Minor League Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Brad Ziegler Diaries Bar-right-arrows

Detroit Tigers Top 20 Prospects for 2008

Napoleon_tiny by John Sickels on in News

Detroit Tigers Top 20 Prospects

All grades are EXTREMELY PRELIMINARY and subject to change.

  1. Rick Porcello, RHP, Grade B+ (I am hesitant to give out a Grade A- or Grade A without seeing some pro numbers first. This grade should not be interpreted as a negative comment on Porcello).
  2. Jeff Larish, 1B, Grade B-  (generous grade, could lower to C+)
  3. Danny Worth, SS, Grade B-  (I like him a lot)
  4. Yorman Bazardo, RHP, Grade C+
  5. Michael Hollimon, INF, Grade C+
  6. Charlie Furbush, LHP, Grade C+
  7. Brandon Hamilton, RHP, Grade C+
  8. Duane Below, LHP, Grade C+
  9. James Skelton, C, Grade C+
  10. Casey Crosby, LHP, Grade C+
  11. Diek Scram, OF, Grade C+
  12. Scott Sizemore, 2B, Grade C+
  13. Francisco Cruceta, RHP, Grade C
  14. Jordan Tata, RHP, Grade C
  15. Clay Rapada, LHP, Grade C
  16. Cale Iorg, SS, Grade C (suspect Baseball America will rank him higher but I want to see some data and two years of rust worries me)
  17. Brett Jensen, RHP, Grade C  (could be a C+ I suppose, but old for level)
  18. Clete Thomas, OF, Grade C
  19. Brent Clevlen, OF, Grade C (almost ready to give up)
  20. Noah Krol, RHP, Grade C
There are several other grade C guys who are interchangeable with the ones on this list...Boesch, Castro, Henry, Joyce, Kaiser, M. Hernandez, M. Hoffman, Nickerson, Putkonen, Rhymes, Strieby, Vasquez, Zell. You can stick any of them on there if you like.

This system has been utterly gutted by trades. How quickly can it recover?

Of course, full statistics and reports on over 1,000 other players will be in the 2008 Baseball Prospect Book, now available for pre-order. Ships the first Monday in February!

0 recs | Comment 80 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Crosby
Is he still a B- even though he is out for the year with TJ surgery?

by aCone419 on Dec 10, 2007 1:33 PM EST   0 recs

crosby!
OOPS! forgot to account for that. Reduce to C+.

by John Sickels on Dec 10, 2007 1:37 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I want to complement you
on your profound ability to say some nice things about the Tigers' farm system.  As you can tell from the Tiger fans postings, they are just whistling in the dark.  They only have one prospect worth writing about, who has never made a professional pitch, and a few guys who could be charitably characterized as mid-level.  I think you are imbued with Christmas cheer in writing about the worst farm system in Baseball.  Please do not be so kind when writing about the Indians' prospects.  We like everyone to think that those non top 10 prospects that are the Indians' staple are just accidents.

by sdtribefan on Dec 10, 2007 6:47 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

well AS A SYSTEM its good
Its not like a system that hasn't produced much talent and doesn't have much in it right now, like the Astros or Pirates.

The Tigers have been producing talent, they just happened to give it all away for a good starting pitcher and a HOF-caliber third baseman within the last week.
And thats what your farm system is for, supplying your big league club with good players.

The minor league operation itself is fine and it is doing its job well, so there is really no need to be all gloom and doom about it even if the cupboard is temporarily bare because you just cooked a feast.
Just a week ago the farm talent would have been well-regarded.  Its a fluke based on when the list was released and when the deal went through

Its like the Mets after Wright and Reyes came up.
Would you rather be a fan of a team with two impact young big leaguers or two A-level prospects.

by nms on Dec 10, 2007 6:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Cabrera is a HOF potential hitter.
Hi nms,
He is an A ball 3B who should be a DH in the AL.  If Willis is considered a "good starting pitcher" who is "an impact young big leaguer", somebody has been sneaking trips in Rocky and Bullwinkels Way Back Machine.
There are also some people who believe that a farm system serves value as depth for the ML club for injuries and underperformers.
Detroit had a better batting order than Cleveland last year.  It is now even better.  Cleveland had better starting pitching which is now much better.  Cleveland had better fielding and that gap is even wider now.  There is no legitimate comparison of relief pitching.  Now, Detroit has no one to call up for at least two years to help out and Cleveland has the same productive organization which supplied so much help to last year's team.
The Yankees have proved that you cannot win a WS without pitching, defense and depth with a payroll of $200+ million!  Do you really think the Tigers can succeed with the same approach with a $140 million payroll?
I appreciante the commentary but to get Cabrera and Willis, Detroit gave up a better pitcher than Willis, a superior 5 tool talent in Maybin, their only healthy backup C and 3 decent upper level pitching prospects.  When you include the Jurjens trade to get a defensive statue for a SS, it looks to me that the Tigers gave up any future the franchise might have to make a big offensive splash in 2008.  To be honest, I had hoped the Detroit franchise wouldn't implode and there would be a great rivalry that would improve the revenues for both teams.  Sadly, Detroit does not appear to have the organization to be competitive long term with the Tribe.  But keep up the cheery face, that is what being a fan is all about.  

by sdtribefan on Dec 10, 2007 11:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
Wow, there is a lot of stuff in this post that simply isn't true.  Willis is not as bad as he was last year.  He is a better pitcher than that and he will be better in Detroit.  Cabrera is an incredible player.  He really is a potential hall of famer.  How is Detroit's defense worse than it was last year?  Cabrera is a significant downgrade from Inge, but Carlos Guillen, who was atrocious defensively at SS, has been moved to 1B (where he is a plus defender) and replaced by Renteria.  I will concede that Cleveland has a better bullpen, but to say that the Tigers have no one in the minors that they can call upon to help out is false.  Yorman Bazardo, Virgil Vasquez, Jordan Tata, and Clay Rapada could all be called upon to contribute at the big league level.  Chris Lambert and Eddie Bonine could also suprise people.

Saying that Rabelo was the Tigers only healthy backup catcher is false.  Vance Wilson will be ready for the start of spring training.

"The Yankees have proved that you cannot win a WS without pitching, defense and depth with a payroll of $200+ million!  Do you really think the Tigers can succeed with the same approach with a $140 million payroll?"

This statement is ridiculous.  It is foolish to say that the Tigers have no pitching, defense, or depth.  Please, you know that isn't true.

I'm sure the point of this post was that you believe that the Indians are still better than the Tigers, but throwing out a bunch of false statements doesn't make that point.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 11:38 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Absolutely not the point.
As I have said repeatedly, I thought Detroit would be a force for years to come with deep quality pitching and some talent at the positions.

I want the Tigers to be a healthy franchise because it helps Cleveland.  However, I think they got desperate because of Cleveland's overall strength and a sinking feeling that the Twinkies might have pushed some good buttons for 2008.  Like Cleveland, they have the organizational depth to make some things happen.

Maybe you are right and some of these lesser talents will help Detroit but do you really believe they will help more than Miller, Jurjens and Maybin did last year?

Detroit has an excellent, young #1 starter in Verlander.  I am not sure any other starter is a #3, but most assuredly there is no #2.  Mostly innings eaters #4/5s.  Maybe one of these fringe average SPs break through in 2008 but nothing in their recent past suggests that.  Maybe the weakest staff in the Central at this point if you include the relievers.

Hey, SBcaptain2, I call them like I see them.  You can disagree with me which is the point of the forum but I do not believe the statements that I actually made are false.  I can defend mine and you can defend yours!  Is this a great forum or what?

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 5:39 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

#2 pitcher
Rogers was a very solid #2 in 2006. He was hurt last season.

Bonderman had a 3.48 ERA in the first half of last season. And then he became injured.

by ian on Dec 11, 2007 11:36 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Looks like we agree
that no one showed he is a #2 quality top of the rotation starter based on last years performance.  Bonderman has had good stretches before and Rogers is approaching Social Security.  Even at this stage of his career, Miller projects as a #2 or better and give me Jurjens every day over Rogers.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 6:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Miller
Happen to see him pitch at all last season? #2 or better is nuts.

by ian on Dec 12, 2007 10:13 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Hmmmmm
A tribe fan opining (aka hoping with all of his might) that the Tigers didn't just finish one of the great offseasons in the modern era of baseball. That talking point amongst Indians fans seems to be spreading over the past week or two and IMO it reeks of petty jealousy. From GM's to fans to coaches to the writers...most everyone applauds the Tigers for making these trades...EXCEPT for Cleveland fans. I wonder why that is and how they know so much more than the rest of the baseball world?

And why are Tribe fans so dang concerned about the well-being of the Detroit Tigers in the 2011 season and beyond?

It's a strange preoccupation that's popped up.

by LickSplickidy on Dec 10, 2007 11:53 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Response
Dontrelle Willis came in 2nd place in Cy Young voting like all of three years ago! He's going to play 2008 as a 26 year old! He didn't pitch very well last year, true. But he is by definition a "young starting pitcher" who has had "impact" performances over the course of a full season.

"Now, Detroit has no one to call up for at least two years to help out and Cleveland has the same productive organization which supplied so much help to last year's team."

Actually, Detroit just called up Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis. Think of it like that. As for the other thing . . .huh?

"Detroit gave up a better pitcher than Willis,"

Andrew Miller has nice potential if he stays healthy, but he isn't anything close to the pitcher that Willis is at this point. And quite frankly, I'd be surprised if he gets there. I don't see Miller making a run at the Cy any time soon.

"a superior 5 tool talent in Maybin"

Um, thanks, you take Maybin, I'll take the guy who's producing at a Hall of Fame level. Maybin's a great talent, but Miggie Cabrera is a great player. And for teams like the Tigers, that's a pretty big difference.

"it looks to me that the Tigers gave up any future the franchise might have to make a big offensive splash in 2008"

Yeah, adding Miggie Cabrera and a SS who put up a .860 OPS last year doesn't do very much for me, either.

"Sadly, Detroit does not appear to have the organization to be competitive long term with the Tribe.  But keep up the cheery face, that is what being a fan is all about."

They traded for a 26 year old pitcher who almost won a Cy Young a couple of years ago and a 25 year old who happens to be one of the very best hitters in baseball despite being only 25. I hope you realize we're talking about baseball and not tennis.

Quite frankly, I'm just totally left clueless by your post. This was an absolute no-brainer of a move, short-term or long-term. All of us should be wishing that our own favorite team could/would make a similar move.

by mrkupe on Dec 11, 2007 12:45 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Your posts are usually much better.
Hi mrkupe,

Miller pitched better last year and he has his career ahead of him.  He will pitch better than Willis who is on an early downhill run.  It happens.  Cliff Lee is better than Willis by the stats and Lee is not likely to make the Tribe opening day roster.

Read what I said.  Cabrera-2 1/2 great tools.  Maybin-5 tools.  Miguel Cabrera is a great hitter, nothing more, nothing less.  Your 860 OPS SS is one of the weakest defenders at that position in the Majors.  He catches what he reaches which isn't much.  Peralta, who isn't my idea of a defensive giant at the position, covers more ground.

Hey, you said you were clueless.  I'll leave it at that.  Just glad my Indians didn't make a dumb trade like this one even though Cleveland has enough prospects so it wouldn't destroy the system.  When all you have is a few near ML ready prospects like Detroit had last year, your choices are limited.  Yeah,  Cabrera and Willis are young.  Looks like a pretty old team otherwise.  But if your happy as a Tigers fan, I am ecstatic for the Tribe.  Win-Win.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 4:44 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

dude
going back to 2006 does not qualify as a trip to the "wayback machine".
He has been an above-average to great starting pitcher every other year but last.  While last year does bring up questions it was also a huge outlier.  One poor year doesnt erase all the good ones, theres more to a player than "what have you done for me lately"

by nms on Dec 11, 2007 1:37 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Ks down, BBs up, WHIP up, HRs up
only 2005 good year plus decent rookie in 2003.  2006 was not a good year and 2007 Willis was one of the worst SPs in baseball.  Check out the stats, dude.  He will get his butt kicked in the AL if the Tigers cannot unload him on some pitching starved NL franchise like the Mets.

If you characterize Willis as having nothing but good years, then I figured out why the Indians are keeping Cliff Lee.  He is a HOF pitcher by comparison, but only by comparison.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 4:22 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Rates
A little more on the giant sucking sound that is Dontrelle Willis:
  1.  6.8 K/9, 2.2 BB/9
  2.  6.4 K/9, 3.3 BB/9
  3.  6.0 K/9, 3.6 BB/9
Not very good trends.

by Yakker on Dec 11, 2007 4:33 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

i have no idea how you thin kthat
You think Andrew Miller is a better pitcher RIGHT NOW than Willis?  And you think Maybin is a superior player right now to Cabrera?

I like the upsides and talent of both Maybin and Miller but its not like you traded them for mediocre players, you traded them for very good ones.  So you could wait a year or two for Maybin/Miller to (possibly) become good players or you could deal them now for guys who already ARE good players (admittedly there is a small chance Willis is hurt o something and doesn't bounce back), guys who have achieved (or even exceeded) what Maybin and Millers upsides are.

Also, I can't believe you included "giving up your backup C" as a negative in the deal.  In a deal like this giving up Mike Rabelo is "whatever".  You can sign any number of random vets to one year/low money deals to get a replacement.
Rabelo does not matter at all.

As for the other three I think you overstate their value.  Eulogio de la Cruz has a great arm and a great name, but right now he looks like a reliever.
Burke Badenhop is like Rabelo, not a player you think twice about in a deal like this.  Hes a 25 year old soft-tossing late pick college groundball guy.  If you really want this kind of thing you can get another one in next years draft easily.
Hell, you already have a lefty version in Duane Below and a similar sort in Jordan Tata.
Trahern is a younger, better version of Badenhop.  
He throws strikes, and keeps the ball on the ground, but he can't strike anyone out.

So yes, Detroit could have kept the players so as to give them a couple guys to call up like the Indians did or they could deal them now to get two all-stars who will contribute all year.

And while yes, this is a "deal for now" move it gives them a better chance of winning a championship now than not making the deal would have given them in the future.  So if the choices are have a small chance at a championship in a few years or have a better chance this year why WOULDN'T you trade the future for the present?
You've got to commit to winning now at some point.

by nms on Dec 11, 2007 1:52 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Yes. No. More tools though so more rounded.
Like I said, if these guys and Jurjens are as bad as you say, then the guys behind them are real crap.  It's funny that you believe the draft will provide ML ready prospects.

Is there a better chance this year?  Are championships won by the best hitting team?  Seems to me it has more to do with pitching and defense.  If it were my team, I would much rather have a staff that included Miller and Jurjens with some ML backups than the staff Detroit has now.  I thought Detroit would be a force for several years with its pitching depth.  Now they will be a great hitting team, something like the Indians of 2006.  BTW, it looks to me like Detroit will be spending its $ on FAs after this year.  Gonna resign the old guys?  Or bid for the FAs?  Tough choice but that's the path.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 5:06 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

hitting
I understand it's the 'in' thing to say now that hitting doesn't win championships, but it sure helps. Boston had great pitching (i.e. Beckett, Pedro, Schilling), but they slugged it pretty good in both of their titles too.

As for the Tigers, Robertson, Rogers, and Todd Jones I think are the only significant free agents after this season, so they should have 2 years of contention at least. Bonderman and Willis are only 25, and given their track records there is some potential upside there.

by thefume on Dec 11, 2007 10:46 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Just silly
Two weeks ago, if a Tiger fan proclaimed that EDLC, Trahern, Badenhop and Micheal effing Rabelo were vital to the team's ability to be competitive in the future, fans from other teams would haved laughed. And rightly so.

But now that those four decent - but 100% fungible - players are gone, the Tigers are going to crash and burn?

So long as Ilitch puts up the money, in four years the Tigers will have a lineup with Miggy, Granderson, Guillen, Ordonez and Larish. Hollimon, Sizemore, Worth and Iorg can fill at least 2 spots in the infield. Skelton could be the catcher. Basically they have question marks at catcher and one infield (SS or 3b) position.

The rotation will be Verlander (28) Porcello (22) Bondo (29) Willis (29) and one of a dozen decent guys in the minors. Yes the Tigers need to build a bullpen but the Padres build and re-build their bullpen over and over.

The lies that "The Tigers are old" or "The Tigers window is 2 years" are just that; nothing but lies.

by RatkoVarda on Dec 11, 2007 3:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Hey John
Publish the book so that this poor soul can see the possibility of success for his projected rotation and lineup.  Other than Porcello, who has never made a professional pitch, I question whether any other prospect would make Cleveland's top 20,  Certainly not Larish and Worth wouldn't be better than 3rd in SS prospects.

I think the point of my threads is that the Tigers will have to keep spending on re-signs of older players or the FA market.  Yankees Central!  Looks like we agree on that!

$140 million is a lot to spend on payroll and not have a pitching staff that can win in the postseason.  Once you have taken this course, you just cannot stop.

BTW, I think EDLC and Trahern could have been solid midrotation starters in time.  Badenhop is probably a #5.  I have also seen Porcello get lit up by 16 year olds.  He was nowhere near the top pitcher at the 2006 AFLAC game.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 6:45 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

cmon
"$140 million is a lot to spend on payroll and not have a pitching staff that can win in the postseason."

Here you go spewing false information again.  Our pitching staff can't the postseason?  HELLO! remember the 2006 playoffs.  Our pitchers have already proven that they can win in the postseason.  The only guy in our rotation that didn't contribute to our 06 world series run is Dontrelle Willis, who was in the rotation for the WS champion Marlins a few years ago.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 11, 2007 6:53 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Great argument but I said
pitching staff and not rotation.  You want to live in the past as long as it is not last year.  I can live with that but it does nothing to change the facts upon which my opinion is based.  Why don't you add that Inge was a great 3B in 2006?  Or Marcus Thames?  Or Zumaya? or Rodney?  Do you also think Ordonez will repeat his 2006 performance?  Granderson?  Could it just be that you are being selective and picking every single player's best year as his career norm!  I don't mind because that is what being a fan is all about-hope.  Although I am ambivalent about the proposed cost to the Indians, it would be nice for the Tribe to complete the Haren trade and have 3 of the top 5 pitchers in baseball.  That could make them competitive with the RedSox and Angels next year.  And on an $80 million payroll or less.  Of course, they can dip into the long list of prospects and be better with Miller and Laffey instead of giving them up for Haren.

by sdtribefan on Dec 11, 2007 11:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

wow
i rooted for the indians last postseason. your posts make me glad they didn't win.

i guess we'll just have to see what team was a bigger fluke, the '06 Tigers or the '07 Indians.

by thefume on Dec 12, 2007 10:08 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I'm at work so...
anyone care to give a quick rundown on Danny Worth?

Don't know him...thanks!

by themurph on Dec 10, 2007 1:35 PM EST   0 recs

Worth
Plus defender at shortstop.  Solid bat, not a lot of home run pop, but good enough gap power for a SS.  He was the Tigers 2nd round pick this year out of Pepperdine and was pushed to double A by the end of the season.  He held his own and appears to be on the fast track.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 1:47 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

You think
Worth gets to compete for job '09 or does he project as a utility layer

by Rajah358 on Dec 10, 2007 2:35 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
He'll get to compete for a starting job.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 3:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
in 2010, he'll compete for the starting job.  I guess if he goes crazy this year and Renteria struggles, they may decline his option to clear the way.

I don't think he'll hit enough to be a difference maker in the big leagues.

by Edman85 on Dec 10, 2007 4:13 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Difference
The difference here is that the Tigers got some pretty darn good players in exchange for their prospects which is a legitimate use of a farm system.  The Astros either got poor return(trade with Rockies) or never had the prospects in the first place(lost draft picks, failure to sign draft picks).  Overall, there's no comparison, the Astros system has been managed far worse and their overall organanization is in far worse shape.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 10, 2007 1:40 PM EST   0 recs

The Astros
Porcello alone gives the Tigers the nod over the Astros.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 1:43 PM EST   0 recs

Really?
I'm no fan of the Astros system, but Towles, Patton, Paulino, Costanzo, and Norris make for a much stronger top 5.

by doublestix on Dec 10, 2007 5:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
2 through 5 the Astros are stonger, but Porcello is an elite talent and the Astros just don't have anyone of that caliber.  Its interesting that you mentioned Costanzo, because he is similar to Larish, though I think Larish is a slightly better prospect.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 5:13 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Tigers system
I am confident that the Tigers system will be rebuilt in two years.  Scouting director David Chadd really knows what he's doing and ownership allows (even encourages) him to pay over slot money in the draft to get the best talent.  The Tigers have also increased their activity in Latin America and have signed some interesting guys out of there.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 1:49 PM EST   0 recs

I agree
The reason the Tigers could make those trades (Sheffield last year, and Renteria, Willis/Cabrera this yaer)they did in the first place was b/c of solid drafting, and Mike Illitch willing to pony up the bucks to sign draft picks that were slipping.

Andrew Miller and Cameron Maybin were two of those guys that slipped in the draft b/c of signability concerns.

Verlander and Porcello as well.

No doubt the Tigers system is in rough shape at the moment, but I like a number of the guys they have in the low minors (especially from the 2007 draft), and I feel that they'll replenish the system in 2-3 years anyways.

This is a key year for guys like Larish and Sizemore, but they have a chance to take the next step as well.

Bonderman, Verlander, Willis, Porcello, OH MY!

by sportznut3081 on Dec 10, 2007 2:17 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Verlander
Fell in the draft? #2 overall?

by doublestix on Dec 10, 2007 5:09 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Bush
Verlander's (and Drew's) demands scared the Pads into take Matt Bush at #1 overall.

by aCone419 on Dec 10, 2007 5:20 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Nah
Weaver and Drew scared off the Pads.  They were never interested in Verlander.  Many thought Verlander was an overdraft at the time, especially considering that Drew and Weaver were still available.  Niemann also signed for more than Verlander, I believe.
Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Dec 10, 2007 6:04 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Drew vs Bush
Everybody thought Drew was the guy for the Pads that year.  Drew ended up signing for what, 6,M?  Bush cost $4,M.  Which do you think the Pads wish they had now?

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 10, 2007 6:34 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
Verlander certainly did not fall in the draft (though Matt Bush had no business being drafted ahead of him), but the point is that he had a big price tag and was difficult to sign.  Had the Tigers not been willing to go above slot and give him a big league deal, Verlander would not be a Tiger today.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 5:26 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Yes
That's what I meant in regards to all 4 players I mentioned.

They became Tigers b/c of their perceived signability issues, and price tags.

Clearly, in regards to Verlander, he didn't really fall, but the concerns were there had the Tigers passed on him as well.

Bonderman, Verlander, Willis, Porcello, OH MY!

by sportznut3081 on Dec 10, 2007 5:49 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

the real reasons
Thank goodness for the fact that hockey is a crappy TV sport, that the NHL players union is weak, that the American public has turned to NASCAR and UFC for its need for speed/violence, and that Steve Yzerman decided to retire.  All of that, plus his commitment to Dave Dombrowski, have allowed Mike Ilitch to pull his cash out of the Red Wings and put it smartly toward the Tigers.  HockeyTown is just a trademark - Detroit is a baseball town.

by TigerFanInCleveland on Dec 10, 2007 9:33 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Well
the fact that the NHL has a salary cap now is the biggest reason Ilitch is spending less on the wings.  I don't think it was actually a plan to spend less on one team and more on another.  Both teams are very profitable and while the popularity of the Tigers may be growing, I don't think fans have soured on the Wings who are still averaging about 18,000 fans per home game.

by kaisertown on Dec 10, 2007 11:41 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Big Misconception
Many outsiders say that Illitch didn't spend money on the Tigers in the past, but that couldn't be further from the truth.

It was just spent very poorly, starting with Randy Smith, poor scouting, poor coaching, and giving contracts to the Bobby Higginson's, Tony Clark's, and Damion Easley's of the world.

His spending on the team goes back to Cecil Fielder, but clearly there were more bad signings than good ones by far.

It took him longer to turn the Tigers around than the Wings, but its not like the Wings were a powerhouse overnight.

It took Illitch sometime to get the right man (Dombrowski) to take care of the job, and its paying dividends now.

Illitch is spending more now than he has before b/c more fans are showing up, and the team is competitive.  If you look at the numbers of the team's payroll in the past, they were always competitive at least from a division standpoint spending wise.

The best thing that ever happened to the Tigers was Juan Gonzalez turning down an 8 year, 140 million dollar offer.

If not for that, they probably wouldn't have half the team they do now.

Bonderman, Verlander, Willis, Porcello, OH MY!

by sportznut3081 on Dec 11, 2007 12:27 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I totally agree
I was just sticking up for the Wings who are still the most popular hockey franchise south of Canada.

by kaisertown on Dec 11, 2007 12:44 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Red Wings
The Red Wings are awesome.  They are the best team in the NHL.  Hopefully they don't fold in the playoffs again.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 11:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Hockey Town
There was a great debate on the local AM (WGR 550 - Buffalo, NY) talking about Hockey town.  The broadcast was discussing during the 07 NHL playoffs that if Buffalo played Detroit they should put city namesake on the line.  That is, Detroit would have wagered Hockey town and Buffalo would have wagered the Buffalo wing.

Hockey is not a terrible TV sport, it just draws little due to demographics.  Hockey used to be one of the leaders in terms of TV sports when they had a slew of recognizable faces and a lot of star power.  With the slowed-down sport and the lock out, much of the star power has been removed from hockey and only recently is beginning to gain traction with stars like Crosby and now Malkin and Ovechkin opening their arms to North America.

The internet's latest attempt at understanding what is going on inside baseball - http://theoutsiderslook.blogspot.com

by bheikoop on Dec 11, 2007 11:25 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Yeah
I'm from buffalo and its nice to see a WGR reference.  I think the biggest reason Hockey has a reputation as a bad TV sport is because it is about 10 times better live.

And Buffalo will always own the chicken wing!

by kaisertown on Dec 11, 2007 12:47 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Sizemore
John, wouldn't Scott Sizemore's impressive Arizona Fall League performance (2nd in the league in OPS) move him up on that list?  He seemed to really finish strong in West Michigan this year, too.

by TheCouga on Dec 10, 2007 2:45 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Sizemore
Sizemore was awesome down the stretch and in the playoffs and was just ridiculous in the AFL.  How can he possibly slip from a B- to a C+ this year and fall down the prospect list in a totally gutted system?
J-Mac

by jdmcrae on Dec 10, 2007 4:37 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

He was a very decent, not-outstanding
hitter despite playing in Low A at 22.

A guy that is a 2b-only, not a shortstop, really needs to show an impact bat (or at least great speed and defense and a solid bat) to be a significant prospect in low A, especially if he is old

by nms on Dec 10, 2007 6:07 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Sizemore
First, Sizemore is not just a second baseman.  While he is best suited to play second, he has the ability to play short as well.  He played shortstop in his professional debut season and he also played short in the AFL.

Second, he really broke out in the second half of the season last year.  Look at his splits. He really struggled in April and May, but he really picked it up afterwards and became a force in the Whitecaps' lineup.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 6:21 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

ill take you word for it that
he broke out in the second half.  But the fact that he evidently struggled so bad in the first of the year in low-A as a 22-yo college star is damning, even if he redeemed himself somewhat late..

As for the defense, I know he was played a little SS but as I recall he played 2b almost exclusively at VCU (though I could be wrong) which doesn't bode well for him as a major league SS.
I havn't seen a single scout say he could be an average ML defensive SS.  I could be wrong about that though, my bad if i am.

I'm not saying hes a bad player, hes really not.  It IS hard for ANYONE to hit in the MWL in April and May.  Its a pitchers league, and its only wose when its cold and I know WMich's park is especially hard to hit in.
I'm just saying he is not at all outstanding and C+ is a very fair grade

by nms on Dec 10, 2007 6:47 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
He was a second baseman at VCU.  I'm not saying that he will be a shortstop, I was simply responding to your post that said he was exclusively a second baseman.  If he ever becomes a big league regular it will probably be at second base.  I was just defending his versatility by saying that he can play a little short and has done so in the past.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 7:12 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

everyone knows
that AFL numbers really don't mean much.  Its an exhibition league in bandbox parks.  Its great to watch the players at, and its great to give the players more games to play, but you can't read too much into the statistics of something like that.

Its much more about everything BESIDES the stats

by nms on Dec 10, 2007 6:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Brett Jensen
I loved this guy at Nebraska, he has a very deceptive delivery and guys just couldn't seem to hit his fastball, even though he doesn't throw that hard.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him make it one of these days...

by doublestix on Dec 10, 2007 6:24 PM EST   0 recs

Skelton
I'm surprised he isn't a little higher.  He can hit and is pretty athletic, although some more power would be nice.  Still needs to do something at the higher levels.

System has been gutted, but there are still some players I like a bit.  Just no uber-prospects that get you excited except Porcello.

by mcq fesijiba on Dec 10, 2007 6:41 PM EST   0 recs

wait...
Todd Frazier is the same grade as Porcello?  That seems a little nuts to me.  Granted that probably has alot more to do with Frazier being overrated...

by nms on Dec 10, 2007 6:56 PM EST   0 recs

grades
I don't know how many times I have to say this, but here goes again.

GRADES FOR PITCHERS ARE NOT THE SAME AS GRADES FOR HITTERS AND DIRECT COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE TWO ARE MISLEADING. That is why I put them on separate 50/50 lists.

by John Sickels on Dec 10, 2007 7:30 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Clevlen
C+/B-...C is very low for him...
--http://yankeesfuture.wordpress.com Bobby Mcnally (alias)

by bobbymcnally on Dec 10, 2007 7:42 PM EST   0 recs

re
Honestly, a C is all he deserves.  Yes, he has talent, but he has done absolutely nothing with it the last two years.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 8:14 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re
Aside one year in High A (in which he was repeating the level), he's really done nothing. Look at his last two years, OPS of .669 and .664, respectively.

by doublestix on Dec 10, 2007 8:16 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Always
..enjoyable Mr. Sickels.

I, for one, am very surprised to see Larish as the #2 prospect, as I view him as something of a bum. His AA numbers were slightly worse than those of Carlos Pena...except Pena was 5 years younger in AA.

I guess that's the most telling sign of a decimated system. There are, however, three players in whom I am particularly interested. Duane Below really pitched well in A ball last year, and he also seemed to step up in the playoffs. James Skelton is a guy who certainly lacks significant pop, but he plays a premium position and he seems to be a good hitter for average. And Charlie Furbush is a guy who looks to have a good arm but maybe some questionable mental makeup.

I realize that all three guys were a bit old for their level, and I've not seen any of them play in person, but their stats certainly looked good.

I'm wondering, has anyone else seen them play?
How is Skelton as a fielder?
What kind of stuff does Below have?
Does Furbush have a shot at bigger things?

by UTBagwell on Dec 10, 2007 9:08 PM EST   0 recs

re
Skelton is very athletic and quick behind the plate.  He definitely has the skills to stick as a catcher.

I havn't seen Below play, but I'v heard he's a soft-tosser.

Furbush started his professional career with a bang so hopefully he as a shot at bigger things.

by SBcaptain2 on Dec 10, 2007 10:17 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Skelton...
I can't speak of his footwork but I do know he threw out over 40% of runners this past year.  I'm somewhat surprised he's rated so low in this system, and think he could be a break-through type in 08.  I guess he was slightly old for the league (21 in Midwest League), but a catcher with an 850 OPS and a 1:1 BB:K rate in one of, if not the toughest hitters league in the minors, is someone to keep an eye out for.  

by ftheyankees on Dec 11, 2007 6:46 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Correction on Larish
"His AA numbers were slightly worse than those of Carlos Pena...except Pena was 5 years younger in AA."

Larish: 10/11/82
24 and a half to start AA in 2007.

Pena: 5/17/78
22 on the dot to start AA in 2000.

That's about 2 and a half years apart, not 5.  Were Larish's numbers slightly worse than Pena's? Let's check the magic of baseball-reference's league stats for the minors:

Pena - .944 OPS, .764 league OPS, .799 team OPS.
Larish - .905 OPS, .738 league OPS, .757 team OPS.
Pena - .180 over league OPS, .145 over team OPS.
Larish - .167 over league OPS, .147 over team OPS.

They look like very similar lines.  Pena's numbers were EVER-so-slightly better, if at all.  After that 2000 season, Pena was named by BA as the #1 Rangers prospect and #11 overall prospect in baseball.  If anything, I think John's B- grade for Larish is too conservative.  Larish looks like a B or B+ prospect to me.

by fourthbase on Dec 17, 2007 12:12 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I think Iorg
should at least be a C+.  I understand the concerns but hes got the upside of a starting SS and hasn't performed POORLY, hes just sat out a couple of years.  The other grade Cs are all middle relief possibilities or guys like Clevlen who have shown they can't hit.

I think Iorg has to be a C+ because of his potential at this point.