Tiger337

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I don't disagree with the gist of this, but it's not as though Tork is blocking someone better. It's entire possible we'd end up with something worse at first.

Given the recent callups, I wouldn't want to test it out.  

1 hour ago, monkeytargets39 said:

I’m worried that if he doesn’t max out this deadline/off-season that we will be in a long stretch with limited results again.

I am think maxing out at the deadline pretty much guarantees that.  I am not saying this isn't an option.  Maybe that's what they need to do, but trading away everybody that's good except for a few players would seem to lead to a long period of limited results unless they get a load of high level prospects in return and they develop quickly.  Realistically, the prospects that they get will be at different levels of development and some of them won't pan out.  

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

the point only being that just because you are good at analytics, all the other stuff doesn't necessarily follow, so being a great analytics org is no guarantee of being a winning org. And one can go further to say the analytics expertise doesn't even have any particular correlation to capability in those other organizational requirements.

While it's certainly a requirement to compete with the orgs that have it, it is not sufficient by itself. Plus you can put all the right data in front of a decision maker and they can still make the wrong decision. The decision is still subject to human variables.

 

I agree with that.  Another element is the ability to work with agents and to negotiate trades.  

3 minutes ago, buddha said:

the process involved in signing valdez was sound.  it hasnt worked out yet because of the other injuries.

the process in bringing in morton and paddack last year was not sound, and it resulted in them losing the division.

perhaps if they had signed a bregman or a valdez-type at the beginning of last year, or traded for someone of that ilk, they would have been better?

we'll never know the answer, but my overall point was that when you have a generational talent who will likely only be with you for so long, you should try to maximize that window of contention, and they failed to do that the previous two seasons, imo.

i would say the same thing to the pirates with skeens.

I was definitely all in for a Bregman signing at the beginning of last year.  I think they tried.  Maybe they needed to be more creative? The Morton and Paddack trades were not significant moves and ended up hurting them.  

3 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I think that was more a comment regarding last season’s deadline. Personally, I’m not sure there is much else that can be said about the current season, so maybe dissecting last season again could be interesting. 
 

With the benefit of hindsight now, what could have been don’t differently a year ago at the deadline when we were on track for a bye? Can of worms opened. 

I don't think there were any Skubal type players available last year.  Mason Miller was probably the most impactful player traded.  He is not in the same class as Skubal in terms of going all-in for one year, but they would have been able to keep him for much longer.  I still wouldn't trade an elite hitting prospect for a reliever. 

16 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

Now pit ballpark factors into consideration. Tony Gwynn was a generational player...Walkers success came in a band box at a mile above sea level. But...whatever..I really don't care. If Harris used stats to build the 2026 Tigers . .look at the results. Go ahead and defend him.

WAR does take ballpark factors into consideration.  All the statistics are adjusted for the average performance in the ballparks where players played.  In other words, Walker gets penalized for playing in Colorado.  Gwynn awas a great player, but he he is only "generational" if you consider batting average to be a good summary of player performance.  

On 5/30/2026 at 11:06 PM, buddha said:

This is why you go for it when you have the chance.  you never know what next year brings.  progress is not linear.

 

Which is what the Tigers did by signing Valdez.  Some wanted them to sign a hitter instead, but I don't know who was realistically available.  I doubt they had the budget to do everything people wanted.  

20 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

Analytics is no panacea in the player development process, it's still only a tool that can tell you much more accurately what a guy is now, and help you show a guy what to do next; but projecting what guys will be in two or three years after they put in more or less work or get more or less strong or big or do or don't take care of their conditioning or end up more or less injured is still a very inexact science because you have a very non-analytic human being at the center of the process - and great analytics is also no guarantee you have the good coaching to pair with it. You're not going to improve many players by just throwing spreadsheets at them - you need people with people skills to instruct and motivate.

I would assume they are doing that too.  But that's something that fans can't see. We can't realistically critique a manager or gm for using a player who we think has a bad attitude or is "mentally weak" or doesn't work hard enough.  We don't know. 

13 minutes ago, NorthWoods said:

So you're saying he'd fit right in.

Yes he would!

However, it would probably better for him and the organization if he fully developed at AAA before promotion.  

25 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

I don’t think they’re holding him back.  He’s only had like 7 weeks of AAA ball and only got like half a season of AA ball.  What’s the rush at this point?  

He's also not hitting too well the last few weeks.  He is probably not ready yet offensively.  

2 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

Even calling up a player to play CF (Max Clark??) would allow Vierling to move to RF. Improves our defense and how much worse could the hitting actually be?

I don't want to see Clark up for his defense.  I want him to be called up when he is ready offensively as well as defensively.  

43 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

but Meadows was never more than a provisional member of the 26. It was probably at least 50/50 he would hit himself off the team. Of course in retrospect once Carpenter went down he probably would have stayed weak bat or no.

He was starting at the beginning of the season and had a OPS of .641.  His lifetime OPS is .691.  He is also an excellent defender.  Who was going ro replace him if sent down?  I think we found out the answer to that.  

Another injury which nobody is talking about is Meadows.  Everybody was complaining about him and saying that he sucked, but he was an excellent defender and he hit a lot better than half their line-up is hitting now.  Their offense and defense was a lot better before all the injuries. 

24 minutes ago, SoCalTiger said:

82 might be enough 

So, you're saying they have a chance? 

13 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

An explanation of analytics used incorrectly;

I see some Padre bias in here! It's pretty general all along and then all of the sudden it throws in a Larry Walker/ Tony Gwynn comparison.  I think someone was upset that Gwynn and Walker have about the same WAR.  😁

31 minutes ago, buddha said:

The tigers have been very unlucky with injuries and bullpen implosions.  i suspect that will change in the second half of the season and give them a chance if skubal comes back and they dont trade him.

 

They were 18-17 before the injuries piled up and they can get back to being that kind of team.  However, I think they have fallen so far that it's going to be really hard to recover.  

21 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Going to a 13 man pitching roster that is used fluidly and without defined roles.  Essentially, mass pitching chaos.  

That sounds pretty extreme.  How about three regular starters and two bullpen games? The 3-3-3 rotation.  3 regular starters and 2 games where 3 pitchers pitch 3 innings apiece.  That leaves 4 full-time bullpen guys and the 6 3-inning starters can also pitch in relief in another game.   

9 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

I think the move, at least in the pitching side, is getting away from starters altogether.  Too much money being spent on starters who miss significant time and whose absence ends up being a major burden to the organization.

What do mean getting away from starters altogether?  

3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Fraudulent?

They cheated?

I wouldn't want to have to choose between a Nazi and an an authoritarian enabler.  Tough choice for the Mainers.  

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

OK, I’m starting to sense a pattern here I think can be summed up by this decision tree.

 

projection.  😉

I'M DONE WITH THIS TEAM!!!!

FIRE HENCH!
FIRE HARRISS!!!
SELL THE TEAM ILLITCH!!

I saw yesterday that Riley Greene hits better batting 5th than 4th.  So, today he's batting 4th.  Stupid Hinch.  

14 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

And lets not forget that a blown save is a blown save whether it's one run or 3 that's given up. If Tigers relievers came into more games with a 3 run lead than a one run lead, or if the team scored  more late runs,  some of those saves wouldn't have been blown - or long story short, the BP has been bad but poor offense also contributes to it looking even worse.   

Yes, the offense is bad and is setting up the bullpen for losses, but it's still an unusual proportion of blown saves .  The bullpen needs to shoulder some of the blame. 

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

However bad it is for us watching the Tigers lose in horrific fashion on TV night after night, it is twice as soul-crushing seeing it happen in person.

For me, It's not seeing it happen in person, that is worse.  It's being surrounded by opposing fans, the vast majority of which care a lot less about baseball than me and watching them go insane when it happens.