Tiger337

I don't know who Benjamin Crump is.  

16 minutes ago, chasfh said:

There was no one else. Spork was the consensus #1 pick, and no one would have not picked him, including me. And the Orioles did have better luck picking during the drafts they did instead of during ours. I will still be disappointed if he ends up around replacement level for his career with the Tigers, because it’s disappointing versus the expectation we had.

To Tiger337’s point, if the benchmark is that Spork ends up with a 13 win career, I would want those 13 wins to come with us, and not after he leaves, which would be a double disappointment. I think you know me well enough to know I had no expectations of a Hall of Fame career from the guy, given his already-well-known defensive liabilities, as well as the positional WAR ceiling first baseman already have. But he was considered practically a fully-formed hitter when we got him, and I did have a reasonable expectation that he would anchor our lineup at some point, and I would have expected him to at least start doing so by the early months of his third season. So maybe the disappointment at his inability to do even that is driving my fear that he will have thrown up a goose egg by the time Scott Boras takes him on the road.

He has been a disappointment so far, but would you be disappointed if he turned out like Tony Clark who accumulated almost all of his WAR with the Tigers?  

53 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I disagree that a 1/1 draft pick is no better than a lottery ticket. There have been disappointing and even spectacular failures at 1/1 for a lot of teams, not just the Tigers (Matt Anderson, anyone?), as at any other pick. But the hit rate on 1/1 picks is good enough that I think it’s reasonable to be disappointed if Tork craps out with a 0.0 WAR career—meaning, for the part of his career he spends with the Tigers.

Now, the 9th pick in the 2018 draft? Definitely a lottery ticket that came through.

Thr question was not 0 WAR, but 13 WAR like Deer.  Tony Clark was in the same class.  

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I would be more than mildly disappointed because Tork was a consensus 1/1, and we all expected better, much better, than a coin flip career from him.

I’m coming around to the idea that Tork may not amount to anything after all, and by now I won’t be surprised if that’s the outcome. But I would still be sorely disappointed because, after all, we tanked like a mother****ing anchor to get the guy in the first place.

He isdisappointing individuslly so far, but when you rely primarily on a bunch of high draft picks to re-build, you can expect to be disappointed by one or more of them.  Mize has a long way to go too.   Green is certainly looking like someone who will give them a high WAR return and Skubal is already a steal for a 9th round pick.  

3 hours ago, casimir said:

Per bbref:

1-1: 58 matching player(s). 54 played in the majors (93%). Total of 1149.1 WAR, or 21.3 per major leaguer.  (Danny Goodwin drafted 1-1 twice).

1-2: 59 matching player(s). 52 played in the majors (88%). Total of 762.6 WAR, or 14.7 per major leaguer.

1-3: 59 matching player(s). 48 played in the majors (81%). Total of 652.7 WAR, or 13.6 per major leaguer.

1-4: 59 matching player(s). 48 played in the majors (81%). Total of 603.9 WAR, or 12.6 per major leaguer.

1-5: 59 matching player(s). 40 played in the majors (67%). Total of 444.1 WAR, or 11.1 per major leaguer.

1-6: 59 matching player(s). 45 played in the majors (76%). Total of 618.2 WAR, or 13.7 per major leaguer.

1-7: 59 matching player(s). 43 played in the majors (72%). Total of 460.9 WAR, or 10.7 per major leaguer.

1-8: 58 matching player(s). 38 played in the majors (65%). Total of 319.2 WAR, or 8.4 per major leaguer.  (Wade Townsend drafted 1-8 twice).

1-9: 59 matching player(s). 38 played in the majors (64%). Total of 316.6 WAR, or 8.3 per major leaguer.

1-10: 59 matching player(s). 48 played in the majors (81%). Total of 500.8 WAR, or 10.4 per major leaguer.

Thanks, you are turning into my go to guy in this thread.    

The average career WAR for picks 1-5 is 13.3.  The average WAR for the #1 pick is probably higher (can't find a recent #) but it's also likely inflated by a small number of elite players and so far there doesn't appear one of those from the 2020 draft.  So, I would agree with Oblong that I'd be mildly disappointed if Tork ended up like Rob Deer, but it wouldn't be outside the expected performance for a high pick.  Tony Clark was another one like that.  

https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa200586

I can barely hear what Gibson is saying anymore. ☹️

Still way better than Monroe though.  

1 hour ago, casimir said:

Since nobody asked for it....

https://stathead.com/baseball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=torkel000spe&player_id1=deer--001rob&request=1&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=br&utm_medium=sr_xsite&utm_id=deerro01

Now, do Dean Palmer.  

Palmer vs Deer is one of my favorite comps, but everyone seems to think that Deer was a joke and that Palmer was OK.   

20 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Is calling for Harris's head a thing on Twitter?

I didn't know that...

(I don't use twitter so I wouldn't...)

It depends on who you follow.  I don't follow many people like that but sometimes they show up in the reponses to those I do follow.  Hinch too.  

44 minutes ago, Toddwert said:

I'm willing to bet the Pitch staff will not even close to the same in five years ... if your not trying to competive in the next few years your wasting good pitching

They might still be good because the Harris and Hinch administration seems to be skilled at acquiring and getting the most out of their pitchng.  I agree that pitching staffs are fleeting though and when you have a good one, you need to try to take advantage of it.  

16 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

But the stats....

Yes, 21st century managers use advanced stats.  That shipped sailed a long time ago.  

4 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Haven’t you learned yet that when the Tigers win it’s because of the players, and when the Tigers lose it’s because of M.F. Hinch?

The manager gets a one year homeymoon.  In Hinch's first year, he was a genius who could do no wrong.  Now, each year he gets dumber and dumber.  It was the same with Leyland.

26 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Not if you're leading in the 9th and the only task required is to close the door.

Don't give up the 9th inning run and we win.

And the previous 3 runs are moot point.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Don't listen to Gehringer_2.  He don't know what he talking about.  

If MTS managers managed the Tigers, they would be in first place.  Fire AJ Hinch!

12 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Gotta get Keith's bat in the lineup. He may start hitting. 🤔

Now that he's getting protection from Tork, he should get going.  

40 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Slugging Andy Ibanez is batting second, so he can drive home Greene.  

18 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Hopefully, Jake starts hitting. There are signs he's coming around. That would be huge!

He will, but he won't be huge all by himself.  They need multiple hitters to improve. 

In most line-ups, it would not make sense to bat Ibanez leadoff even against lefties.  The Tigers line-up is not most line-ups.  One thing about Hinch is he doesn't manage his roster based on hunches, but rather data.  

18 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

Instead of bums, which is what we are. 

I see them as a .500 team.  Their pitching staff is as good as their hitting is bad.  I was thinking at the beginning of the season that they could be a contender in a weak division, but so far it's not looking so weak.  

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

10 walks is optimistic for a guy with a 40% k rate, but sure, it just about doable, but sadly Parker’s other problem is a very high pop-up rate, which is killing his BaBIP!

I was thinking 10% walk rate which is around what you'd expect for him.  I don't think there is a big correlation between strikeout rate and walk rate.  It's not uncommon for hitters to have high strikeout and also high walk rates.  They don't put the ball in play, so they see a lot of pitches and a pitcher without control might walk them.  

2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

But harder to get to even 200 if you can't get the ball in play in 40% of your AB!

Let's say he had 100 PA and 40 K.  We'll give him 10 BB and 3 HR.  So that's 90 at bats, 18 hits (15 are not homers).  That's 47 balls in play and a .319 BABIP which is very doable.  It's also a .280 OBP which might not be tolerable on a contending team even with his defense.  

3 minutes ago, theroundsquare said:

Does he smoke? 

This is not JIm Leyland's Tigers. He's a non-smoker and vegetarian.  

I don't see anything in Vilade's profile that makes me think he's going to break out and surprise us. He is flexible and has decent on base skills which are two things that Harris looks for.  I don't know what kind of defender he is.  Flexibility often means not being able to play any position particularly well.  If he can move around without hurting them defensively, then he can help.  

17 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

in the Winter of '27, Harris will be done assessing and will makes some a-ma-zing moves, just wait, it'll be awesome

Greatest team since the 27 Yankees.  

If he bats third, it will be 3 fewer solo home runs😃