Tiger337

I noticed that too. Hopefully, he is smart enough to make the addjustment if you really can't hit that way in the majors. Either that or he so talented that he is one of the few who can still hit that way.

We make our own amateur speculations instead.

The India Times did say that the Tigers are prepared to make a blockbuster trade for Bichette.

I think there is a near zero chance of Tigers signing Bichette. I just wouldn't avoid signing him because he's blocking Anderson, Lee or even Keith.

Are they really that loaded in the infield? McGonigle is a super prospect who is very close. Rainer is another big time prospect a couple years down the road. Lee and Anderson are interesting, but they aren't guys I'd plan around especially if there was a chance to sign an established star.

That could be true, although the Tigers being able to sign players to one year contracts because of no baseball in 2027 would probably be more depressing to me than exciting.

That's not something I'd worry about with Bichette, but it would be a consideration with Torres.

Expect might be too strong a word here...I mean expect in the statistical sense: the average of all possible outcomes (projected value) will be worth it.

I think he will. I hope he does, because I fear they won't be able to replace him if he leaves. Getting Flaherty and Torres for one year might be ideal since I expect them both of them to be worth the money next year, but they aren't the types of players I want tied up in long-term deals.

He's a modern day Scott Lusader.

That depends on how long the duration is. If it's one year, then you would have chaos. I am thinking more like four or five years. Assuming a team can still hold a player for the first six years, then they can extend him another four or five years and there aren't a lot of players you really want to keep longer than that. A few superstars maybe, but players aren't staying with their same team throughout their career even the way it is now.

From a fan's standpoint, I love the idea of limited duration contracts. I don't really care how much money a player makes, but I hate seeing a team sign a player to a long-term deal and then having watch the player keep playing years even after he loses all his value.

I definitely can relate to finding old videos of great moments. I recently found a video from a game in 1983 where Kirk Gibson hit the ball out of the stadium in one at bat and then tripled (doubled?) and scored and knocked down the umpire in his next at bat. I had been wanting to see that for 40 years.

Nook Logan's entire amazing career was like a dream. There is no way to sufficiently replicate his existence on a video. Was he even real or was it just something we imagined?

I don't think you can ever say that which much certainty in a short series.

Flaherty's career has been inconsistent, but he seems to be a good comeback candidate given his under the hood numbers this year. They still need another good healthy starter along with a right-handed bat and bullpen help.

I think a likely contender with the best pitcher in the league has to try to win now. You don't know when that opportunity will happen again. You don't know what kind of team they'll have in a couple of years. Maybe the hitters are slower to develop than expected. Maybe they do just fine, but they don't have enough pitching after Skubal leaves. They have a chance to win now. Opportunities like this are why teams go through re-building processes. They need to take advantage of it. That, of course, means making some meaningful additions in the off-season to maximize their chances.

King and Imanaga are both interesting options which the Tigers might regard as more affordable.

I understood your point the first time. I just don't understand what Bill James has to do with it.

What does Bill James have to do with it?

He just left one lof the teams you mentioned. He is looking for money.

He'll get us more than socks. Maybe some pajamas.

That is accurate, so then you have to calculate the probability of getting a bye. Suppose they have a 60% chance of making playoffs which seems about right looking at last years pre-season odds on fangraphs. Suppose they have a 30% chance of a bye assuming they make the playoffs. Then, they have a 12.5% of winning WS if they have a bye and and 6.25% chance without a bye. P(win)= P(playoffs)*(P(bye/playoffs)*P(win/bye) + P(no bye/playoffs)*P(win/no bye)) = .60 (.30*.125 + .70*.0625) = .04875 or just under 5%

I am not sure winning the World Series makes it more likely he stays, but their chance of winning the World Series is probably a lot lower than 15%. All things being equal, the chance of winning the World Series once you make the playoffs is 1 in 12 or 8% and you have to make the playoffs first.

Greg Maddux also had four consecutive, but it came earlier