2010 Season Preview: A New Hope

Opening Day is tomorrow, and before the world is treated to a Zach Greinke-Justin Verlander match up, I thought that I would share my perspective on how I think the Tigers are going to fare this year. Last year I did this through a week-long position-by-position breakdown of the team, and how similar it felt to the 2006 team. Quoth me:

Prediction: The Tigers will be in the hunt for a playoff spot up until the final week, at which point, the hot team will win out. This team has tremendous potential, it's just a matter of putting it all together.

Remember, this is on the heels of the vast majority of professional analysts predicting that the Tigers would finish 4th or 5th in the division.

That said, the 2009 team was not particularly good and ultimately, their weaknesses were exposed and the hottest team in the history of everything was able to overtake them by going 17-4 over their last 21 games, with 3 of those losses coming at the hands of the Tigers. This, for a Twins team that was playing under .500 baseball prior to that home stretch. Hot indeed.

Anyway, that improbable run culminated with this:

Oh, the pain.

That game apparently sent a shockwave through the collective sports consciousness of every team that I care for, leading to this:

And this:

And this:

And this:

It's been a rough year.

A New Hope?

So, it is crucial that I believe that we have reached a turning point. That this perpetual 2009-2010 nightmare has reached its end right back where it started. With the Tigers. Now, I'm not saying that they're going to win the World Series. Or even make the playoffs. Or that I even need them to make the playoffs. No, they just need to make it stop. But can they?

I tend to look at a baseball team in two ways: What personnel changes will make them better or worse than the year before and, how will individual players perform based on historical norms, seasonal anomalies and the like. Then we do a mental calibration of the rest of the teams in the division and there you have it. So, let's get to it.

Out with the old, in with the new.

There was a lot of movement within the Tigers organization this year. These guys?







They're all gone. That is, for brevity's sake: your two best offensive players not named Cabrera, your best pitcher not named Verlander, your closer, your set-up man, and the player who needed the fewest at-bats per home run in Detroit Tigers history. In their place we get: rookie, rookie, promising young pitcher and Jose Valverde. And throw in Johnny Damon for good measure.

So here's the question: Did the Tigers get better with their personnel moves this offseason? I have a hard time believing that the answer is "yes." Still, it isn't as much of a long shot as it seems. Valverde should be a better closer than Rodney. Damon is a more-than capable replacement for Granderson, albeit one who I think is not as good by a number of measures. The rookies, by all accounts, should be on their way to nice careers, but are still rookies. And when I see rookies up the middle (at 2nd and CF) I get worried. Personally, I think that both Austin Jackson and Scott Sizemore need to have Rookie of the Year-caliber years to make up for the offense that the Tigers lost in the offseason, and frankly, I just don't see that happening.

Regressing to the mean

I'm going to take a shortcut here, because it is late and I need to take the dog for a walk and go to work in the morning. Everything that I'm going to say has no statistical backing because I don't have the time to look it up. However, if you were to look it up yourself, I'm pretty sure that I would be in the ballpark. So...

Looking back to last year, I see four players who had seasons that were unusual. Justin Verlander pitched like Cy Young and carried the team on his back towards the end of the season. Compared to 2008 he was a revelation. Rick Porcello was the 20 year old who, even with all the hype he brought with him, outperformed expectations. Meanwhile, Carlos Guillen and Magglio Ordonez fell off a cliff, which Maggs somehow climbed back up to have a stellar back-half of the season. Still, their declines we so marked that I would be surprised if any former all-stars not named Andruw Jones have had such abruptly abysmal seasons.

For this year, I think that we will see a regression to the mean, and that that will benefit the Tigers. What I mean is this: Verlander was great in 2009 and bad in 2008. But he was really, really good in 2006 and 2007. I see him having a similarly consistent and excellent year, even if it isn't quite as good. Rick Porcello, in his second season, should be able to build off of an excellent 2nd half (culminating in a breakout Game 163), as long as his arm isn't too tired from substantial increase in workload last year. I see him grabbing about 14 wins and holding down the fort. Ordonez will benefit the most from a regression to the mean. His average will stay high, he'll hit the gaps and, although his power numbers will continue to shrink, I think that he'll come through when he is needed, time and time again. Guillen is less certain, as injuries have taken a toll on him. However, a move to DH should help and he should at least be able to hit for average if healthy.

Also, don't count out Gerald Laird. I think he is going to have a big year (.275/15/70). Mark it.

Other Stuff

Questions abound. Where are the runs going to come from? Can the Tigers survive the offensive output of Santiago, Inge, Laird, and Two Rookies? How are Willis and Bonderman going to pitch? What is the backup plan for if/when one of them fails? How will Inge and Sizemore recover from their injuries? How will Scherzer and Valverde adjust to the AL? Damon to Comerica? Guillen to DH?

Ugh.

In a way, I regret not giving myself the time to do a more comprehensive preview for this team, because there is just so much that we don't know. At the same time, I feel like I could have done all the research in the world and felt the same way. I take solace in this: The White Sox seem to have a number of similar question marks as well. The Twins lost Joe Nathan and are OUT OF THE METRODOME! I think that they lose 5 wins on that fact alone. I just don't think that the Indians or Royals are there yet, despite their young, talented cores.

And so we're left with this.

A Prediction

The Tigers will not make the playoffs this year. I just don't feel it. And I'm an optimist--I always feel it. I think that they will be in contention and make things interesting down the stretch but that they won't be able to do it. On the plus side, I think that they'll spare us the heartbreak that we were all treated to last year, so at least there's that.

I'm going to chalk it up to the fact that the team is a bad combination of being too-young and too old, and that they are going to come up just short as they try to reconcile themselves with the fact that they are simultaneously on the decline and not quite ready for the big time. The exceptions are huge, as Verlander and Cabrera will have seasons that will place them in the Top 3 for Cy Young and MVP voting, respectively, but I don't think that the supporting cast is there. When I see Cabrera protected by Guillen and then some sort of Inge/Laird/Sizemore/Everett 6-9, I see trouble.

5 Things from the Crystal Ball:

1. The Tigers will finish in 2nd with 84 wins. The White Sox (88) win the division.
2. Austin Jackson will play like Curtis Granderson circa 2006
3. Both Verlander and Cabrera will lead the league in two of three "triple crown" categories for Pitchers and Hitters, respectively
4. Magglio Ordonez's option will vest for 2011
5. Curtis Granderson will hit 40 home runs and win a Gold Glove. No, I'm not joking.

Prove me wrong kids, prove me wrong. Now bring on Opening Day!

*It is worth noting that while I was writing this Curtis Granderson hit a home run in his first at-bat as a Yankee

Grand Galleries: 2010 Topps Finest

I like Finest. I particularly like it when you have the chance to look at one page and see a full multi-colored refractory rainbow of a player. It was always a goal of mine to do this with Curtis Granderson cards, but I was never able to really come close. Thank goodness for Grand Galleries then, I suppose. And for living vicariously through eBay. Have you ever heard about how people get the same mental benefit from thinking about what they would do if the won the lottery as they do from actually winning the lottery? Yeah. This is kind of like that.

A few things to note: I will include printing plates as they appear, but I'm not going to soil the aesthetics of this otherwise complete page with my big "Grand Cards" logo. Also, if you want some more thoughts on Finest, please peruse my Tigers Gallery post for the set. With that, I am proud to present you with 2010 Topps Finest, the Complete Curtis Granderson collection:

#64 Curtis Granderson	#64 Curtis Granderson Refractor (#/599)	#64 Curtis Granderson Blue Ref. (#/299)
#64 Curtis Granderson Green Ref. (#/99)	#64 Curtis Granderson Gold Ref (#/50)	#64 Curtis Granderson Red Ref (#/25)
#64 Curtis Granderson Purple Ref (1/1)	#64 Curtis Granderson Printing Plate Black (1/1)	#64 Curtis Granderson Printing Plate Yellow (1/1)

The Winners of the Great Grand Cards Giveaway Are...

Ok, the contest is closed and the winners have been selected. Please enjoy this introductory video, followed by the randomization:

And now the Randomization...

One:

Two:

Three:

I'm sorry. You have been made the fool. An April Fool, as it were.

I'm not much for April Fool's pranks--I haven't really done much of them historically--but for whatever reason felt compelled to give this one a shot.

Kudos to mmosley, who at 10:45 almost blew my cover:

Interesting Day for an interesting Contest!

I thought that The Drizz was on to me too after his post on Totally Cecil said this:

Dan must have fallin' ill and/or lost his marbles with an exciting and outrageous contest!

But no, somehow I managed to keep under the radar--either that or those that were wise to me stayed away.

Anyway, because you were all such good sports, I thought I would be nice.

mmosley, for figuring out my little game, will now be the proud owner of this:

Yes Virginia, that's your very own 2002 Bowman Chrome Curtis Granderson rookie card. Please enjoy.

Also, keep your eyes peeled because of the course of the next few weeks, I really will be giving away some of my Granderson cards, and selling others etc. For everyone who entered the contest today, you are now automatically entered for the next contest I run. It's the least I can do for the bit of fun you gave me today.

Now, bring on the baseball season!

The Great Grand Cards Giveaway Contest!

You may recall, sometime around the great blog identity crisis of '09 that I came up with a plan. To wit: I would cease and desist my Curtis Granderson collecting and selectively sell-off my collection bit by bit to the overpaying Yankees fans that have money to burn.

However, sometime between then and now, something odd happened. First, Granderson cards stopped selling for much money. That whole "these cards can fund all my wildest collecting wishes" was quickly replaced by hesitation. I can't sell my cards for that! etc. Then, because I'm a sucker, I took advantage of some low prices and *gasp* added more Granderson cards to my collection--the very collection I vowed to eliminate.

Oh, and I've got news. I almost did it again, and again and again but, by the grace of God either lost out on my bids, or forgot about the listing or had common sense get the better of me. Suffice to say, I'm playing a dangerous game. So here's what I've decided to do.

A Contest
1. Look at my Granderson Collection
2. Become a Follower of the blog (sidebar)
3. Post a Comment with your favorite Granderson card in the collection--if it doesn't have a caption, just describe it or something

The Prizes
Every eligible comment will be entered onto a list. The list will be randomized and TEN winners chosen. What do the winners get? A card.

But not just any card. Think of it as a draft. End up first on the list? You get to pick ANY Curtis Granderson card from my collection.

That means the 1/1s


Or the on-card refractor autographs:


Or the silks. Oh, the silks:


The first TEN people on the list, will get their choice of whatever card they want--just like a draft. After that's all done and I am forced to break up the band, so to speak, I should be able to overcome the mental barrier that has kept me from moving on the way I should.

One More Thing
Post about this contest on your blog, and you will receive a second entry into the contest.

Also, ALL COMMENTS MUST BE POSTED BY 5:00PM EASTERN TIME TODAY, AS I AM HEADING OUT OF TOWN ON BUSINESS AND WANT TO ANNOUNCE THE WINNER BEFORE I AM STUCK IN INTERNET PURGATORY.

Good Luck!

Robertson Gone: Tigers Choose One Basket for All Their Eggs

Oh boy.

So I was eating lunch with some co-workers when the headline caught me: Nate Robertson was traded to Florida for LHP Jay Voss and Cash. As the bottom line ticked away this factoid appeared:

Detroit 6 Baltimore 5 5th Inning. Willis: 4.1 IP, 7H 5ER 4BB 3K

Oh boy.

2009 DAV Detroit Tigers Nate Robertson

I always liked Nate Robertson. Back in 2006 he was a tough-luck, hard working, awesome facial-haired pitcher. He was my wife's "Tiger" in the "Who's Your Tiger" campaign. He started gum time. He was the only Tiger who actually bought a house in Michigan and lived there year round. Ironically, today's Detroit Free Press announced that Brandon Inge will now be living in Michigan full time.

In recent years, pitcher Nate Robertson has been the only Tiger to live in Michigan year-round. He resides in Canton.

No more.

Somewhere along the line, the wheels fell off. Robertson went from being a serviceable major league starter to a fringe major leaguer in a matter of months. As he wasted away as a generally ineffective bullpen lefty last season, it turned out that he was suffering from any series of maladies, including bone chips and a groin issue.

Flash forward to this spring. Bone chips removed and Groin healed, Robertson, in his 19-odd innings of Spring Work outpitched, by a not insignificant margin, the other two main contenders for the open spots in the Tigers rotation. With Robertson, Willis and Bonderman all proud owners of $10 Million+ contracts, it was widely believed that 1) someone would get traded or 2) someone would fill up a bullpen slot.

What is interesting is that the pitcher that ultimately did get traded was the one most "coveted" (as much as any one of these pitchers can be coveted) by other teams for precisely the reason that you wouldn't want to trade him: he looked the best.

2009 Allen & Ginter #AGR-DW Dontrelle Willis Relic

There is a concept in economics known as sunk costs. They apply to things that will need to be paid for no matter what, and it the general theory is that the sunk cost shouldn't influence strategic decisions because they are fixed either way. The Tigers are not foreign to this concept. Last year, they cut Gary Sheffield and his multi-million dollar contract for one reason: they thought that they were better without him. He was getting paid no matter what, so the question was whether they were better off with Sheffield and his contract alone, or with Sheffield's Contract and a different player and his contract. They chose the latter.

This season, monetarily, Bonderman, Robertson and Willis all had similar sunk costs, and presumably, their contracts shouldn't have factored into any decision. However, you begin to wonder whether there is some ego or emotional factor that swayed Dombrowski to stick with Willis. Perhaps a glimmer of hope that his signing wouldn't turn out to be a total failure?

In other words, blatant disregard for Willis as a sunk cost.

Rob Neyer parses this by assuming that the Tigers are not motivated by ego or hubris or what have you in his brief update on the trade:

Early rumors are that the Tigers are paying almost all of Robertson's $10 million salary this season. Considering Voss's presumed future, that means Dave Dombrowski is essentially betting that Dontrelle Willis will be better than Robertson this season. (emphasis mine)

Assuming that Dombrowski is consistent in his application of economic theory, and recognizes sunk costs for what they are, this trade says one thing: We think that Dontrelle Willis will be better than Nate Robertson.

Whether that position has any merit remains to be seen. The brief flashes of Willisian brilliance this spring have been encouraging, but really no different than say, 6.1 innings of excellence for example. When I see a walk rate that is as high as ever, and wild pitches and all of the inconsistency that has plagued Dontrelle Willis over the last two years, I have a hard time of saying that 20-odd innings of good-not-great performance is the type of encouraging sample size that I like to see.

But this is the basket in which the Tigers have placed their eggs (two baskets really, as Bonderman--who arguably pitched the worst of the three this spring--is a huge risk too) by making the trade.

Now, I'm not saying that it is a bad trade. But when I see a player who loved Michigan, was pitching well and could have served as a lefty in the bullpen (move over, Brad Thomas) get shipped out for a low-level prospect with limited upside and the Tigers are playing the bulk of his salary, I start to question whether it was something that needed to be done. When this is done alongside the human question marks that are Willis and Bonderman, you need to wonder whether Robertson isn't more valuable as insurance in the Tigers organization than he would be to any other team.

But hey, the eggs are where they are. Willis (and Bonderman) are in. Robertson is out. I'm not calling myself a pessimist, but let's just say this: I hope Eddie Bonine keeps himself stretched out.

*it is worth noting that I probably would have felt this way no matter which of the three players were traded, and clearly Robertson was the only player that had any trade value whatsoever. It is more a question of depth. With the salaries all sunk costs it seems like the trade doesn't net enough for the team to sacrifice the depth of another starter option. Through a combination of random chance and likelihood of failure, it seems to me like the Tigers would want as many viable starters as they can get, but that's why Dombrowski gets paid the big bucks, I guess.

Diminishing Greatness

In the last three years--basically, the three years since I've gotten back into card collecting--I have noticed a general trend among my Tigers. In addition to current Tigers players, there has been a steady stream of retired greats that have made appearances in my sets. However, that steady stream looks pretty much like this:

Ty Cobb
Ty Cobb
Ty Cobb
Ty Cobb
Al Kaline
Ty Cobb
George Kell
Ty Cobb
Al Kaline
Hank Greenberg

For a team that has existed for more than 100 years, it makes me wonder how the history of the great Tigers franchise has essentially been reduced to four players. Four. Seriously, try to find recent Tigers cards that show anyone else. There may be one or two, but that pattern above tends to holds.

Now some of this is attributable to the fact that MLB has contractually limited the degree to which retired players can be included in card sets. Part of it has to do with the rights to the deceased that Topps acquired prior to 2009, leading to Ty Cobb overload, but I'm pretty sure that part of it is this: If you can only have X retired players per release, why even bother with the "second-tier" greats. Hall of Famers are 1. Better Players and 2. Have a wider appeal than your general hometown heroes etc.

The problem is that people can only digest so much of the same thing. There are what, like a dozen photos of these players that the card companies can use? And for how many cards? I feel like I'm seeing the same thing over and over again. Well, no more. Courtesy of some 1993 Ted Williams cards I got last week.

Sure, you've got your old standbys:



But the photos are different from what you typically see nowadays, which is nice.

What's more, is you've got some greats (and goods) from the past too.







So I have two questions. The first is, given that 1993 was in the wheelhouse of my childhood collecting years, how did I not have any of these cards? The second, and more important question, is how many players--for any franchise, not just the Tigers--have essentially been relegated to the annals of history because they weren't in the Top 5% of players all-time? Mickey Lolich was a tremendous pitcher, and was a huge part of the 1968 World Championship Team. Yet, apart from some Sweet Spot autographs in 2004, there has been bupkis.

What ever happened to just good old fashioned baseball cards? Sure, autographs of these players are great, and very cool, but they tend to be rare, expensive and devoid of anything that is actually, well, interesting on them. So where's my Lolich base card now? Or highlight card? Or something that tells me, the collector, who Mickey Lolich was and what he did in his career? The beauty of hindsight is that it gives us perspective on where something fits in the context of history. I can look at vintage cards and see a player's stats in his day, or a neat cartoon factoid about him, but that doesn't mean anything to me when I'm trying to tie that player in to the context of baseball 40 years later.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just crotchety, or sick of having a million Ty Cobb cards from the last two years. And, honestly, I'd probably give an out-loud WTF if Darrell Evans was a short-printed Topps issue or part of an insert set. But please, can we get some context around here? Or are we going to be forced into believing that there are two tiers of players in baseball: the Hall of Famers, and everyone else? Has time really diminished their greatness that much? Or have cards betrayed the legacy of these former All-Stars, Hometown Heroes and Franchise Mainstays and, in so doing, veiled the character and context in which the game was played?

I'm sure I'm being overdramatic, but seriously, there's more to baseball than the Hall of Fame and I'm afraid that point is being lost in today's landscape. It is up to baseball cards, as much as it is journalists or media or whatever, to remind us that there were some great players who did great things beyond what is enshrined in Cooperstown.

Tigers Gallery Checklist: 2010 Topps Finest

Oh Topps Finest, how I adore you. For some reason, you were never on my radar as a young collector--too expensive, I suppose--and I was blissfully ignorant of your existence right up until I saw these staring back at me. Now, three years into my world, you've done it again. Bold, Shiny and Colorful you make any collector smile, and any player collector giddy with anticipation over completing the coveted "rainbow" of your cards--despite the fact that they know in their heart of hearts that it probably is not to be.

Alas, I am out of the player collection business, but I can't help but create a scenario in which I start picking up some Finest just because.

Base Set The knock on the Finest base set is that it is little. 5 Tigers, one of whom is this season's "rookie that is in every set even though he won't make the team and isn't even the third most important rookie in the system," Brent Dlugach. Dollars to Donuts says that Austin Jackson is treated to a redemption a la Rick Porcello in 2009 Finest.

As is my way, I will highlight the "base set" in the form of much better looking refractor parallels. In this case, the Blue Refractor. The "rainbow," for those keeping score, would include the base card, and the following refractors: regular (#/599), Blue (#/299), Green (#/99), Gold (#/50), Red (#/25), Purple (1/1)

Note: This is one of those sets for which there is no checklist yet, but based on what I'm seeing on eBay, I think I'm in the ballpark on this one, even as it pertains to inserts and autographs etc. As always, if I'm wrong let me know and I will correct as necessary.

#31 Miguel Cabrera	#58 Brandon Inge	#87 Justin Verlander
#101 Rick Porcello	#145 Brent Dlugach RC

Autographs Bare bones Tigers inserts and hits this year: Rick Porcello gets a "Finest Moments" autograph, which is on a sticker (BOOOOOOOO!!!). As far as I can tell, that (with it's parallel versions) is it for non-base Tiger cards in the set. Oh well. Multi-colored refractors it is then...

2010 Topps Finest #FMA-RP Rick Porcello "Finest Moments" Autograph

And that's all she wrote for Finest. I need to get some of these in hand, but from the looks of things, they stack up very nicely to the 2009 version, which was arguably my favorite design from last year.

...But Wait, There's more! Thanks to sruchris, in the comments, it turns out that there is another card on the Tigers checklist that is worth mentioning. It is a "RC Patch" for Brent Dlugach. This is different from the Manufactured Letter patches, as you will see, and is numbered to 50 copies. Essentially, it is just the picture from Dlugach's regular card, turned horizontal and with a huge rookie logo patch on it. To wit:

2010 Topps Finest #145 Brent Dlugach RC Patch Logo (#/50)

Also in the manufactured patch realm, the first Tiger to make an appearance in Topps' year-long, cross-producted "Logoman" continuity set has come to the fore. It is none other than Miguel Cabrera looking shiny and awesome:

2010 Topps Finest #LM-25 Miguel Cabrera (#/50)

It isn't a Finest card per se, it isn't branded "Finest", after all, but it comes in the packs so it goes on the list. Once they're all out, I may re-label these as part of a different Topps subset, but we'll just have to wait and see for that.

And, barring a secret redemption announcement (I wouldn't rule out a Rookie Redemption), that should be it for Tigers in Finest.