Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Rumor Mill: F-Mart for Granderson?

There is an interesting rumor floating around that the Mets could deal OF Fernando Martinez for Granderson. Also, SS Ruben Tejada could also be in the deal as well with Martinez, as the Tigers want a future middle infielder, since Placido Polanco is a free agent. Brad Holt’s name could be thrown in as well into the conversations.


Hey, Fernando, Ruben, and Brad - can you tell me where your suitcases are?  I’ll help you pack your things.

Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 12:09 AM | 50 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: mets

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. JMPH Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:58 AM (#3387951)
I really hope F-Mart doesn't catch on as a nickname for this guy.

If it does, I will spend his entire career calling him Fartinez.
   2. JJ1986 Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:58 AM (#3387952)
Please happen.
   3. Dock Ellis Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:58 AM (#3387953)
Also, SS Ruben Tejada could also be in the deal as well with Martinez, as the Tigers want a future middle infielder, since Placido Polanco is a free agent.


This makes perfect sense. With the second baseman on his way out, the Tigers will promptly replace him with an 20 year-old SS.
   4. Raskolnikov Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:28 AM (#3387987)
Ugh. Please say no, Omar.
   5. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:30 AM (#3387989)
Doesn't Granderson lose quite a bit of value as a corner outfielder? Or is the idea that Beltran would go to LF?
   6. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:47 AM (#3387992)
I get the impression that Mets fans -- some -- have an inflated sense of what Fartinez is worth.

Anyway, this trade is a loser for both teams. Granderson loses serious value not playing CF, and I think the Tigers can get better for him anyway.
   7. CraigK Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:51 AM (#3387994)
Citi Field seems to me to be the type of place where you'd need a CFer in right as well.
   8. Raskolnikov Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:55 AM (#3387995)
With the recent advance of defensive metrics, I think OF defense will need to be valued more than it has been historically. Granderson would be a great trade target, just not for Martinez.
   9. DCA Posted: November 15, 2009 at 07:16 AM (#3387998)
I get the impression that Mets fans -- some -- have an inflated sense of what Fartinez is worth.

This.
   10. The District Attorney Posted: November 15, 2009 at 07:20 AM (#3387999)
I have no problem with F-Mart for Granderson, but Tejada held his own at AA at age 19... he is not exactly a throw-in. If Granderson were a great fit for the Mets' needs, it might be worth it anyway. But, he isn't at all, so it doesn't seem like the best possible way for the Mets to cash in two pretty serious chips (and, BTW, they don't exactly have an abundance of chips to play with.)
   11. Tripon Posted: November 15, 2009 at 07:23 AM (#3388000)
Granderson, and Edwin Jackson for F-Mart, Tejada, and Jenrry Mejia?
   12. PreservedFish Posted: November 15, 2009 at 07:24 AM (#3388001)
I'm surprised that he's 28-29, but Granderson still seems like a coup for Martinez.
   13. PreservedFish Posted: November 15, 2009 at 07:33 AM (#3388004)
Tejada held his own at AA at age 19... he is not exactly a throw-in


I am curious about this. What does this suggest about his future?
   14. Barnaby Jones Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:41 AM (#3388014)
Sounds made up. The Tigers have Sizemore waiting in the wings for when Polanco exits.
   15. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:52 AM (#3388017)
If Martinez could stay healthy, he'd be one of the very best prospects in all of baseball. Seriously, he put up a .250 isolated slugging in AAA in his age 20 season, in the IL not the PCL (.290/.337/.540). It seems like he has been around forever but at his age, Ryan Braun hadn't even played in a professional game. I'd be very hesitant to trade him because the only question about him in my humble opinion is his ability to stay healthy. He's been pretty good in the IL despite being really young for the league, and that's especially impressive to me considering he has missed so much development time because of injuries.

If the Mets didn't already have Beltran, Granderson would make sense. But they do have Beltran and Granderson just isn't as valuable as a corner outfielder.

FYI, Granderson is under the Tigers' control for 4 more years at a cost of roughly 10 million a year. He also can't hit lefties a lick (.614 career OPS against them). That's scary when you consider the Phillies might have 4 lefty starters in their rotation next season.

Granderson just isn't a good fit for the Mets and that's why I would not make the trade. It's not that Fernando + Tejada and/or Holt is too much for Granderson. It's just the Mets could trade those guys for a different player of comparable value who would be a better fit.
   16. Zipperholes Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:53 AM (#3388018)
Sounds made up. The Tigers have Sizemore waiting in the wings for when Polanco exits.

Yes, but Everett is also a FA and their future SS is a project. Odd that the article mentioned only 2b.
   17. Zipperholes Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:01 AM (#3388019)
Also, I don't know who Matt Pignataro is, but it's unacceptable to not cite your sources or, if anonymous, give some indication as to their credibility. I'd hope there's some threshold re: credibility for what gets posted here.
   18. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:05 AM (#3388020)
One last thing: Granderson was probably a little bit unlucky with respect to his BABIP this year. His career BABIP prior to last season was .336.
   19. Dock Ellis Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:07 AM (#3388021)
Yeah, no one else except this blog is talking about this, at least not on twitter or google news.
   20. The importance of being Ernest Riles Posted: November 15, 2009 at 01:45 PM (#3388030)
That the Tigers, who let Magglio's insane option vest, would trade Granderson for financial reasons is dumb.
   21. Lassus Posted: November 15, 2009 at 02:20 PM (#3388034)
I get the impression that Mets fans -- some -- have an inflated sense of what Fartinez is worth.
This.


I would like to welcome these comments to 2007. Otherwise, no. Maybe this thread would provide a hint.
   22. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 15, 2009 at 02:40 PM (#3388038)
If Martinez could stay healthy, he'd be one of the very best prospects in all of baseball. Seriously, he put up a .250 isolated slugging in AAA in his age 20 season, in the IL not the PCL (.290/.337/.540). It seems like he has been around forever but at his age, Ryan Braun hadn't even played in a professional game. I'd be very hesitant to trade him because the only question about him in my humble opinion is his ability to stay healthy.
That's a nice line, but it's just 200 PA. And it's a big power boost from what he's showed previously, and he failed miserably to maintain it in the majors. Whether Martinez has the bat to play in the major leagues is still pretty obviously a big question. 200 PA are still just 200 PA.
   23. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 03:05 PM (#3388045)
Sounds made up. The Tigers have Sizemore waiting in the wings for when Polanco exits.

Didn't Sizemore just break his leg?
   24. Marcel Posted: November 15, 2009 at 03:20 PM (#3388052)
Didn't Sizemore just break his leg?

His ankle. He's supposed to be ready to go for spring training.
   25. Raskolnikov Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:10 PM (#3388066)
How about Neuwenhuis/Tejada/Holt for Granderson?
   26. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:40 PM (#3388072)
I would like to welcome these comments to 2007.


Whatever. The comments in this thread include a certain number of people who seem to think that Granderson isn't worth Martinez. In the non-Mets-fan universe, Martinez is a wild-card who can't stay healthy, and the Tigers would be crazy to trade Granderson for him. So I think my comments are perfectly valid right here on 15 November 2009.
   27. TVerik - Dr. Velocity Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:43 PM (#3388074)
I'm with Voxter. While Mets fans have a well-earned reputation for sloppy love for their own prospects, I think BBTF denizens almost all overvalue their prospects.
   28. pkb33 Posted: November 15, 2009 at 04:51 PM (#3388079)
Neuwenhuis/Tejada/Holt for Granderson?

Putting aside that this isn't enough for Granderson in the first place, don't you also have to think a whole bunch of teams would beat that offer anyway?
   29. PreservedFish Posted: November 15, 2009 at 05:02 PM (#3388082)
Neuwenhuis/Tejada/Holt for Granderson?


This brings me back to the "how about Jay Payton for Superstar X" days. Honestly, Newenhuis and Tejada (and possibly also Holt) are prospects that the Tigers GM has probably never heard of. Only Mets fans and prospect dorks know who they are. Not real trading chips.
   30. Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 05:39 PM (#3388097)
YOU METS FANS ARE A BUNCH OF STUPID JERKS AND YOUR PROSPECTS ARE DOOODIE!!!! WAAAAAA!!!!
   31. TVerik - Dr. Velocity Posted: November 15, 2009 at 05:43 PM (#3388099)
I don't recall saying that they're doodie.


That other stuff, no contest.
   32. New York Necks Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:26 PM (#3388132)
I really hope F-Mart doesn't catch on as a nickname for this guy.

If it does, I will spend his entire career calling him Fartinez.

Mr. F!
   33. Walt Davis Posted: November 15, 2009 at 06:34 PM (#3388137)
I'd hope there's some threshold re: credibility for what gets posted here.

Of course we have standards -- a piece has to be credible enough to be posted on the internet.
   34. bobm Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:11 PM (#3388183)
From the Boston Globe article on Boras recently posted to BBTF Newsblog: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/11/15/bottom_line_boras_hounds_owners_that_he_says_are_crying_wolf/

"The Tigers, intent on cutting payroll, came out of recent organizational meetings feeling that virtually everyone but Justin Verlander was available in a deal. Which means the Yankees could go get Curtis Granderson . Or that the Red Sox could put 26-year-old Miguel Cabrera on their short list (along with Adrian Gonzalez ) of possible middle-of-the-order bats."
   35. Gaelan Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:32 PM (#3388192)
It's not true that Granderson (or any CF) loses value playing in LF.
   36. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:41 PM (#3388197)
It's not true that Granderson (or any CF) loses value playing in LF.

I know this argument and it's basicall semantics. Granderson's abilities would be underutilized as a corner outfielder. Is that better?
   37. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:42 PM (#3388198)
It's not true that Granderson (or any CF) loses value playing in LF.

Horseshit.
   38. Gaelan Posted: November 15, 2009 at 08:50 PM (#3388199)
I know this argument and it's basicall semantics. Granderson's abilities would be underutilized as a corner outfielder. Is that better?


No. If you believe Tango's positional adjustment numbers (ten runs difference between CF and LF) and if you believe what play by play defensive stats tell us what happens when CFers move to LF (they gain ten runs in comparison to average) then yes he is no less valuable in LF, he will help the Mets in LF just as much as he helps the Tigers in CF (his WAR will be the same).

Now it is possible for someone to not believe those things but if you don't then the onus is on you to suggest why those numbers are wrong. If you can't do this then you've simply declared that Granderson loses value but you have no reasons or evidence to support your entirely unsubstantiated claim.
   39. Dandy Little Glove Man Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:11 PM (#3388203)
That the Tigers, who let Magglio's insane option vest, would trade Granderson for financial reasons is dumb.

I don't buy the criticism of the Tigers for "letting" Magglio's option vest. They had to play him because (A) they were surely facing a grievance if they benched him just before he met the terms for the option to vest and (B) they were in a playoff race and he was their second-best hitter throughout the second half of the season. Their decision to play him last year is unrelated to their current financial situation.


How about Neuwenhuis/Tejada/Holt for Granderson?

Granderson is an All-Star/4-WAR centerfielder in his prime who also happens to be massively underpaid and enormously popular. The only reason his name has been floated out there is that the Tigers have a $125+ million payroll for next year before signing a single free agent. However, Granderson isn't part of the financial problem. He makes $5.5 million next year, and he has a very team-friendly contract for 3 years thereafter. If he is traded, it won't be to save the $5 million he is owed. That just doesn't make sense. He would more likely be traded to save $25 million or $35 million next year, in a package deal with some combination of albatross contracts (ie Magglio, Dontrelle, Bonderman, Robertson, and Guillen). The deals floated in this thread for Granderson straight-up have been ridiculous. Add Magglio and one of the expensive pitchers and they start to make some sense for the Tigers.

In my opinion, the Red Sox are the best potential trade partner for Detroit. Magglio would be very useful as a platoon partner for Drew, and they would view a guy like Bonderman or Robertson as a reliever and rotation depth rather than as a starter. Even if those guys had basically no value and their contracts were viewed as part of the cost of Granderson, would the Red Sox rather have Granderson for 4 years at an average of $16-17M per year through age 32 or Holliday for 7 years at $18-20M through age 36? I think they'd prefer Granderson by a wide margin. If the Tigers really need to cut payroll, I could see something like Granderson, Magglio, and Bonderman for Reddick, Bowden, and Delcarmen. By taking on $30+ million in 2010 salary, a team could potentially trade a Neuwenhuis/Tejada/Holt type of package to the Tigers rather than giving up the sort of elite talent that Granderson alone would require.
   40. Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:22 PM (#3388212)
2007 called - it wants its assessment of Curtis Granderson back.
   41. The importance of being Ernest Riles Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:32 PM (#3388215)
I don't buy the criticism of the Tigers for "letting" Magglio's option vest. They had to play him because (A) they were surely facing a grievance if they benched him just before he met the terms for the option to vest and (B) they were in a playoff race and he was their second-best hitter throughout the second half of the season.

I would have taken a chance with the grievance, given the amount of money involved. There was also talk of platooning him, which could have helped. He sucked eggs for long enough in the early part of the year that they could have defensibly benched him for performance reasons. Talk of benching Magglio started a lot earlier than right before the option vested.

Their decision to play him last year is unrelated to their current financial situation.

The heck it isn't. I'm sure Ilitch and Dombrowski would love to have the 18 MM in savings right about now. I doubt very much they'd be looking to trade Granderson and company in order to save a few bucks if they had that money to play with.
   42. Zipperholes Posted: November 15, 2009 at 09:47 PM (#3388216)
They had to play him because (A) they were surely facing a grievance if they benched him just before he met the terms for the option to vest

I might be wrong, but I believe the rules prohibit releasing a player for non-performance reasons but not benching him. Also, it was considered highly unlikely a grievance would be successful. So the grievance issue probably wasn't relevant -- the real concern was that benching/releasing him might have alienated fans/teammates/future FAs.

they were in a playoff race and he was their second-best hitter throughout the second half of the season. Their decision to play him last year is unrelated to their current financial situation.

So basically, keeping your second-best hitter for a few months for the sake of that year's playoff run is worth losing 4 years of Granderson?
   43. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: November 15, 2009 at 10:00 PM (#3388221)
#38, I guess I actually didn't get the argument because I was not aware of that argument. I'm not sure switching positions is that easy but Tango et al. obviously know what they are doing. Thanks for that.

I don't think Mike Cameron did as well in a corner but what do I know and even if that's true, one example hardly disproves the rule.
   44. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 15, 2009 at 11:26 PM (#3388263)
This brings me back to the "how about Jay Payton for Superstar X" days. Honestly, Newenhuis and Tejada (and possibly also Holt) are prospects that the Tigers GM has probably never heard of.


Why would you think that? Do you think that the Tigers don't scout every level of the minor leagues? I guarantee you that Dombrowski not only knows who they are but has detailed scouting reports on each one of them.

-- MWE
   45. Raskolnikov Posted: November 16, 2009 at 01:31 AM (#3388306)
At a "objective" level, Granderson is more valuable than Fernando + Tejada + whatever. But I've been fairly consistent in my belief that the Mets need to stick with Fernando because he has the chance to be a superstar. No need to use the "Mets fans overrate their prospects" trope, it's just my irrational belief in this kid.
   46. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: November 16, 2009 at 03:11 AM (#3388346)
Why would you think that? Do you think that the Tigers don't scout every level of the minor leagues? I guarantee you that Dombrowski not only knows who they are but has detailed scouting reports on each one of them.

I don't think that he meant that literally. He just meant that Martinez and crew are not players who would excite Dombrowski.
   47. Tripon Posted: November 16, 2009 at 03:16 AM (#3388348)
What would excite Dombrowski is not getting fired.
   48. Sam M. Posted: November 16, 2009 at 03:22 AM (#3388350)
At a "objective" level, Granderson is more valuable than Fernando + Tejada + whatever. But I've been fairly consistent in my belief that the Mets need to stick with Fernando because he has the chance to be a superstar. No need to use the "Mets fans overrate their prospects" trope, it's just my irrational belief in this kid.

Here's my issue with this trade. It's not how much I value these prospects. As I've said, I am very concerned about Martinez's inability to stay healthy, I don't think much of prospects who hit with almost zero power (like Tejada), even if you can say they "held their own" in a league "for their age," and Holt has a great arm and one pitch.

But you need numbers of prospects to have a decent chance to "hit" on some of them, and when you keep doing 3:1 and 4:1 deals, especially in a system that is already thin (and which is only just beginning to get a bit less so), that lessens your chance of having some of those "hits." If the Mets are going to have any sort of budget control, they need to have some young players actually develop and be young Mets, instead of trade bait for somewhat higher-priced veteran guys, or for FAs-to-be like Santana.

All that said, if the Mets did a deal like this (and it would sure as hell have to be Martinez, not a guy like Newenhuis, whom BA doesn't even rank among the Mets Top 10 prospects), I'd go for it if it meant they would non-tender Francoeur. A Pagan/Beltran/Granderson outfield would be pretty damn awesome defensively, and you could begin to see the glimmerings of a line-up there if everyone stayed healthy.
   49. Lassus Posted: November 16, 2009 at 04:11 AM (#3388361)
Well-said, Sam.

(I feel when I agree with you it should be noted. :-D)
   50. Something Other Posted: November 16, 2009 at 07:47 AM (#3388446)
If Martinez could stay healthy, he'd be one of the very best prospects in all of baseball. Seriously, he put up a .250 isolated slugging in AAA in his age 20 season, in the IL not the PCL (.290/.337/.540). It seems like he has been around forever but at his age, Ryan Braun hadn't even played in a professional game. I'd be very hesitant to trade him because the only question about him in my humble opinion is his ability to stay healthy.

That's a nice line, but it's just 200 PA. And it's a big power boost from what he's showed previously, and he failed miserably to maintain it in the majors. Whether Martinez has the bat to play in the major leagues is still pretty obviously a big question. 200 PA are still just 200 PA.


Martinez's struggle against LHP throughout his career is another obstacle against him eventually excelling.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogIs Mike Trout really better than Derek Jeter?
(46 - 12:43am, Aug 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-23-19
(98 - 12:20am, Aug 24)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogMLB bans playing in Venezuela amid Trump order
(8 - 11:58pm, Aug 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogThe reason Reymin Guduan was suspended
(11 - 11:52pm, Aug 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogAlex Rodriguez shares painful details of MLB suspension on Danica Patrick's podcast
(21 - 10:57pm, Aug 23)
Last: majorflaw

NewsblogLEADING OFF: Players get creative, Yanks at Dodger Stadium
(2 - 10:56pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogJudge upholds arbitration ruling that Orioles owed Nationals $296.8 million in MASN TV rights dispute
(7 - 9:16pm, Aug 23)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogI was a bird-flipping Little League menace -- and it’s time to come clean
(4 - 9:12pm, Aug 23)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogHow players are using uniform numbers to break MLB's unwritten rules
(26 - 9:10pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - A New Season is Upon Baldrick
(561 - 9:10pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogCarl Yastrzemski knows it'll be 'emotional' to see Mike play at Fenway
(10 - 9:04pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogOMNICHATTER hereby orders you to bring home your chatter!, for August 23, 2019
(2 - 9:03pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogMLB warns sexual enhancers may include PEDs
(25 - 9:01pm, Aug 23)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOMNICHATTER is King of the News! for August 22, 2019
(65 - 7:44pm, Aug 23)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogJustin Verlander responds after Astros block Free Press from media session
(41 - 6:21pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jeff Frances the Mute

Page rendered in 0.4607 seconds
46 querie(s) executed