MLB Trade Rumors on The Curious Case of Nate Robertson:

Upon learning that he'll begin the 2009 season in the bullpen, Nate Robertson wondered aloud Thursday whether his time has run out in Detroit: "The cycle of a player's time in an organization comes and goes, and maybe my time is nearing its end." (Quote is courtesy of Steve Kornacki of MLive.com). Robertson, 31, has gone 49-65 with a 4.90 ERA since showing up on the scene in 2003. His '08 season was a disaster, however, and probably nullified any trade value that he once had. (He finished with a 7-11 record and a 6.35 ERA). Tigers manager Jim Leyland spoke briefly about his Nate's fall from grace on Thursday morning: "If someone had told me in 2006 that Robertson would be in the bullpen, I'd have told him, 'You are crazy.'"

Look, Robertson was never a particularly good pitcher, and his three-year, $21 million contract never made a great deal of sense. But unless he's hurt (and nobody's talking), I don't see a great deal of evidence suggesting he's appreciably different than he was in 2006. Right now, the Tigers' No. 3 (or No. 2) starter is Armando Galarraga, who sort of came out of nowhere last season to go 13-7 with a 3.73 ERA. Meanwhile, Robertson was going 7-11, 6.35. Was there really a great deal of difference between them, though? Each started 28 games. Galarraga gave up 28 homers and 61 walks, and struck out 126. Robertson gave up 26 homers and 62 walks, and struck out 108. I wouldn't argue that Robertson pitched as well as Galarraga, but the difference between their fundamental performances was a great deal less than their ERAs suggest. The real difference was that Galarraga gave up a .247 batting average on balls in play, while Robertson gave up a .343 average … and neither of those figures are sustainable. Galarraga was exceptionally lucky last season and Robertson exceptionally unlucky. Not that Robertson has any right to complain. Not much, anyway. He got that big contract thanks in part to a 2006 season in which he was exceptionally lucky, "holding" (that is, "lucking") batters to a .282 average on balls in play. Of course, what the Fates may give, they may also take away ... although rarely in such dramatic fashion as this. Robertson has never been a good pitcher. He's never been worth $7 million. Not fundamentally. That the Tigers owe him $7 million this year and $10 million next year betrays a terrible lack of familiarity with basic statistical analysis. But if he's healthy, he's good enough to start for a fair number of teams. His talents, meager as they might be, are essentially wasted in the bullpen. Admission: I stole the Robertson/Galarraga comparison from someone, and I apologize for not remembering who (and yes, I Googled but with little luck).