Brandon Inge?

by cmathewson on Feb 16, 2008 2:44 PM EST in News Comment 23 comments

ESPN is reporting that the Tigers are shopping Brandon Inge. After last year, in which he saw his OPS drop 86 points at age 29, Dombrowski went out and made a slight upgrade at third. This left Inge in a bench role, which he has not taken well, especially since the Tigers are expecting him to play multiple positions, including catcher, at least to showcase him to other teams. Any team wanting to acquire him would be paying a premium for his services, at $6 million a year for the next three years.

With this background, it got me thinking. (I know always a dangerous thing.) Would the Twins be interested in him? Let's say the price is right, Punto and a fringe arm like Mullins for him. Would you make that deal?

I would, if the Tigers agreed to take some of the salary, say about half. He could be a super utility player, as he can play just about every position and he has good pop from the right side. He'd keep Gardy from freaking out about that third catcher. And he'd make Monroe expendable, which could help pay for this year's hit to the budget.

What do you think? Please take the poll, and feel free to leave comments.

Poll

Should the Twins pursue Brandon Inge?

I'm all for it, Giterdone!

22 votes

Meh, he's washed up and too expensive.

21 votes

Maybe, if they can get rid of Punto in the process and the Tigers can take some of the dollars.

53 votes

96 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I mean

I mean, look, here's the problem with that. He'd be super utility here too. Sure, he'd probably get more at bats in a platoon with Kubel and he would be nice to quiet Gardy's concerns, but he'd still be a role player. He wants a starting job somewhere, so he wouldn't be happy here. It would be the same thing over again for him.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Feb 16, 2008 4:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

The Twins would have to spin it like this:

We'll give you every opportunity to win the everyday third base job. But, just in case Lamb beats you out, we want you to be versatile. And, you will have opportunities to play third, first, catch and possibly play center against certain left handers in any event.

I'm not sure if that would satisfy him. But it would be a better situation for him than being blocked by Miguel Cabrera.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 16, 2008 4:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

I'd be willing to do it, if it were for Punto and Mullins. Agree that Inge would not be happy as a super utility guy. Heck, just the potential of trading Punto makes this worth it for me. Remove the temptation for Gardy...

Unless we have a better option sitting around, I'd probably keep Monroe as an additional RH bench bat. This would give us Monroe, Redmond, Inge, CF (Pridie/Span) on the bench. Pretty good, with potential for semi-platoon setups at DH (Kubel/Monroe) and 3B (Lamb/Inge). There should be enough PA to go around to make all hitters happy.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 16, 2008 4:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Punto/Monroe

I think the value in this deal would be the option to cut Monroe.

If we could make this trade (I doubt it), we would benefit in the following way:
Subtracting: Punto and Mullins (or something) in trade, and Monroe (cut). We would reduce our payroll by $3.2 + $2.4 = $5.6 million, so Detroit would only have to swallow about $.5 m (this year), before it becomes a profit for us.
Addition: Inge provide us a good right handed bench bat, who is very versatile. He can play 3B, C, and 1B. This allows us to platoon him with Lamb if neither clearly wins the job. It also provides a space on the team for another player (Casilla, Span/Pridie/Gomez, Buscher).

This is why I would do the deal. The biggest benefit is dropping Monroe and Punto, for someone who combines their talents.

by snolls on Feb 16, 2008 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Trade bait

Though he wouldn't like to know it, Inge could also end up carrying some serious value as trade bait later this year, or in the offseason, particularly if he plays well. No-one is really looking for his skill set right now, but that could change due to injury, poor performance.

by snolls on Feb 16, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Given our projected 2008 payroll...

I'm just not that concerned about paying another $6M this year or cutting Monroe just to save $3.2M. We're still far under 2007 payroll. Of course, I'm not in the Twins front office.

The roster space is a valid issue. If we make the trade and cut Monroe, who takes his place? We'd probably want a backup MI like Casilla or Machado behind Harris and Everett.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 16, 2008 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the bigger issue...

is having Detroit take on money from that contract for 2009 and 2010, not this year. $6 M dollars for a bench guy is just too much for my liking per year. This year, it can work because we have tons of extra cash and not much to spend it on, but in 2009 and 2010, I'd rather have some more leeway.

by djskilbr on Feb 16, 2008 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ya, I'd definitely take it...

for that package. IF he'd accept that role.

What I like is that he's a perfect defensive replacement for Lamb at 3b and can bat effectively RH. We don't really have one of those. The closest thing we have is Macri, and he might not be ready. Buscher offers nothing that Lamb can't, and Punto can't hit.

Inge vs. lefties (3 year split): .828 OPS
Inge vs. lefties (2007; his "off" year): .924 OPS

I would GLADLY take that, especially if we're getting rid of Punto in the process.

And I tend to agree; I think I'd still keep Monroe.

We'd have 3 nice bench bats from the right side in Redmond/Inge/Monroe, for a heavily lefty lineup, and 1 guy that should be a good lefty (Pridie). I like that a lot.

I'd hope that Detroit would also take on a bit of his salary in any deal as well. That's a hefty contract he has for a sub.

by djskilbr on Feb 16, 2008 4:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Middle infield

Supposing we sent Punto and a fringe arm to the Tigers for Inge, our bench would look like this:

Redmond, Inge, Monroe and a second utility guy. Adam P. suggested a backup center fielder. I'm not so sure. I think we would need a backup SS/2B. If we went with Machado, we could have three guys on the bench who can play center in a pinch, without having a designated center fielder on the bench. That would allow the loser of the Pridie/Gomez competition get regular playing time in AAA. Alternatively, we could go with Casilla as a bench guy, but I would like to see him work on a few things in AAA.

If we cut Monroe, then I could see having both Pridie and Gomez on the team. Otherwise Monroe's replacement would be one of Jones/Macri/Buscher, or a late signee like Patterson.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 16, 2008 6:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Much as it may pain us all to say, trading Punto for Inge would leave a real hole on the team - middle infield backup. The replacement on the roster would pretty much have to be Machado or Casilla, with either Monroe backing up center or Delmon rotating over there on Mystery Centerfielder's days off.

Again, though, I think others are right in that Inge doesn't really gain anything coming here, other than maybe getting reps in the outfield more often, so I don't see how it would make him happier.

by BeefMaster on Feb 18, 2008 11:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He would get more ABs

With left-handed bats at the corners and behind the plate, there are more opportunities to get him starts with the Twins than the Tigers. The Tigers have two right handed bats and a switch hitter at those positions.

It's still not the starting role he wants, but it's better than riding the pine for a manager who does not use his bench much.

Also on Machado, he can play the outfield, which makes him a perfect utility guy on this team, whether they trade Punto or not.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 18, 2008 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right

Backup MI would be a hole. For some reason I incorrectly thought Inge had experience at 2B. In this scenario, I would expect Casilla to take that backup MI role, as Machado is not on the 40 man, not that we couldn't put him there.

I think Inge would gain marginally by coming here. Currently, he's completely shut out of 3B with Cabrera in Detroit. In Minnesota, Inge could expect 200 PA minimum in a platoon situation with Lamb at 3B, as well as probably another 200-300 with time at DH, OF, C, etc.

I could see Inge ending up with 400+ PA, Monroe with 250-300, Lamb with about 500, Kubel 500-550.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 18, 2008 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Mijares

The Twins do have room to add one non-roster invitee at the end of spring, when they put Mijares on the 60-day DL. So Machado could squeeze in there.

Plus, unlike Casilla, Machado can play third and the outfield. Casilla has never played outside of the middle infield before.

Casilla has better tools and would be a good fit, but he is the classic prospect that you prefer playing everyday at AAA versus being a defensive replacement at second and a pinch hitter at short in the majors.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 18, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

40 Man

Yeah, you're right we have space for Machado.

Which reminds me, any word on who was waived to make space for Livan?

by Adam Peterson on Feb 18, 2008 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We're back to the old trade punto talk again . . .

Why would the Tigers even consider Punto. Are they hard up for a utility guy in the MI? I don't know enough about their roster but I'd assume that they have something that is just as good as Punto and wouldn't want anything to do with him IMO.

All that said if there's any way they could pull it off I think it would make sense. It's a 3 year deal that is a bit spendy but most of our young pitchers that we're gonna need to pay won't be free agents until after 2010 so I think the contract isn't too substantial.

I like Inge as a platoon at 3B and if he rebounds and hits well then he can be the starter and Lamb either will get traded or be our bench guy. He's used to riding the pine so I don't think he would cry too loud.

by halfchest on Feb 16, 2008 10:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I can't speak for CMath, but I'll try...

I think the thought was that since Inge is a defensive utility guy for Detroit right now, Punto would offer the same thing for them, except Inge isn't happy there.

I think that's a valid thought. They replace their UTIL guy (downgrade, but save money/chemistry), and they get a pitching prospect, a department in which they've depleted themselves immensely this offseason.

I still really don't think Detroit is all that special this season. Their incredible lack of depth, and the fact they have a very old team is going to haunt them this season IMO.

by djskilbr on Feb 17, 2008 12:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's about right

The Tigers have upgraded their defense some, but not much. It is one of the worst defensive teams in the league, as evidenced by the difference between Jeremy Bonderman's xFIP and his ERA.

What they need is someone who has a good defensive reputation to be a defensive replacement late in games. Inge would be the guy, especially at third, but he wants out. And Leyland is big on getting rid of guys who don't want to be there. Since Dombrowski prefers veterans, Punto is a good choice, especially at second and third, where the Tigers are arguably the worst team in the league now.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 17, 2008 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's interesting...

I obviously have my issues with everyone proclaiming the Tigers as seemingly invincible right now (I don't think they're all that great at all) but I hadn't even considered the knock in their defense of late.

Maggs is awful in RF with no range. JJ is good in left, but has one of the worst arms around. Miggy's terrible at 3b. And Renteria and Polanco have both lost a lot of range in the middle. Plus Pudge is declining defensively rapidly at C.

That's a great point CMath. Just another knock against Detroit IMO. A big reason why their team in 2006 was so good was their defense and their bullpen. And those are both two HUGE weaknesses this year on the club.

by djskilbr on Feb 17, 2008 1:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

this

is why I was upset about the Johan trade. I think the Tigers are catchable and that we are not too far off from them as we have superior depth, bullpen, and had a better top of the rotation.

by doofus04 on Feb 17, 2008 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Same...

I really think we are not far off from Cleveland and Detroit at all.

by djskilbr on Feb 17, 2008 10:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Glass half full?

I like your optimism, sir.

by Jon Marthaler on Feb 19, 2008 1:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

dot dot dot

Why would Detroit trade in-division?
Why would Minny give up anything of value to a divsion rival?

unless its a three team trade, I see no way of getting Inge

by DedicatedFollowerOfFashion on Feb 18, 2008 8:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't see it happening either but. . .

I think the caliber of player needed for Inge wouldn't be something so great the Twins would be afraid of trading him to the Tigers. Same goes for the Tigers and Inge, he's not an impact enough player for them to not trade him in the division.

However I don't see it happening just because I think the Twins are going to stick with what they've got. Maybe we can give them Bonser, Blackburn, Slowey, and like eight other pitchers for Cabrera and Verlander?

I'm kidding.

by halfchest on Feb 19, 2008 4:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs