The best thing about May trades is that they seem kind of random. When the Detroit Tigers traded infielder Scott Sizemore to the Oakland Athletics for lefty reliever David Purcey this afternoon, no one saw it coming.

“This guy is being wasted at Triple-A.”

“Scouts still believe in the bat.”

“He deserves another shot.”

Those are all things I wrote about Sizemore during the first month of the season, when he dwelt at Triple-A  and hit .408/.495/.605 in 23 games for Toledo. A career .301 hitter in the minors, including a .313 mark at the upper levels, Sizemore has spent a considerable amount of his professional career proving he can hit, but he's yet to jump the final hurdle of solving big league pitching. After earning the Tigers' opening-day job last spring, Sizemore lasted just 48 games after .224/.296/.336 numbers sent him back to the minors, and he didn't do much to get out of Jim Leyland's dog house this month by beginning his second stint by going 14-for-63 (.222). Still, we have a minor-league track record of well over 2000 plate appearances to go along with scouting reports that consistently say that this is not some kind of 4-A mistake hitter. Clearly he had worn out his welcome in Detroit, but he could end up quite the find for Oakland as a potential .280 hitter with plenty of doubles, a fair share of walks, and 10-12 home runs annually.

The biggest question is how Sizemore fits into Oakland's future plans. While he's seen as a second baseman, the position at which he's spent the majority of his time as a professional, that position is occupied by free agent-to-be Mark Ellis in Oakland, and 2008 first-round pick Jemile Weeks has been healthy and outstanding at Triple-A Sacramento, with his .322/.412/.454 line giving him likely first dibs at the position should Ellis get traded, or Oakland simply get tired of his non-productive ways. The guess here is that Oakland will give Sizemore a shot at the third base job, as they are now in their second year of trying to figure out why Kevin Kouzmanoff was never able to build on the somewhat promising seasons he had with San Diego. Currently hitting .198/.238/.333, he's one of many woeful performers in the Oakland lineup. While Sizemore would represent an upgrade at either position, he does have limited experience at the hot corner and fits better there for the A's, both in the near and long term.

As for Purcey, he certainly fits well with the Tigers' affinity for big guys who throw hard, but that has remained the sum of his skills as the 29-year-old is now far more known commodity than developing prospect. With a 92-95 mph fastball, Purcey can still bring it from the left side, but he's yet to find a dependable second pitch, and his control can come and go, with much more "go" in recent outings. It's hard to see him suddenly figuring things out at this point in his career, and his splits are not nearly dramatic enough to make him a future LOOGY. Further complicating matters is a tendency to elevate his pitches, a habit he'll pay for far more in Detroit than Oakland.

There is really no logic in the deal for the Tigers, as between Daniel Schlereth, Adam Wilk, and Charlie Furbush, they have plenty of capable left-handers in their bullpen, and merely being capable is the best they could hope for from Purcey. This is a case of a team getting too frustrated too soon with a prospect struggling in the big leagues, and Oakland swooped in on Friday afternoon to take advantage of the situation. 

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
For the A's, the roster angle is probably even more important than the talent -- they only have two relievers who have options remaining, Devine and Ziegler, but someone was going to have to go to make room for Andrew Bailey this weekend.

Kevin, apologies if you've addressed this before somewhere that I've missed, but what's the word on Adrian Cardenas as a possible third base option? He's dropped off the prospect list radar, but just from his stat line, he's finally stopped scuffling at AAA, hitting for a ridiculous average with some walks, and he's still just 23. On the other hand, there's not much power and he's played much more left field than third base and he's DHing a lot.
According to the local A's talk shows Cardenas cannot cut it at third but has been doing much better in LF.
As a Tiger fan just how angry should I be about David Chadd's fixation on power arms right about now? Has it gone too far?
I wrote a bit on Purcey after the Jays finally gave up on him earlier this season, designating him for assignment (he's out of options) and then sending him to Oakland in exchange for the return of Danny Farquhar:
I haven't followed his meta-pitching in Oakland but in Toronto, he was down to one pitch, and as Kevin noted, it went more often than it came.
I 100% agree with toanstrom...and you Kevin. Sizemore was not given a proper shot to figure things out at the Major League level. Leyland put him in his Malboro-stenched doghouse and never let him out. Now we have another one-pitch power arm who will give up bombs. And a second base tandem of 4A players. Awesome.
5/28 reports that pitching coach Ray Romanic had tweaked Purcy's
mechanics and moved his position on the rubber. Have to see if it did any
"Marlboro-stenched doghouse"...[applause]....And it is a large one too --- you've basically got to go back to Dick Williams Fenway-Park, late-1960s, tobacco-juice-floorboard-rotting, Yaz-calling-the-shots doghouse to find one as large (Mike Andrews, George Scott, Tony C, Billy C, Reggie Smith, Russ Gibson, Ken Harrelson)
Thanks, Kevin, for confirming my initial reaction that this was a terrible move by the Tigers.
I agree this deal makes no sense for the Tigers.

Re: Furbush -

Everything I read/see about his delivery screams, "Each pitch could be my last."
When deals "make no sense" generally they know things we don't.

When the public pronouncements don't really add up it's because they aren't at liberty to give us the real reason.