alex

7 hours ago, kdog said:

One of Marisnick or Schoop get the boot when Riley Greene is activated. Hackosky seems to think it's Jake. 

Hmm, may of previously had a type of agreement with Jake Marisnick, you come here you get a chance to play for 30 days or so but when Riley is off the IL all bets are off... or does anyone still have options ex Zach Short? For at least the short term.

Let us not forget as 'injuries' seem to pop up with 'all' teams on a very regular bases 🤕.

38 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

I think as Tigers fans weve had so few prospects over the years to get excited about we don't know how to handle it when we actually get one, like we just feel they automatically should be in the big leagues but that just isn't how most teams do it.

They don't just throw them to the fire cause they put up a few months of great play in the minors, particularly when you still have questions about their defense.

You think as fans we wouldve learned our lesson with Maybin, Castellanos, Tork and to some extent Greene's struggles when getting called up too soon but it seems most haven't. 

Well put. Then, if we do bring them up, and they do not 'succeed' right away many fans then sour on the player even if they are say - just 23-24 yrs old ex Tork.

It takes time to develop players. Maybe there is a generation exception here and there - but that is rare. If Tork was doing still what he did last year, which maybe was not 'that' bad for that time, then there is an argument. At least now he is taking more steps forward (and some back still). IMHO, there is SOME progression with some nos. (and the old eye test) to back it.

7 hours ago, Jim Cowan said:

Vierling and McKinstry appear to be the two best baseball players on the team right now, without Greene. I'd like to see them both make a serious dent into infield playing time in the second half. And I'm not looking for more platooners, I want to find a guy to play 150 games at second and another to do the same at third.  They probably are not the guys but let's have a look. 

This 'sounds' good but for the most part those days may be gone for most all teams. The days of 6-7 starting position players 'starting' 150+ games for any team may unfortunately be a thing of the past.

Like 3 SPs going 200 innings (used to be 250 before that) - for any team is also a thing of the past (there may be an outlier here and there but... ). Now teams seem to be gearing more for 'options' at SP to be able to pitch 150 innings. Say 10 per in and out of a system.

Injuries are a major part of this and there are several underlying reasons there, some maybe more apparent (at this time) than others.

However, I DO agree with you. Hopefully the Tigs can come up with a couple more productive 'starting' type players (ex start 120+, and in several other games as well). Seems right now they are more concerned with getting pieces in place and maybe later (again hopefully not too much later) adding 1-2 of those 'bigger' missing pieces.

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Deaden the ball and it won't have to be like that anymore.

Interesting... does this refer to the ball being lighter per say?

11 hours ago, Tigermojo said:

Lot of fluke stuff this year. Neck, fingers, toe...

There is a lot to this with regards to the amount of injuries to Ps. It may be more than just baseball, but the movement and physical stress may really help exploit a possible underlying scenario that is complex (IMHO)...

I have posted it several times now:

The days of 3 SP on a team throwing 200+ innings are loooong gone! (note: perhaps an outlier staff or two may occur.) Crazy, we used to think in the 90's to early 2000s how could any of those previous decade SPs toss 250-300 innings a year...

Each organization needs 10 SPs ready to put up innings for the MLB team. You start a season with 5 SPs in rotation (not counting IL out of the gate), have 2-3 ready at AAA and maybe 1-2 from AA. Yet, if not there to begin with maybe the waiver wire and/or trades.  At any time 1/3 are on the IL (again an outlier here and there). Most all teams now know this and it has been repeatedly mentioned on various MLB broadcasts.

SI, by Tom Verducci, had an interesting article just recently about the scenario of current MLB SP :

https://www.si.com/mlb/2023/05/22/starting-pitching-decline-pitch-count-timer-injuries

2 hours ago, casimir said:

As if all of the pitchers will be healthy at the same time.....

Good point. At this day and time that rarely happens for any SP staff for any extended period of time ex 3 SPs giving 180 innings on a team (let alone 200!).

Again, each team needs 10 guys or so from MLB-AA (and waivers, trades, etc.), ready to give SP innings for the MLB team (does not mean each one will in the majors). This has been said several times now from different baseball people while stating their observations.

20 hours ago, HeyAbbott said:

There's no intent by the Tiger's brass to reach the playoffs,or even a winning record this year. If there is a decent return pitching will be traded

True. Yet, if we can throw in a valued fringe prospect or two so the return is greater, then that may be a way to go also.

19 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

I’d also be OK with trading prospects that other teams value for players that fit our team.  We can take on salary.  We don’t have to label our activity as either buying or selling—I think we can consider both.

This makes sense. Even if we are or are not going to get higher priced per say FAs then they need to consider this. Trading prospects does not mean the higher end types (Keith, PMeadows, Campos, Jung, etc.). Teams evaluate differently and a fringe guy for us may be a strong consideration for another organization (and vice-versa). Any way to make the team/organization stronger moving forward has to be considered.

It may not be as cut & dry as 'Sellers or Buyers' - maybe both.

10 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

... all the starters at full health means that we can finally kick one or two over to the BP. I would start with Faedo & Flores.

OMHO, perhaps the days of teams SPs (most ALL teams), all being fully healthy at once may be few and far between. Depth this day and age is of utmost importance.

Remember hearing on a national TV game last year, from a former SP, saying every team going forward will need 10 SPs ready to go between MLB/AAA+. It is just the reality.

   All IMHO: I am beginning to wonder why is this management so concerned about getting spots 20-26 on the roster filled. They need top talent. More everyday types. All the utility guys that maybe do not K so much and walk a bit are 'not' going to make up for the lack of stronger talent. Yes, some combo of McKinstry, Vierling, Maton, Skolak, Rizzo, Ibanez, Nevin, Short, etc. are 'ok' - and it is a good thing that they play multiple positions (however so could Goodrum, Jones, Castros, etc.) but this team needs 'Talent'.

If the team is so consistently bad, talented players will not want to come here FA wise. There is a difference between a 65 win team and a 75 win team -  10 games. The point is things can change fast. Heck 2 weeks ago we were thinking of competing for the division, now to avoid a 100 losses. Who knows in two weeks again (seriously).

FA and trades are not the answer (but a couple can help). Drafting and developing young talent IS a big part of the answer. Yes, the past administration did 'not' draft very well. Too many SPs. That mindset has hopefully changed and all teams this day and age need apx 10 SPs between the MLB staff, AAA/AA and long relief on hand (Q - what do Mize, Manning, Skubal, ERod, Turnbull, Faedo & Jobe have in common right now?).

I have mentioned repeatedly the days of 3 SP on a team throwing 200+ innings are loooong gone! (note: perhaps an outlier staff or two may occur.) Crazy, we used to think in the 90's to early 2000's how could any of those previous decade SPs toss 250-300+ innings...

I do not see the point of A.J. talking about McKinstry now being thought about for some games in CF. We heard all this before (again Goodrum, Jones, Castros, Reyes, etc.). Forget that. He can play 2B, 3B and sometimes a corner OF spot.

FAs? There is a difference here with position players and Ps. Ps will more likely come here as they know Comerica has a reputation as a 'pitchers park'. Still, a team can try to get '0ne' position player a year that could be a longer term fit (easier said than done of course).

Trades? This is where scouting really comes in hand. This list was posted by SeattleMike:
https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-trade-candidates-change-of-scenery-2023

These type of players may be worth 'calculated risks'.

Drafting and development are the key and supplementing from there. You do not have to wait for a core to 'develop'. We have Greene, Tork, Carpenter, Keith, Malloy, PMeadows, JJung, Campos, Dingler, etc. If this developmental staff cannot get 3 'good' players out of that group, well then... We will have 3 of the top 46 picks this year.

Let's start adding now - as things in baseball (esp this division) can change very quickly.

On another note: I am not sure what has happened to Haase. Seems he is now, and has been, in the very low production area (with the exception of 2-3 games this year). C is an area that may need more attention. Go Tigs.

40 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

The pitch clock is great and I agree it was implemented perfectly.  I don't see the clock or think about it, but it makes the game easier to watch/hear.  

Agreed. A good thing. The only thing I would like to see implemented is during the extensive ABs ex 12 pitches+. At the 12 pitch point to one batter, add an additional 20-30 seconds at least at that point (one time). This way the pitchers arm is not overly extended during a short period. I swear I have seen this effect Ps (and their arms 'health wise') shortly afterwards.

3 minutes ago, lordstanley said:

Even though it had only been two losses, with the big E-Rod and Greene injury news the past few days this felt like a stop-the-bleeding win.

Indeed! A good win for the team. It will not be easy, as roster was stretched/reaching before, but IF they can play 'close' to .500 this next month+, there could be some semblance of interest/hope for much of the remainder.

There are going to be injuries for ALL teams. Opportunities for some younger players here and we may pick up another vet or two. With said some should be coming back as well from the IL - dare I say it - it is always more fun to have hope in July+...  🫢  🙂

2 hours ago, RandyMarsh said:

I wanted Candy back just cause I thought he was our best chance of getting a potential elite bat at a reasonable cost since he was just that a season prior.

Despite that though I understood the rationale behind the move not to bring him back so I'm certainly not going to drag Harris over the coals for it.

IMHO, maybe a combo of things: ex 1) payroll (if worth a raise). 2) Put those funds towards another player (a different dice roll). 3) He had been here for awhile and maybe brass decided best to 'change' (some pressure and perception of change to fans and press as mentioned earlier). 4) Maybe try to change the clubhouse culture as this team has been 'losing' for awhile now.

Players get too comfortable sometimes and a 'change' is often needed so a wake-up may take place... Jeimer is a decent player (though streaky), but maybe it was time for a change from both sides. Could always try to resign him later...  How does that FIRST resonate with each reader. Maybe that was part of the answer as well on how the team feels. 

12 minutes ago, Toddwert said:

Does anyone have a thought between Langford vs Jenkins? I kinda like Langford shorter timeline to the show and a right handed bat which we don’t have a lot of

Yea, I do like the potential shorter timeline with Langford. Yet, if Jenkins is an exceptional hitter, then perhaps the timeline is 'not that long' as well. Here is where scouting comes into play. Also, as mentioned, the Tigs have 3 picks in the top 46 or so. They hopefully will make some hay here.

16 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I could see Harris trading minor leaguers for relative young players already in the majors.  I don't see them trading good propects for a rental.  

This would make sense for 'now and the future'. We might be able to get a player for  both 'time periods' ex for 1-2 decent prospects (maybe not top).

There may be a good team (or not so good) with a blocked player. Seems Harris has done this with several who are now playing more & helping (here in the D) who would not have as much elsewhere.

29 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

It is a safer bet and investment signing a pitching free agent who has a proven track record. If it doesn’t work out you know you are making a 3-4 year gamble and you can move on.

Seems the Cubs went more this route for their contention run and WS title during 2016+/- years. It makes sense and we already have several young 'high draft pick' SP choices on the current roster -  Now, can we keep them healthy to get 2 of 3-4 for several years at 175 IP🤔.

9 hours ago, Jim Cowan said:

Something else Harris did really well is fill out the Toledo roster with some 30 year olds.  Jonathan Davis, Andy Ibanez,and Andrew Knapp have all been great additions, creating a winning environment.

IMHO, there is something to be said about that. Also, they can help in a pinch at the MLB level - while still emphasizing most of the 'process' on the younger players and development. Let's face NO team has all 26 roster spots filled with 20-27 yr olds (MLB is not AA ball) and you can bet the expected winning teams have quite a few 30+ yr olds.

I do get it of course, that we are developing and a process is taking place - but this is an MLB team, hence an MLB payroll and fans are paying MLB prices to view in whatever venues of choice.

That and you never know when an injury takes place, and someone may ask about a player (or even help out here) to potentially get a lottery A ball type. ex Trayce Thompson of last year (yes, I know that transaction was cash).

6 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Gibbs isn't just a rusher, he's also a pass catcher. I've seen comparisons to Kamara who's someone who averages around 1,300 all purpose yards and double digit TDs. Goff and the Rams went to a Super Bowl with a strong run game. They probably could have got him later but whatever. I don't like the Campbell pick but teams did run over the Lions at times. The Eagles game and the Seattle game come to mind. They simply couldn't stop them to get the ball back. There's also the Carolina game. 

Maybe they look at Gibbs as more of an all around offensive player/threat, ex both as RB & WR. This way they get one player for/with two purposes.

1 hour ago, RatkoVarda said:

going to be a decent number of win now teams, who hopefully don't care about Rodriguez's opt out

and Ilitch can always throw in some cash if that helps

All IMHO. Why do we wish to trade any talented players (ERod, Javy, etc.)? Well you could say so we can 'get some young talent back' and reduce payroll.

Yet, next off season many may will be clamoring to sign some significant players (like ERod and Javy 😉) hence, perhaps not too much sense there.  Sure we could gamble and say SHarris and staff will be better at this than the previous regime. However, you should be darn sure in who you acquire (yet all prospects are a crap shot).

Things can turnaround quickly (see Cleveland and young talent). We have to develop players we have 'now' (Tork, Greene, Malloy, PMeadows, Keith, etc.) and Draft well (and develop). As far a SP we have to have several of quality that can pitch 150 innings. Who projects as that? Who did last season? The Mize, Manning & Skubal projection could still be legit - but right now and also last year they barely can pitch 175 combined!! (minders of projections of Fullmer, Boyd and Norris).

No team can continue to improve very much if they are not getting IP from their starting staff. We have to have SP who can give innings.

The BP will be decimated if SPs are not giving some innings and we will then have AAAA SPs all over AND an overused BP and a constant 'losing games' mentality among the team. This is a sane reason why not to just trade ERod, Boyd, Lorenzen, etc. (for 'iffy' prospects). Even if they end up leaving, for the salaries paid to them, we can replace them (or even re-sign some).

9 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

...Or are you saying a GM can be judged by his later draft picks? I have to agree with that. It's the job of the GM to get the right scouts in the right place to find talent. And it's also the job of the GM to have the right coaches to develop the talent.

Well put, all of this makes good sense and brings about organizational 'talent' !

15 hours ago, mtutiger said:

I know Hitting Harold is the stuff of legends around here, but honestly despite all the hate when the acquisition initially happened, I think I'd rather have Zach McKinstry

IMHO, Harold could hit and had a knack with it. However, walks were few and he had base running limitations and not much instinct with that part of his game. He was versatile, better than some gave credit for player - but by no means a standout at any position.

Zach is starting to grow on me as well. Not sure what type of career he may have but he hit go gap to gap, has some speed (both excellent for Comerica Park) and good baseball instincts - at least it seems that way, but that does not mean every player does not have a gaff now and then (Harold had several on the bases and did not seem instinctive there). Zach seems to have a game plan and knows the situation each time on base.

At this point perhaps the Tigs got a little better here and maybe at the least a decent role player for a period of time.

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

Which kinda drives the point home - in order for this team to have more success in the free agent market, they are going to have to have a better story to sell players on. You could sort of see it in 2022 given how they played during most of 2021. You can't see that now at all.

Yes, a very good point. The team has to get to this marker. They did it in '21 with development of Mize, Skubal, Manning, Haase, etc.... it looked like Grossman, Candy and Baddoo, etc. could do close to or the same for '22 and hence they added several, what looked like, 'key' players.

Whatever the core is now - they really need to uptick their game (and/or development) and then you may be able to add to it as other players could see a 'vision'. That along with further development of a few more younger players (Keith, PMeadows, Flores, and/or whomever surprise... along with a sound draft).

The management has to have a vision of what they wish to try to accomplish. I do have one major concern - and I have said it many times here 'depth' because of the many injuries in the game today, all around the league. It is more important than ever before. So, in other words the adage 'luck' is always a factor. As JLeyland used to say 'Your best ability is your availability' and paraphrasing on his next one 'The team with the most healthy good players will almost always do well.'

3 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

The other part about the "sign someone to be respectable" type of free agents are the years they were commanding on this past years market.... @chasfh has commented on this a lot and it's true. Tucker Barnhart, who we all wanted to shoot into the sun for most of last year, commanded a two year deal FFS.

Even still within the fold, you would think that things like living out the remainder of Jon Schoop's two year deal would maybe be a cautionary tale as well. But I digress.

Yes, we have gone over this a few times here... It may be more than trying to add 1-2 MLB FAs per say ex for the line-up, BP, etc. to be more respectable.

There are going to be injuries and if you have nothing but AA players filling in for AAAA types you are asking for trouble, so there is the idea of depth.

Then, the 'potential' building blocks (Greene, Tork, etc.) need some pressure taken off them. If not it just continues - yet, that is why we have AMeadows, Baez, Schoop, Haase and Miggy. With said Baez & Haase have been very slow so far. Schoop has given indications now for over a year of less production... Miggy, as you said, is a shell of his past self - but can still hit a bit at times. Meadows gave indications of his struggles last year (best to him and his family as health is first and hopefully he can come back even if sporadic, and contribute, but he may need time at AAA).

The other thought is perpetual losing builds a psyche that can snowball. I feel that happened with some of the last group (Castro's, Reyes, Goodrum, JJones, Candy, etc. - that and the talent base of course).

Do a couple FAs solve this - IMHO, of course not. The players also have to choose - if they want to come here as well - and I still feel we tried on a couple, but 'no go'.

We can hope we still get some production from the list mentioned and that would be more than what has gone on so far - (ex Schoop, Baez, Haaase, etc.).

Sooner or later they will have to add another 'guy' or two. Some of the Minnesota players, so I read somewhere, said CCorrea changes the attitude in the clubhouse to expect more, to win - of course where did they finish last year? and the oppo is look at what Cleveland did, one of the youngest teams in the game, but they are fundamentally very sound.

I like Vierling, but that 'no' slide into second base was inexcusable. He had that base stolen with Maton at the plate. Haase running on a ground ball right in front of him, taking him out of scoring position - again no excuse. These things have to change. Maybe 1 or so every 4-5 games - but 2 in 3 innings?

I, like many here feel, they are a bit better than what has been seen thus far - but they have to 'play' the game smarter (manager included) and some need to step it up. Go Tigs...

38 minutes ago, kellmell50 said:

all these experiments should have been done in spring training so you know who to pitch in the ninth

 

That is true to an extent - however, often in ST teams do not have their A lineup in the game in the late innings. Sometimes they extend players towards the end of camp, but even then managers often take out a few of them to avoid injuries and you then have several 'A' ball types who are in the game that get invited to the big league camp that am.

18 minutes ago, chasfh said:

If Baez is going to stay here for six years—and there’s a better than average chance he will—then one of the top missions of Scott Harris has got to be acquiring an above average or, preferably, All-Star shortstop, whether by trade, free agency, draft, or whatever. Schoop will be gone and Baez needs to move to second if not next year, then certainly by 2025. He does have experience there—the Cubs started him there when Addison Russell had #6 locked down, so it wouldn’t be a complete shock to his system. And of course, his arm would play a lot better there.

Was thinking along those lines as well. When, not sure...

Javy does have a good amount of experience at 2B really. Like you mentioned with the Cubs and also with the Mets, 2021, as after they got him at the deadline they put him at 2B with FLindor at SS. Also the WBC this past year. He could be an elite 2B IF the Tigs come up with a SS at some point (could even be RKreidler if he hits or PGraham, etc.).