News and Notes: 11.30.2010

– Zach Miner has been designated for assignment. Assuming he clears (I’m sure he will), he’ll be a free agent on Friday.  But the Tigers are likely to bring him back.  He’s been a great spot starter and will be a good long man starting off in 2011.  Good info on the rationale for taking Miner off of the 40 man in lieu of a minor leaguer in yesterday’s Freep.

– Expect the Tigers to offer contracts to Armando Galarraga and Joel Zumaya before Thursday’s deadline.  According to one source, 2011 is make it or break it for Zoom.

– Don’t expect either Juan Gone or Higginson to be inducted anytime soon.  The Detroit News didn’t mince words regarding Juan Gonzalez’ candidacy.

Raburn to start in LF next season?  Someone is reading our comments.  If this is the case, I don’t see a spot for Damon, perhaps he’s heading west.


  1. Vince in MN

    December 1, 2010 at 6:12 pm

    IMO Miner has neither been a “great” spot starter, nor “good” in long relief in the recent past. He’s was average (if that) before the injury and now he is going to turn it on and become a savior on the staff? I don’t think so. Sure he deserves a shot in ST if he re-signs, but was he really missed that much last year? Since the Tigers seem to draft practically nothing but pitchers, they have a farm system loaded with replacements of the same mediocrity.

    Raburn in left for a whole season? We’ll see. Part of me says “go Ryan.” Another part says “oh my god”. Another part says “who are we going to get to play LF this year?”

    Damon? You are joking right, Kevin? Such a dry wit.

    • Kevin in Dallas

      December 1, 2010 at 9:24 pm

      Just trying to let him down nicely. I don’t see a fit for him anywhere in the clubhouse, unless he wants to be a bench coach. I think he can still provide value as a DH somewhere, but we’ve filled that role.

      • Vince in MN

        December 2, 2010 at 2:26 am

        I seem to recall DD saying they weren’t going to resign Damon almost immediately after the season ended. Obviously he doesn’t make any sense as a DH because of his lack of power and he wasn’t going to be playing in LF either. With Leyland’s contract going another year yet (sigh), I don’t think there was ever any chance of him being a coach. I doubt that he would want that anyway if he still thinks he can play, which he apparently does.

        • kathy

          December 2, 2010 at 6:46 pm

          The Dodgers are interested.

  2. Vince in MN

    December 2, 2010 at 9:22 pm

    White Sox signed Dunn at 4/$56M.

  3. Kevin in Dallas

    December 2, 2010 at 11:41 pm

    Oh man, I feel like we’re gonna see the wrong end of a few Dunn walk-offs over the next 4 years.

    Werth would make me feel better.

    • Vince in MN

      December 3, 2010 at 10:36 pm

      But we just signed John Bale to pitch to guys like Dunn. Good counter-move by DD.

    • Vince in MN

      December 5, 2010 at 6:32 pm

      Werth signs with Nationals at 7/$146M. I didn’t think the Tigers had much of a shot to sign him, but the Nationals surprised me.

  4. Kevin in Dallas

    December 5, 2010 at 11:25 pm

    It’s 7 for $126M (prob just a typo V in MN), but still, $18M/yr is a TON for a 31 year old. I’m very, very pleased that the Tigers didn’t get in on that. Though that sets a terrible precedent for Carl Crawford. I don’t think the Tigers will be able to afford him now. He’s gotta get more than Werth.

    2/$18M with incentives for Maggs is looking more and more likely.

    • Vince in MN

      December 5, 2010 at 11:41 pm

      If the Tigers weren’t really in the bidding for Werth (so says DD), I can’t imagine that they will be serious contenders for Crawford’s services. Maggs coming back does seem much more likely. Boras and DD have talked a lot already apparently, so maybe within the next couple of days a deal will get done. If not Ordonez, who?

  5. Vince in MN

    December 5, 2010 at 11:42 pm

    Say Kevin, I just happened to notice that the time signature is still in EDST mode, if it makes any difference.

  6. Coleman

    December 6, 2010 at 4:29 am

    White Sox sign Dunn. DD says, we weren’t even interested once we got VMart. Nats sign Werth, DD says, we weren’t pursuing him. Meaning: 1. PR..there are no failures. 2. Shrewdness, a sense of relative player values to the team. 3. Foreshadowing–there is some other option he is pursuing instead. My sense is it’s an even mixture of 1 and 2; and yet the possibility of 3 is what intrigues me.

  7. Coleman

    December 6, 2010 at 4:32 am

    Who d’ya want? Pheralta, or Miguel Tejada for < 1 mil more?

    Discuss amongst yourselves.

    Expert mode option: lack of Pheralta decreases probability of singing VMart by 20%

    • Kevin in Dallas

      December 6, 2010 at 8:57 am

      I don’t know that the budget was finite, at that point in time. But I like your 3 in the post above…

      I’ve been scouring the news outlets, haven’t seen much of anything. Grienke or Lee??

  8. Coleman

    December 6, 2010 at 4:40 am

    As a relative veteran of DTW game threads, I was dreading the prospect of all the comments after signing Dunn, with his “Rayburn” minus glove and his Inge plus K rate; similarly, it would have been tough reading to process the “1 mil per hit with RISP” Werth era comments (you know whereof I speak).

    (I’m being mildly, Colemanly, semi-sarcastic).

    • Vince in MN

      December 6, 2010 at 3:48 pm

      Where have all the “haters” (to borrow an old billfer term) gone? Perhaps distracted by Lions football?

  9. Coleman

    December 6, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    Vince, the local hater (or h8r for you youngsters) levels were critically depleted by the Michigan football season.

    • Vince in MN

      December 7, 2010 at 1:12 am

      Ah, hibernation rather than peroration.

  10. Coleman

    December 8, 2010 at 1:21 am

    Peroration? There’s no peroration in baseball.

    See, that’s why I hang out at DTW. Not every blog is gonna sport “peroration.”

    The term of course derives from Cicero’s famous Pair Oration, in which he defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, which at the time was treated with derision by his fellow Romans.