Skip to content

Jose Iglesias out 4-6 months, could miss entire season

Mar 20, 2014, 1:17 PM EST

Jose Iglesias Getty Getty Images

Tigers shortstop Jose Iglesias has been diagnosed with stress fractures in both legs and the team announced today that he’s expected to miss a minimum of 4-6 months, putting his entire season in jeopardy.

Iglesias was initially diagnosed with stress reactions, but Cash Kruth of MLB.com reports that further examination discovered fractures and significantly increased his recovery timetable.

Iglesias was slated to be Detroit’s starting shortstop this season after the Tigers acquired him from the Red Sox in the middle of last year to replace the suspended Jhonny Peralta. Peralta has since left as a free agent, signing with the Cardinals, and the slick-fielding, weak-hitting Iglesias looked ready to take over as the long-term starter.

Rookie manager Brad Ausmus has said that defense will be the priority in finding a replacement shortstop and speculation that the Tigers could make a late run at free agent Stephen Drew appears to have little behind it.

  1. historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:19 PM

    Ok, punks, this is why you do NOT play hurt. I know you want your big chance and all that, but it just makes it worse later to recover if you don’t nip it in the bud early.

    /sobs

    • fearlessleader - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      Historio: …..Kozma?

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:56 PM

        I’d be down with that — and if he had a good season, I’d die laughing. Ha, SS Swap! Could make for an interesting WS. (I’m still looking for that rematch!)

        We could use the defense and we were used to not having a great bat there anyway. It would be pretty lateral for us. So, you’re thinking Joba in exchange then? :D

      • fearlessleader - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:01 PM

        Well, it crossed my mind that this would be a nice opportunity for Scherzer to come home to St. Louis. We could throw in a handful of Skittles to make things fair.

        (Seriously, I’m sorry about Iglesias. I always root for the Tigers—through the ALCS, at least—and I’ve really enjoyed watching him play.)

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:11 PM

        It’s so hilarious that you think you’re getting His Heterochromianess…ever…not over my dead body.

  2. stex52 - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:22 PM

    I must start by saying I am very sorry for Iglesias.

    But here is the opening Stephen Drew was looking for.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:27 PM

      Thanks a lot.

  3. xpensivewinos - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:28 PM

    Mets, huh?

    • shaggylocks - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:35 PM

      Seriously. Makes you wonder why the Mets keep getting linked to Drew if they’ve got Peralta.

  4. halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:35 PM

    This should be Jimmy Rollins territory. Detroit only has to take his contract on. The Phillies rarely eat contracts (with the exception of Jim Thome). Detroit would get a solid defender at SS and the Phillies would be relieved of a player they don’t want anymore. I agree with this philosophy.

    • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:43 PM

      I’ll add this to my comment. Jimmy Rollins doesn’t want to be traded. We all know this. If the Phillies tell him he will be benched if he won’t accept a trade, it could happen. It depends on how far the Phillies will go with Rollins.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:43 PM

      But it’s not gonna happen.

      • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:47 PM

        You never know.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:50 PM

        Australia knows.

  5. pappageorgio - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:41 PM

    I’d be really suprised to see Dombrowski give up the 1st rd pick to sign Drew. Need or not….the money AND the draft pick makes the price too steep, especially condsidering the state of the farm system.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:49 PM

      Okay, here’s the problem: suppose we limp by for a few months with in-house talent and having a hole there doesn’t hurt us that badly, we get Little Sexy Fire back but he’s got kinks to work out from not playing the first part of the season and he didn’t have the strongest bat to begin with. He really still needs seasoning, and to bring up someone from below him…To me it just looks like a problem there all season at this point. I don’t see how they don’t work some kind of trade. But, then, you can’t get someone who keeps you from letting LSF develop when he’s ready to come back. There’s a lot of ifs here and I worry more about the team level this year — especially since we lost a big bat.

  6. nymets4ever - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:46 PM

    Why all the consternation over Ruben Tejada now that we have Peralta in the fold, eh fellow Met fans?

  7. doctorofsmuganomics - Mar 20, 2014 at 3:27 PM

    I tried to warn him. Nobody ever listens to the doctor

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 8:02 PM

      I know, and you were so smug about it and everything.

  8. metrocritical - Mar 20, 2014 at 3:48 PM

    After skating by for nearly a decade on the strength of a few shrewd trades and frenetic free agent spending, this organization’s total failure to develop talent and depth through its farm system is finally catching up. Outside of developing some pitchers, the Tigers have had almost no success identifying, drafting or cultivating everyday positional players in the last 10-20 years. How many of their starting infielders came from the farm? How many outfielders? How many homegrown positional players have made an all star team? While DD may be heralded for crafting a competitive team using an open checkbook but he also deserves blame for putting the organization where they have absolutely no talent ready to step in at shortstop or in the outfield. Without having yet won a championship and zero organizational depth, this team is now on the verge of major vulnerability to injury and increased talent on the rosters of rivals. That window of opportunity that once looked so wide is narrowing rapidly and could soon be closed without anything more than a few pennants to show for the effort.

    • emdash01 - Mar 20, 2014 at 4:14 PM

      They’re still pretty clearly the best team in the division this year, though, by a fair amount. We’ll see where they go from here, but at least for this year even with a below-replacement-level shortstop they’re overwhelmingly likely to be okay.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 4:23 PM

      Off the top of my head Nick Castellanos and Avasail Garcia (who was traded away) come to mind as guys drafted and brought up through the Tigers’ system, so I’m not sure where that total failure thing comes from. Also, I don’t think you can look back at the last couple of years as AL Central champs and say DD hasn’t put together a good team (no matter how it was done). Until I am blue in the face, I will reiterate that the thing that lost the Tigers the WS the last couple of tries was NOT, NOT, NOT position players. We could be more vulnerable this year, but I don’t think it’s due to years of poor player development.

    • happytwinsfan - Mar 20, 2014 at 4:26 PM

      nothing too shabby about a “few pennants”.

  9. metrocritical - Mar 20, 2014 at 6:23 PM

    historiophiliac: The two you named are the ones that come to mind quickly because they stand out so easily. But where is the steady trickle of homegrown youth that feeds other successful clubs?And, note, I’m not criticizing DD for what he has accomplished, but, rather, pointing out that his wheeling and dealing has built a formidable major league team but not a formidable organization. I’m not referring to grooming a stream of superstars but find It inexcusable to not produce a major league, starting caliber positional player every few years. The Tigers have only produced a handful over the last two decades. As a result, they have a fancy, expensive machine and few spare parts available if something breaks.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 9:17 PM

      But if they can work great deals, they don’t have to worry about developing too many folks. Plus, it wasn’t until 2006 that the Tigers were even spending the MLB average on payroll and 2009 that we cracked the top 10 — so it’s not like they’ve been throwing around money to build great teams for years. They got what they paid for (or less) a lot of years, and now that they spend more, they have gotten better results. I think you make it sound like they’ve just been buying big for a long time, and that’s simply not true.

      • metrocritical - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:20 PM

        For starters, let me say that it’s good that we are both interested enough to keep the conversation going. I do, however, think you may be missing my point. I’m not saying they’ve been long term big spenders, rather, I am suggesting that they were forced to become bigger spenders precisely because they had a decade long drought caused by poor scouting and development at the minor league level. If they possessed the talent scouting/developing acumen of a team like the Cardinals or the A’s and used their deep pockets, the Tigers could’ve maintained a strong major league team, stocked by its own players and supplemented through free agency. It is a time honored formula for sustained success. With a better farm system, the team wouldn’t be in a situation where they have little positional depth on their own bench or in the minors, forced to trade Doug Fister for cheap prospects, overly rely on the likes of Don Kelly, Raji Davis, Danny Worth, et al, and no longer able to afford signing top free agent talent (and very possibly lose Max Scherzer). Simply put, the organization lacks a healthy balance with virtually no margin for error or injury. Top notch starting pitching should keep them competitive but they desperately need an infusion of inexpensive, homegrown talent.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 21, 2014 at 12:05 AM

        I agree with you that they were poorly run for a long time, but I think when DD came in, the point was for him to turn it around pretty quickly. As such, he didn’t have the luxury to wait to develop a new generation of players. He had to buy and he brought in some faces that were familiar to him. I think that was the focus for quite a while and it probably didn’t help that Leyland had an inexplicable soft spot for guys like Inge and Kelly. I think DD finally kind of put his foot down on those guys and that marked a sea change. I think locking down some of our star players means both that they are serious about contending for awhile and that they are buying time to develop new talent. I think how they handle the situation here will give you the answer you want. If they give up the draft pick to get Drew, that might tend to bolster what you’ve said. If not, I think it means they have spent what they intend to spend and don’t want keep shorting the future to win now. I really do think things changed quite a bit in 2009, and that Ilitch’s age (and wanting a championship soon then) has been a factor in recent developments.

      • Reflex - Mar 21, 2014 at 9:00 PM

        I think its kind of silly to say that they should have just built a better farm system and then point at the A’s and Cards (or Rays for that matter). Of course if every team could do as well as those teams they would, but then that would become the new norm of course and not really give them much of an edge.

        Everyone would like to have a great system. Few can do it to a degree that puts them ahead of the rest of the league because the average level of talent is always rising and the competition for those prospects is fierce, while the talent to identify them is limited. The Cards and A’s are great organizations, and all clubs would do well to emulate them, but assuming all can with equal results is silly.

  10. sportsfan18 - Mar 20, 2014 at 7:01 PM

    Ever hear of in for a penny in for a pound Tigers? Yeah, of course you have.

    Your payroll has been and it is high. You are contenders still, the window is still open.

    Yeah, Drew wants multiple years, but he could be HAD for one season with a decent enough price.

    Even overpaying a bit for Drew is fine as long as it’s just for the ONE season. Your team is a title contender.

    Your SS is done for this yr, but should be back next season. Just go get Drew, pay him and be done with it.

  11. churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 8:09 PM

    Scroll at the bottom of the Yanks/Sox game just read that he’s done for the year. Can’t find a citation for it yet though.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 9:07 PM

      Maybe they are taking it from DD’s comments here:

      http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/tigers-shortstop-jose-iglesias-may-miss-entire-season-with-stress-fractures?ymd=20140320&content_id=69695224&vkey=news_mlb

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 9:46 PM

        The scroll said Tigers confirm he’s done for the year. I’ll try to take a SS if i see it again.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (5275)
  2. M. Kemp (3130)
  3. W. Middlebrooks (2846)
  4. C. McGehee (2834)
  5. J. Upton (2745)
  1. J. Kang (2685)
  2. M. Morse (2224)
  3. A. Rios (1975)
  4. J. Peavy (1949)
  5. D. Norris (1771)