, Willis stunk it up in late 2007, and Cabrera
>looked a bit overweight, so time will tell.
>
>Interesting trade.
>

cabrera & willis 6 other players are eligible for arbitration. what's
the going rate for hitting .320, 34 HRs & 119 RBIs?

thames made only $432K, but hit 18 Hrs in only 269 ABs. obviously, if
the tigers don't offer him arbitration, we go after him as a FA for
LF.

the tigers' payroll could hit 130 million. with that kind of payola
AND giving away so many prospects, anything short of winning the WS is
going to be a major bite in the shorts.





--------
"any words spelled incorrectly are probably typing errors"
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

"barry" <toisan_boy.DeleteThis@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jcful355aqle8vke599oc5cud5r73fu6kn@4ax.com...

>
> thames made only $432K, but hit 18 Hrs in only 269 ABs. obviously, if
> the tigers don't offer him arbitration, we go after him as a FA for
> LF.
>

Was this a sarcastic post?

He's 30, strikes our 25% of the time, and hit .242.
Your platoon system of JM and DD is better.

Of course, he did have those two SBs...
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:51:50 -0500, "Steve" <steveoneill.DeleteThis@alltel.net>
wrote:

>
>"barry" <toisan_boy.DeleteThis@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:jcful355aqle8vke599oc5cud5r73fu6kn@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> thames made only $432K, but hit 18 Hrs in only 269 ABs. obviously, if
>> the tigers don't offer him arbitration, we go after him as a FA for
>> LF.
>>
>
>Was this a sarcastic post?
>
>He's 30, strikes our 25% of the time, and hit .242.
>Your platoon system of JM and DD is better.
>
>Of course, he did have those two SBs...
>

<LOL>

aren't the tigers SO much better now that we can improve ourselves
with their castoffs/leavings? especially from their bullpen.

--------
"any words spelled incorrectly are probably typing errors"
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now? 

vices.[47]

355. Continuous eloquence wearies.

Princes and kings sometimes play. They are not always on their thrones. They
weary there. Grandeur must be abandoned to be appreciated. Continuity in
everything is unpleasant. Cold is agreeable, that we may get warm.

Nature acts by progress, itus et reditus. It goes and returns, then advances
further, then twice as much backwards, then more forward than ever, etc.

The tide of the sea behaves in the same manner; and so, apparently, does the
sun in its course.

356. The nourishment of the body is little by little. Fullness of
nourishment and smallness of substance.

357. When we would pursue virtues to their extremes on either side, vices
present themselves, which insinuate themselves insensibly there, in their
insensible journey towards the infinitely little; and vices present
themselves in a crowd towards the infinitely great, so that we lose
ourselves in them and no longer see virtues. We find fault with perfection
itself.

358. Man is neither angel nor brute, and the unfortunate thing is that he
who would act the angel acts the brute.

359. We do not sustain ourselves in virtue by our own strength, but by the
balancing of two opposed vices, just as we remain upright amidst two
contrar
 >> Stay informed about: Wonder if Shapiro will stand pat now?