Tiger337

I don't agree with that at all. He'd like to have a great team and he may get one eventually. I'm just saying that his impact on the 2024-2025 is being overstated.

I know this by seeing that the manager and almost all the key players on the 2006 roster were acquired by Dombrowski. Dombrowski tore the team apart and built a winner in 4 years.

Chas, last time this argument came up, you provided a chart that showed that attendance or television viewership went up with more victories. Do you still have that? KL seems to be suggesting that you either have a championship caliber team or not and nothing below that will affect fan interest. I don't believe that is true.

Dombrowski had a lot more to do with winning in 2006 than Harris did in 2025. At the same time, I think Harris has a very good chance to be a better GM long-term than Dombrowski.

The Tigers are all set. They just got their injured pitcher:

We didn't even get socks. They took away our tramsistor radio as a punishment and then gave it back as a gift for Christmas.

Still need to sign an injured pitcher.

Yes, in one lost year, it is good to get a high pick, but if it requires gutting your organization to do so, that's going to lead to several lost years. It worked for the Astros, but it doesn't usually work that well.

Chas and I are agreeing on something again. Feels good. 😄

Not the kind of re-building where your team is crap for 3 or more years. That's not necessary.

Average is deceptive, because there is a small number of top players that inflate it. The median player is much closer to zero. It is good to get high picks, but the value gets overstated. I don't believe the risk/reward is worth going through multiple years of crap teams to try to get good again.

I've been told that tanking is a necessary part of baseball for small and mid market teams, but I've never believed it.

They can make the playoffs and thus compete for a ring. I'd just like a little push to make it more likely.

Good question. Why do so many teams do that? I think it's more owners wanting to save money on salaries during lean years than anything else. I means it's good to get high draft picks because a moderate percentage do end up making good contributions, so if you collect enough of them, you'll get some hits. However, I have never been a proponent of deliberate total re-builds.

Chatgtp did not used to to have links which is why I stopped using it. It's good to hear that it now does. edit: I just compared chatgtp to perplexity on a couple of searches. Perplexity gave sources and chatgtp did not. So, maybe chatgtp sometimes gives sources but not consistently.

I will be happy (and I expect him to be Tiger), but I'd like it even better if more talent was added to support him.

Correlation does not prove causation and saying phrases like "I have no words" is not not a persuasive argument either. I see Hinch and Fetter having an impact at the major league level. I don't see Harris having as much of an impact at that level, at least not yet. The Tigers would not be doing what they have done the last two years without the players, manager and pitching coach which Avila provided. Avila was terrible, but when you collect prospects for long enough (way too long in his case) you can build up a good base of talent.

I like Perplexity, because it provides sources.

Adduci has already recruited him.

Avila never should have traded Cody Ross

Lynn Henning finally called something correctly.

I have seen clear evidence of Hinch's influence. And yeah, Avila hired him.

I have seen no credible evidence that there even any ink.

I really don't see much evidence that the team performance of the last two years is all because of Harris. I expect to see more evidence at the MLB level of Harrises influence soon, but I have not seen it yet.