Tiger337

11 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

just totally surprised they are going without a true backup SS. 

Harris and Hinch living on the edge.  

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

$25b for pancreatic cancer research would not hurt about now.

Research is for nerds.  

Shades of Troy Percical and Joe Nathan  

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

have I said before that I really hate bringing in old relievers at the end of their ropes?

Yup, I wasn't a big fan of this signing.  He is the kind of reliever Dombrowski used to sign

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

No, maybe best player to fill in, short term. Protect SS in case of emergency. Don't have to worry about options or putting another player on the 40 man roster  And a RH bat. They're leaving the better, future player, in Toledo. Instead of sitting on the bench in Detroit for two weeks. Or....you were being sarcastic? 😅😅

I wasn't being sarcastic.  I don't believe that a 26 year old player who has played for three different teams in the past two years and can't stay on a on a 40-man roster has any future.  I don't think Jung has any future either, but I think the Tigers view him as better.  

7 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I guess that’s true, although I’ve heard the manager of the Mudhens claim otherwise. I’m not sure how many chances the Tigers owe Jung. Maybe he’ll stick this time.

That could be like Anderson pumping up Pittaro.  It is just hard for me to believe that someone who has become a journeyman infielder is worth getting excited about.    

8 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I don’t care who is “a prospect” or not. I just want to see the best player possible, but there are rules and protocols that need to be followed and I guess that’s what this is. 

I think the Tigers see Jung as the better player.

3 minutes ago, NorthWoods said:

It could be argued that Jung isn't much of a prospect either.   Kind of sucks that merit didn't win out.

I don't know that Workman is more worthy than Jung based on one month at Toledo.  Since they let him get away two years ago, I think they see him as a flawed player. 

Not that Jung isn't!

7 minutes ago, diaspora04 said:

Indeed.  Nothing will get by him today.

Except for strikes.  

25 minutes ago, GalagaGuy said:

Well maybe he should be? 🤔

He is not much of a prospect anymore and the Tigers 40-man has gotten more competitive.  He has bounced around between three different organizations recently.  

I have been pretty busy lately and I have to admit I didn't know Holman and Curet are on the 40-man and that I had never heard of Curet before.  Also, Curet arguably has worse eyebrows than Torres.  

1 hour ago, Shelton said:

The boring part of speculating is it could be for naught within the next few hours, so it hardly feels worth it. That said, it’s a low bar.

So, I will say that I’m not sure a hot start by workman so far this year is enough to justify a 40-man spot, and I think Scott Harris is “loathe” to give those up without good reason. We know that Clark is likely to occupy a 40-man spot in the near future anyway, and for a long time to come. If you add workman now, that requires a move. If you add Clark in six weeks, that requires another move. I’m not sure giving a 40-man spot to workman for what might be a short term need is worth it. 
 

As for Clark being “ready,” I’m not going to put too much weight into GM speak. Even if they would prefer waiting, things changed last night. They can always send him back down when other options become available (and/or if he is struggling). He can play CF and bat 9th and we can see what happens. 

I can see them adding Clark, but I also think they would view a real back-up shortstop as a necessity.  I think Cruz would have been the obvious choice if he was healthy as he has played both CF/SS within the past year and is already on the 40-man.  How soon McKinstry coming back is a big consideration.  

8 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

 

It's probably less a matter of whether he could than that Hinch is loath to be without his Swiss Army knife roster.

It's not just Hinch though.  I still think they are sacrificing reliable defense for flexibility by moving players around so much, but it's the way the game is played today.  

I think Clark is not ready based on what we've been hearing from Harris.  Harris said the same thing about McGonigle over the winter, but this is more recent.  Cruz would be the logical choice if healthy, but he's still out.  It will probably be Workman.  They really need someone who can cover both CF/SS.  If Baez is out for a long time, we might miss him more than we think.  

5 minutes ago, kdog said:

optimism for $1000:

 

Better than nothing, but pro players are usually pretty optimistic about injuries.  Denial of weakness is a big part of their make-up.  

1 minute ago, 4hzglory said:

Is the Red Sox payroll higher than Detroit this year?  

Not according to Cots.  

5 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

Workman has NEVER had bat-to-ball skills...

IIRC, prior to this season he's been pretty much a .220 hitter... in college and in the minors.

What gives?

SMALL SAMPLE SIZE

On 4/25/2026 at 5:14 PM, chasfh said:

 

💬 President Trump lamented yesterday that "the whole world, unfortunately, has become somewhat of a casino."

Hopefully, you don't have your 7th casino bankruptcy.  

2 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Sure, they'd still be heavy hitters under another administration (at least Amazon and Apple anyway)... but that doesn't mean they don't have a *clear* preference. They clearly do, and they clearly do *care* about it given all the money they have spent on this administration.

Your eyes and ears tell you something different perhaps, but I saw Tim Apple go into the The White House and give him that stupid plaque with a 24 karat gold base to appeal to his vanity and ego. And to get policy concessions they wanted. 

So again, my point stands.

Yes, he is easy to manipulate, but I think they really would like him to shut the **** up, so they can perform their corruption quietly.  

Just now, mtutiger said:

My point still stands. He's widely despised in the broader public, and The Big Club that you speak of, the guys like Bezos and Cook and Musk, would all prefer that he weren't

I don't think they care that much.  They will still drive policy in the United States and make billions one way of the other once he is gone.  They always do.  I think he is probably easier for them to manipulate, but they can still get what they want.  

Just now, mtutiger said:

I think the public takes it more seriously than you think (he's getting -25 to -30 polls for a reason). But The Big Club wields a big stick, and they would prefer we all just shut up about it.

Sure, they don't like him, but the disapproval rating of congress is even worse.  A lot worse.  They don't trust anybody.  

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

2 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

1000%. Tired of having to pretend that the behavior observed out of both sides of the political spectrum with my own eyes and ears are the same. It just isn't.

It's not the same, but I think the left cried wolf too many times and now that we have a real problem, not enough people take it seriously.  They think it's still Clinton vs Bush.  

18 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I think The Big Club would much more prefer it if those who disapproved of Donald Trump would just shut up about it.

What they don't want is for everybody to start pointing fingers at them instead.  

6 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm sorry, but treating the current breakdown in American political culture and the violent undertones of it as being completely symmetrical is a bunch of hooey. There is one party that is led by a leader that sicced a mob on the capitol, there is one party that is led by a leader that blanket pardoned all of the people involved, has legitimized groups like the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, etc. 

I understand the tendency to want to see things from both sides and all.... but on this particular subject, it's wildly asymmetrical and oughtta be treated as such. And the fact that we treat "both sides" as if they are "the same" on this only emboldens more bad behavior.

LOL, studies have shown that the right is more violent, but you can't deny that us versus them among lower classes is exactly what The Big Club wants.  

The right hates the left and thinks it is dangerous.  The left hates the right and thinks it is dangerous.  This is a perfect scenario for The Big Club and the politicians which support it.