Is Edwin Jackson for sale?

by billfer on November 10, 2009 · 51 comments

in 2010 Season,Trade Rumors

Post image for Is Edwin Jackson for sale?

There has been considerable speculation about the Tigers financial state. The payroll will be high, and there are continued questions about revenue potential. Mike Ilitch saw less advertising revenue. Attendance was relatively strong, but the Tigers missed out on any postseason gate receipts despite adding payroll midseason. Now Ken Rosenthal and Jon Paul Morosi are reporting that Dave Dombrowski is listening to offers on Edwin Jackson.

Jackson will likely command a salary of about $5 million in 2010 as he enters his 2nd of 3 years of arbitration eligibility and so a trade would seemingly be at least a year early. The salary wouldn’t appear to be prohibitive for a player that was 3.5 WAR last year and 1.5 WAR each of the previous 2 years. In other words, Jackson will have surplus value next year even he reverts closer to his 2007-8 numbers than his 2009 campaign. Of course value or not, cash is cash and if the Tigers don’t have the money they don’t have the money regardless of the value.

Aside from money, or perhaps in addition to it, are there are reasons why trading Jackson may be desirable?

The Sell High theory

Why this makes sense: Jackson is coming off legitimately the best season of his career. His 3.62 ERA was stellar, but he pitched into some luck without a remarkable strike out rate. His FIP ERA was 4.28. Definitely above average, but not eye-popping. Jackson faded down the stretch – badly. Perhaps the Tigers think Jackson hit his ceiling and they don’t think he can replicate or build upon his 2009 season. They know that Jim Leyland rode him pretty hard and they’re worried about his health or stamina going forward.

Bill James predicts his FIP to balloon back to 4.72 for the 2010 season. If the Tigers can parlay his 2009 season into younger/cheaper talent it may make sense to move now.

Why this doesn’t make sense: As mentioned earlier, Jackson is still a good bet to be a good value as long as he remains under club control. Plus, opposing GM’s have access to all these same stats and circumstances. Also, the Tigers would need to replace over 200 innings of above league average  production and it’s doubtful that talent exists currently in the organization. This leads us to…

Freeing up money for a big move theory

Why this makes sense: The Tigers were reported to meet with Aroldis Chapman who will command big money. Perhaps the Tigers think they have a shot at Chapman and that he could step right into the rotation. I don’t know how Chapman’s contract would be structured, but it seems reasonable that he would make comparable money (or perhaps a little less) than Jackson in 2010. The upshot is the team gets younger without adding payroll in the coming season – and they get some prospects.

Why this doesn’t make sense: Lots of teams want Chapman and that would be a lot of eggs to put in a basket that may be full of holes.

Pitcher X is ready theory

Why this makes sense: Andy Oliver, the Tigers 2009 second round pick was aggressively sent to the Arizona Fall League where he’s had some success after getting roughed up in his first outing. Are the Tigers looking at a rotation of Verlander/Porcello/Bonderman/Oliver/Robertson in 2010? The Tigers are paying Bonderman and Robertson (and Willis) no matter what so they might as well try and extract something from them. They aren’t movable but Jackson is. Plus the Tigers have been aggressive in their promotions in the past.

You could also make the case that the Tigers think they have found something in Scot Drucker. He’s also been strong in the AFL and he could find himself in the mix as well come April 2010.

Why this doesn’t make sense: Oliver is very talented and could prove to be a great pick in the second round. But he has 12 professional inning at this point and a 13:8 K:BB ratio. I’m not saying that Oliver couldn’t make starts at some point in 2010 – or even break camp in the rotation – but to pencil him in 3 months before spring training starts would be kind of crazy.

Drucker is probably a more legitimate candidate for this spot, but I don’t think he’s at the point where the Tigers would be freeing up a rotation spot for him.

Playing for beyond 2010

Why this makes sense: As challenged as the Tigers will be with payroll in 2010, things get better in 2011. Robertson, Bonderman’s, Inge’s, and Willis’ contracts all come off the books and because of Ordonez’s limited playing time in 2009 he isn’t a sure bet to vest for 2011. Maybe the Tigers bite the bullet in 2010 knowing that things will be better in the future with a core of Miguel Cabrera, Curtis Granderson, Justin Verlander, Rick Porcello and hopefully developing youngsters Scott Sizemore, Alex Avila, and Ryan Perry.

Conversely, they may view the division as so weak that even in a re-tooling season they could hang around enough in the AL Central to make things interesting.

If Jackson isn’t required under these scenarios, now might be the time to trade him because his value may not be appreciably higher after the 2010 season. If he can replicate 2009 next year it would further establish that 2009 was a break through rather than a fluke, but it would also take away a year of club control for the receiving team.

Why this doesn’t make sense: The Tigers will still have over a $100 million payroll without Jackson and that is too much for a re-tooling team. The Tigers are likely to be turning to a younger middle infield already, as well as a new closer most likely. If the payroll is too high for a non-competing team then the talent without Jackson probably isn’t sufficient for a middling team.

Putting it together

If the Tigers are serious about trading Jackson, there are probably facets of each of the above scenarios that come into play. Even then, the overarching motivation is probably money. The same Fox Sports article also mentioned that industry sources are saying that Gerald Laird is available as well further leading to the cash flow theory. But at the same time the Tigers are still talking about bringing Brandon Lyon back and he’ll command a salary similar to what Jackson would make.

As long as Mike Ilitch is mum on the payroll fans are left to speculate as to how Dombrowski will improve a team with many question marks on a tight budget. Unconventional moves like flipping Jackson may the only recourse to get through to the salary relief coming after 2010.

 
 

{ 2 trackbacks }

{ 49 comments }

Kevin November 10, 2009 at 11:48 pm

Depending upon the return, it would be a great idea to trade Jackson. The Tigers traded from a position of strength to get him, and selling high (somewhat high, because of his second half) would be a great idea. Guys like Robertson and Bonderman are probably going to have spots in the rotation just because of their salaries (and ability to not completely implode like Willis), so I don’t believe the Tigers will be short on replacement level pitching next season (which is what Jackson will probably end up being).

If only they would’ve taken this approach last offseason with Armando Galarraga.

Stephen November 11, 2009 at 2:17 am

Trading $5 m a year Jackson to create a spot for no-hopers Bonderman or Robertson would count as the stupidest thing this franchise has done this decade. Trading Jackson for salary relief is kind of like a self-employed guy driving a $599 a month Escalade and trying to make ends meet by brewing his own coffee rather than going to Starbucks.

Joel in Seattle November 11, 2009 at 2:56 am

But if your Escalade is totaled and has no re-sale value, and you’re stuck making the payments anyway, brewing your own coffee instead of going to Starbucks makes sense. Under normal circumstances, self-employed guy can get rid of his $599 car payment by selling the car. There’s no market for the Tigers’ lemons.

Since Willis, Bonderman and Robertson are sunk costs, sitting and fretting about them buys you nothing. Dombrowski can only reduce costs he can control, not ones he wishes he could control.

The stupidest thing a GM can do is to say “well, I’m stuck spending a bunch of money on crappy players, why don’t I double down on my losses by spending more money in other places where I don’t have to?”

Kathy November 11, 2009 at 9:45 am

DD did say he’s “listening”. DD says alot of things that don’t necessarily come true. They’d have to get a gold mine of treasures to give up Edwin, imo. I think there would be tremendous interest in Edwin, but what do the Tigers want in his place. Bondo and Nate in the rotations make me queasy already. I nearly died when they traded Jair for Renteria. You just don’t give up good starting pitchers for BS.

Andre in Chi November 11, 2009 at 12:28 pm

Hey now, skipping Starbucks can save you over $2000 a year.

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 8:25 am

Sure if the Tigers were offered some outstanding player or package, they should consider trading Jackson, but i’m pretty sure no team is going to offer up a proven star or combination of players – and if payroll is truly the Tiger’s reasoning behind considering trading Jackson, then to get another team’s star or package of players would be a 2-steps-forward-3-steps-back scenario, a star or starter (position player) would command even more than the Tigers would pay Jackson,

Jackson’s late season fade or some other underlying (health, attitude or contract) concern would be the only reason the Tigers would consider trading Jackson – i’m not buying the payroll story.

Kathy November 11, 2009 at 10:23 am

Oh, don’t even remind me of the late season fade. It still feels like a knife through my heart. The money they lost not making the post season. A history breaking record that we established…..only team to have a 3 game lead with 4 games left and lose the division title. I just don’t believe Ilitch can’t spare a few millions for another year until the bad contracts are off the books.

Chauncey November 11, 2009 at 8:32 am

This talk would make more sense if Jackson had an enormous salary over the next couple of years that the Tigers were trying to offload for some payroll flexibility- but that isn’t the case as Billfer points out.

I understand they have payroll problems (although I often question the severity of those problems because of the relief coming in 2011)- but it doesn’t seem that one of those problems is Jackson’s salary, and for that matter how much salary are they really clearing by moving him? Or even him and Laird? $5m for Jackson and like another $2.5m for Laird? Yes thats a lot of money, but I don’t see how having a 124 million payroll all of a sudden makes things that much better than having a $132 million payroll, especially when they are at the same time talking about bringing Lyon back at the same or higher cost than Jackson- when Lyon is more easily replaced based on the talent in the Tiger’s system than a 200 inning starting pitcher is.

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 8:36 am

Every team with the exception of the Yankees and Red Sox are going to cry ‘payroll and economic concerns’ this offseason – sure there are legit economic concerns in most markets (especially detroit) but its all posturing and setting the fan base up for potential disappointment (in lack of quality trades and free agents signed) in the offseason.

Its like the Tigers saying they’re in the Chapman sweepstakes – they have to say that to let the fans know they’re ‘going to do what it takes to win’ – even though the Tigers know that the Red Sox or Yankees will outbid everyone and sign him. Expect Illich to make the obligatory statement that he’s willing to pay whatever to win a championship… but talk is cheap, and actions are real… and expensive.

Ray November 11, 2009 at 8:52 am

I do not believe that Jackson will have a 2010 season like the first half of 2009. DD should explore trade opportunities for Jackson and Laird. It is reasonable that Gallaraga will bounce back in 2010 as well as either Bondo or Robertson. The Tigers should not trade Jackson or Laird due to payroll considerations but should consider offers if they will help the team in 2010 or beyond.

jcm November 11, 2009 at 9:08 am

Unless they will sign Hollyday , DD is officially the worst GM ever

jcm November 11, 2009 at 9:10 am

BTW: They play in Detroit and soon will be a white-latinos only team.
Disclaimer:Im venezuelan

Andre in Chi November 11, 2009 at 12:31 pm

jcm,

What’s your point? Selective racism?

BTW: They play in the Northern Hemisphere and are currently a male only team.
Disclaimer: Im male.

Anson November 11, 2009 at 10:09 am

I would rather not trade a young pitcher but I do understand the arguments about payroll and the value of selling high. I just don’t want another Ham Sandwich for a Mr. J-action. We would need to get at least 2-3 high-end prospects (in positions we could use), for me to be ok with this.

Kevin November 11, 2009 at 10:53 am

jcm: How is DD worse than someone like Dayton Moore or Ed Wade? Seriously, he’s given out some pretty bad contracts and is overly loyal to his veterans, but you can *much* worse than having Dave Dombrowski as your GM.

Anson: Getting that many high end prospects would be very dependant on how much value a GM puts into a base stat like ERA. I don’t know how many GMs these days use that stat as a primary base for evaluating, and it seems like most GMs would look at the moderate improvement in his peripherals and proceed with caution.

That’s not to say a guy who can throw up an ERA around 4 and give you 200 innings (and is 25) doesn’t have a good amount of value. I just don’t know if we should be expecting 3 high end prospects for him.

Anson November 11, 2009 at 10:59 am

Yeah I’d be hoping for 1 top-end prospect and maybe a C-level or two B-levels. Neither of which I would be terribly happy with. I vote for keeping him.

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 11:09 am

This HAS TO BE just dombrowski fishing to see what kind of guys he might be able to get for jackson this offseason. If they were really that concerned about the 2010 payroll, they would have released maggs before his option vested. It’s not about the money. Or we’d be dangling miguel cabrera.

Look at the free agent class of starting pitchers this year, it sucks. there’s lackey, wolf, pettitte, piniero, harden, garland, pavano, penny, washburn, marquis and some other dreck. those guys will ALL be demanding more money than jackson makes and jackson’s probably the best (and youngest and most durable) arm on that list. If you’re a GM looking for a good young SP, you can pay lackey $100m over 6 years or something, or you can cough up some top prospects for jackson at maybe $10m over 2 years.

Two years of a guy like jackson is worth a blue chip prospect plus two or three other top 100 or 200 type guys: if DD thinks he can get a top talent and a couple more quality players, great, if not, we keep jackson and all’s right with the world.

On the other hand, if something goes down, and we’re pencilling in bonderman, robertson and willis in the 3-4-5 in the 2010 rotation, there will be some significant – uh – consternation from this area over here.

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 12:34 pm

Pineiro is the best of the free agent SP bunch – and his stats were almost identical to Jackson’s last year. Pineiro will be good for someone for the next couple years, but he will come at a pretty price.

Last year: Jackson made $2.2M and he’s 26 yrs old (an incredible bargain any way you slice it)
Pineiro made $7.5M last year, and he’s 31

There are no certainties in MLB when it comes to player expectations – especially with pitching (too many variables). But history usually proves that quality YOUNG starting pitching is just something a team needs to hold onto… unless of course the Rays wanted to exchange Longoria for Jackson – which they don’t and won’t.

tigersfanindc November 11, 2009 at 1:12 pm

Pineriro ‘wants’ $30M for 3 years. yikes…

tigersfanindc November 11, 2009 at 1:07 pm

Now the rumor is George Sherill for Edwin. This is madness. If you’re (really) trading jackson to get salary relief you don’t take salary back; in fact you package bad with good “you get jackson, but you have to take Guillen too”. Frankly, DD is looking to add players to make 2010 better and knows he cannot add a higher priced free agent (although, I’d argue if the right player became available, the Tigers should consider adding payroll this year since theyll have payroll flex next year) so he’s trying to find out if he has any sellable assets. The whole ‘budget’ thing is a smoke screen – if a GM thinks DD is selling because Jackson is over-valued, well, then it makes it harder to get that over-value back, right?

Jeff (the other one) November 11, 2009 at 2:03 pm

Sherrill for a proven starter, even one who might regress to innings-eater status? That would be insane. I’m still mad about Cody Ross for Colyer.

Ryan November 11, 2009 at 2:40 pm

I don’t see any reason to really sell off Edwin, unless we’re getting a lot in return. I know the payroll is high, but so much is coming off the books in 2011 and the Twins look like a lock next year anyway, especially if they get Harden.

Scott November 11, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Jerry November 11, 2009 at 3:06 pm

I think DD is putting all the marketable bait out there to see what he can get back at this point. Keep in mind, these are all rumors until something actually goes down. It would be a shame to lose EdJack and Curtis, but if it brings back quality in return…well, I’d still hate to see those guys go.

Mat November 11, 2009 at 3:02 pm

Good analysis.

My 2 cents:

Just as other GM’s know EJ is probably going to regress, they also know he’ll still be a bargain and still have the upside to be dominant. If they can get a good young player for EJ they should go for it.

I don’t think Willis/Bonderman/Robertson are all necessarily sunk costs. Allocating two starting spots to them is reasonable. That leaves Verlander/Porcello /Pitcher X for the rest of the rotation. Miner is an invaluable swing man who could fill in as needed if one of the expensive trio falters. If all 3 give you nothing, well, you’re probably screwed but if the budget is an issue you have to take some risks, right?

I don’t want the team to spend a lot for a closer. Let Perry, Zumaya or someone else from the minors have a shot at the role.

Let the FA market sort itself out and find the cheap Adam Everett type veterans no one wants.

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 3:52 pm

I think we have to be very honest with ourselves about what it’s reasonable to expect out of bonderman, robertson, galarraga, willis and miner. Avoid wishcasting. and the more I think about it the more I think it’d be kind of nuts to trade a solid 200 inning guy.

bonderman hasn’t been healthy or effective in over two full season. there’s a significant likelihood that he’s completely cooked.
robertson hasn’t even been close to league average since 2007, and has 200 innings of era over 6 since then. he’s probably cooked too.
willis is a wholesale disaster.
galarraga might be capable of putting up a 5.00 era over 150 innings. yay.
miner is perfectly fine as a swing man, but there’s really no reason to believe he’d be effective as a regular starter.
scot drucker will be lucky to have miner’s career, he’s a AAAA guy.
Add all that up and what’s it reasonable to expect? 200-300 innings of 5.50 era?

none of our top pitching prospects – crosby, turner, oliver – are close enough for 2010. If DD deals jackson, the guys coming back would pretty much have to include a near-ready starter that DD thinks they can put into the rotation. what’s john smoltz asking for these days?

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 3:53 pm

If the Tigers get anything close to 200 respectable innings out of any (or all combined) out of any of Willis/Robertson/Bonderman ($34M in 2010 salary) i would be totally surprised.

This understanding makes the prospect of moving Jackson even more of a long-shot.

How about trading Robertson and Willis to the Cubs for Bradley? its a net-zero dollar committed transaction… and both teams rid themselves of dead-enders – who may very well continue on the same dead-end path, but the trade won’t cost either team anything more than they would have spent (granted Willis/Robertson’s 2010 contract would equal Bradley’s 2010 + 2011 contract) – and there are not any teams lining up to trade for on any of these 3 guys and their bloated contracts.

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 4:04 pm

robertson and willis are completely radioactive – utterly untradeable. bradley’s not worth the money remaining on his contract, sure, but it’s debatable whether robertson and willis are even worth their roster spots. If robertson and willis made the league minimum, how many teams would want to commit a roster spot on them?

Mark in Chicago November 11, 2009 at 4:28 pm

Robertson and Willis’ contracts are up after this year, while Bradley is signed through 2011. No thanks.

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 5:18 pm

It takes $22.5M off the books next year (a net savings of $12.5M) that could help sign Lyon and maybe Polanco (to a year deal)…

Without question Bradley is a head case, but he’s a switch-hitter that can hit (.310 in ’07, .321 in ’08) …i know, he didn’t this year in Chicago, but he’s only 31 and this year will need to be a make or break year for him – and if he doesn’t produce or he’s a disturbance, you cut him (still have to pay him the $10M for ’11), and he’s got more of a chance of being productive than either Willis or Robertson will for the Tigers.

When the money is tight and the options are limited, the Tigers have to think outside the box to make some changes, because the status-quo is not going to enable them to compete with the White Sox and Twinkies this year. It could prove to be a crap-for-crap deal, but at least it would net out a savings.

rings November 11, 2009 at 3:28 pm

Fox Sports saying Granderson is on the block:

“Wednesday
Will Tigers listen to Granderson offers? — 3:08 p.m.
An official of another club confirmed the Tigers are indicating that they would listen to offers for Curtis Granderson, who has been considered a franchise center fielder.
The Tigers are saying they would discuss trade offers for a number of their players, including starter Edwin Jackson, multiple sources told FOXSports.com on Tuesday.
The New York Post reported on its website Wednesday that Granderson is available, but that the Tigers would prefer not to trade him.
Falling revenues and escalating salaries are forcing the Tigers to control costs — even though they had a payroll of more than $130 million this year.
Granderson is signed to a long-term contract but had an inconsistent 2009 season.
The Tigers don’t have an obvious replacement for Granderson, but Ryan Raburn has experience in center.”

(see Rosenthall/Morosi notes on their site)

Kathy November 11, 2009 at 3:42 pm

It sounds like he’s selling off the team. Miggy might be next!

Scott November 11, 2009 at 3:42 pm

I hate to point out the obvious, but if we’re looking to move salary, why not explore trading Miguel Cabrera? He would bring a ton … perhaps a corner outfielder and a top prospect or two? What does he make next season, $20 million?

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 3:58 pm

I’m sure DD would listen there as well. Boston’s supposedly in the hunt for a 1B, was kicking the tires on adrian gonzalez, and they’re one of the only teams I can think of with a hole at 1B, the money to aford MC and the prospects to get it done.

Shane Trapped in Toledo November 11, 2009 at 5:17 pm

Kevin Youkillis is a hole at first base? Plus, Victor Martinez will play plenty at first base next year as well.

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 8:30 pm

Youk is a third baseman who’s playing first when lowell’s healthy and effective, which is not so often anymore. They’re looking for a 1B so they can move youk back to third full time.

Shane Trapped in Toledo November 11, 2009 at 9:03 pm

Sure, but Martinez is not a good catcher who will have to play at first base quite a bit and Youkilis will have to play the other half. Ortiz is plugging the DH. They have too many DH/first baseman as is.
I really wish the Cabrera to Red Sox rumor would die.
He is not leaving Detroit. He is the Tigers best offensive player and the team is built around him.

Kathy November 11, 2009 at 3:53 pm

Sounds to me like they will listen to all offers.

rings November 11, 2009 at 4:16 pm
dwinning November 11, 2009 at 4:33 pm

hmm, wouldn’t phil hughes look nice in the old english D?

Stormin Norman $ November 11, 2009 at 5:35 pm

dwinning – i like the deal – Hughes and Gardner (or a solid pitching prospect) for All Star CF and all around good guy Grandy… sounds like a win-win for both teams – the only hitch being the Yankees are notorious for offering up less-than-squat in their deals…

Coleman November 11, 2009 at 5:33 pm

Thanks for the link..although it’s tough reading when you get a first sentence like this: “In a cost-cutting frame of mind, the Tigers have let teams now that…”

I mean, hey Post, I know it’s just a rumor and all, but you could still proofread…

Anson November 11, 2009 at 5:34 pm

Noooooooooo, if they trade Grandy and Jackson I’m changing teams.

cib November 11, 2009 at 5:38 pm

I KNOW it’s baseball, yada yada, but if Granderson leaves the Tigers I really don’t know if I would be able to get past that.

ian (seattle) November 11, 2009 at 7:31 pm

first off…Illitch does not need to cut payroll by selling off the team. He still very much wants a championship..they just cant throw out money this year, so they have to move some players to create capital on the market. Little Caesars is doing well…people opt for the $5 pizza in bad times. Yeah they had a poor attendance in comparison to previous couple years- but those last few years were record! 30% down from a record year at Comerica Park is still better than most ball parks across the nation. Safeco stadium has been a GHOST town by comparison, and Seattle isnt even aware of the recession.

DD just says they are available while listening to offers…which is completely different than being actively “shopped”.

It doesnt mean they want to get rid of them (Dave even said they prefer to keep them), it just means that are not considered untouchable.

BTW I take offense to those that think DD is the worst GM ever…he brought Miguel over by trading a handful of youngins who have ended up less than ideal and/or injured since the trade. He’s also made some great acquisitions like Pudge, Mags, Guillen, Laird, Jackson, Lyon that were all doubted at first and ended up paying large dividends..sure he made some mistakes with Willis, Renteria and extended large contracts to others- but in most cases he rewarded players that had performed great and had seemingly bright futures..its not his fault people boned it after they took Tiger money.

Sometimes you have to trade a Jurrjens to get an experienced tried and true SS that you think is the missing piece to your lineup. Everyone has perfect vision in hindsight..if you could be GM’s for a year, I seriously doubt everyone on this blog would end up praising your efforts at the end of that season.

I feel some of you guys need to move to Toronto to get some appreciation for what a real bad GM can do.

PS- DD has done an outstanding job on the tiger draft picks as well..for both usable players and as trading chips.

Shane Trapped in Toledo November 11, 2009 at 8:25 pm

One of the most rational posts in a while.

Chauncey November 11, 2009 at 7:44 pm

I still say that if you look at this from purely a financial standpoint, it doesn’t make a ton of sense- yes Grandy is owed about $30 million over the next few years, and Jackson is due to make about 5m next year, but even for a team with a bloated payroll, those are not enormous salaries. If it were purely about salary dollars, one would think that Cabrera would be the first one available.

Like Billfer says, this is probably a combination of the financial situation, and possibly DD acknowledging that this team as it is currently made is not good enough to win next year, so he is trying to stock pile talent and build more payroll flexibility in for 2011 with the few tradeable pieces that he has at his disposal.

dwinning November 11, 2009 at 8:37 pm

Right. Someone may have mentioned it somewhere above, but if Dombrowski thinks jackson and granderson are at the peak of their values from here on out and wants to cash in while he still can, he can’t very well SAY that. Instead, he’ll take the approach of “man, these are really stellar players that we love to death, but damn if we just can’t afford them. now give us your best prospects.” It’s not about money. If granderson gets traded, it won’t be a salary dump.

kyle carr November 12, 2009 at 2:04 pm

Wow I really dont want to see Granderson go! but just imagine what he would be able to do in the new yanks stadium. I’m willing to bet he would hit 35-40 home runs a year! I really dont see the tigers trading him unless they can dump ome of the big salaries with the trade ! As for Jackson this guy is a bargain at 5 mill a year! I f he would of had any run support last year he would have won 16-18 games! I personally think they need to sit still with the team they have! I really dont think dumping salaries is a good idea for one u dump your all stars, what is that going to have a effect on? Attendance! If people dont come to the games then basically you are rite back to the same amount of capital anyways. So I say grit it out and wait a year and in 2011 they will have some money to play with!

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post:

Switch to our mobile site