Longgone

37 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

He's perfectly fine as a #5 starter. We need bullpen help and don't let these bullpen guys fool you with the last couple of good weeks. They're pretty inconsistent so looking good sometimes is just part of being inconsistent. 

That sounds like every bullpen

4 hours ago, papalawrence said:

I put "highly" overrated in quotes for a reason. It's one thing to call a prospect overrated. If you put "highly" in there I would expect some reasoning. Since the AZ Fall league he's hit 25 HR in ~280 at-bats.

Underrated overrated, it doesn’t really matter because any analysis is just a point in time along the development curve, and no one really knows how much anyone is going to progress and develop and adapt. It’s just a guess, some more educated than others.

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with micro on Briceno, but someone can be ranked high by all prospect sites and still be overrated.  The prospect rankings have a great deal of uncertainty and I think they sometimes copy each other.  

He’s a prospect. Most wash out and most won’t even reach their ceilings. However, when they do, it’s exciting, but I doubt anyone can reliably predict who it’s going to be. That’s why you collect as many as you can.

9 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Gentleman said:

can someone remind me what "oppo taco" means? I haven't had it pounded into my head with a sledgehammer quite enough yet.

Chicken, instead of beef

17 hours ago, Shinzaki said:

Anderson is 23 years old and has almost a 1000 AB's of MiLB experience after playing college ball.  I would hardly call bringing him up this season rushing him.

I'm not suggesting we jump at the chance to move on from Tork...but if the opprtunity comes to make a big swing at a quality SP and he's part of the ask...I would strongly consider it

Big jump from AA to the bigs

On 6/25/2025 at 2:53 PM, CMU97 said:

Wrong thread

No, you are always welcome.

26 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

OK so this not a political statement per se at all, just one about human perception in general - there are two immutable laws at work - the law of large numbers, and the law of decreasing returns. The first means you can make a lot of noise about 'waste' using numbers that seem big, but are still tiny potatoes in the total scheme, and the 2nd means that there is always a point where the cost of more thorough budget controls exceeds the dollars that control will save, ergo the 0% $ loss organization is a mirage - it's not even the target you can/should realistically aim for. 

There is also the Law of Mendacious Bull****.

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

also, the reference to Taters is possibly hibernophobic.  

Or tuberphobic

12 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I was even more surprised by Haas.  

Mlicki should buy a vowel from Haas.

3 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Crim looks like he should be playing in beer league softball

Trent Crim from the Independent?

5 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I got the feeling it just sounded like such an off-the-wall thing and it came to me in the form of a Facebook post and Facebook gets more iffy all the time. 

I just saw one that said drafting TeSlaa would cause the Lions to have to trade Laporta.

40 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

https://www.newsweek.com/sports/mlb/tigers-trade-idea-sees-50-million-outfield-bat-acquired-pitching-prospects-2065825.

Can anybody make sense out of this Newsweek repeat of a bleacher report article claiming the Tigers should acquire Luis Robert Jr. from the White Sox for much of the Erie pitching staff?

 

The world is now full of ai generated clickbait crap like this.

6 hours ago, NYLion said:

He's not even a backup. They brought in Bridgewater for the playoffs because they didn't trust Hooker as backup. It's a miss, the Lions aren't getting the dividends on Hooker unless Goff gets injured long term and Hooker gets them some wins. Holmes first two 3rd round picks were McNeil and Joseph for emphasis. I can even get the Martin trade in a sense because there's some upside for him to be a starter if he panned out, Hooker was never going to be a starter here.

Again, I don’t believe it was a matter of not trusting Hooker. They had the opportunity to add Bridgewater and all his experience for the playoffs and took advantage of it. No brainer and no reflection on Hooker.

11 hours ago, Jason_R said:

I assume they signed Teddy Bridgewater going into the playoffs last year because they didn't trust Hooker. 

This was another Holmes special, buying low on an injured or otherwise undervalued prospect. Maybe he will develop into something, but just like Martin, it is not a good sign that they had to bring someone in to his position. 

I don’t think it was a matter of not trusting Hooker as much as it was having the opportunity to utilize the availability of Bridgewater and all his experience. It was a win/win, Hooker got to develop all year as backup, and you had Bridgewater available for the playoffs.

9 hours ago, Jason_R said:

Sorsdal was a miss but I don't hold it against Holmes for missing on a 5th round guard. Martin was a head scratcher. So was Hooker for that matter. 

But these Rams guys have a knack for uncovering late round WR talent. And Holmes has earned the right to trust his gut in finding undervalued players. 

Why is Hooker a miss? Seems like a solid backup for a 3rd rounder 

1 minute ago, Motown Bombers said:

I don't think it's the players, it's the value that was traded for them. 

Holmes looks throughout the draft and if he has conviction on a olayers he goes and gets him. That’s what makes him successful, not playing games with value. He’s not going to hit on every player, that’s not reasonable.

8 hours ago, chasfh said:

Almost certainly not how the Tigers wanted him to approach it. Because that’s how he was approaching it for his three seasons with the team, and we all saw how much viscerally helped him.

I think it’s more likely that someone had a CTJ talk with Tork, something clicked, he buckled down to review the info, made the adjustments that he made, and improved his approach and results; than that the team said you know what, we’re use gonna leave you alone and let you figure it out by yourself, he made his adjustments all by himself, and improved his approach and results.

They didn’t “leave him alone”, they were in agreement with what he needed to work on, and he worked on it. 

41 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

This was the quote the media and some fans picked up on;

 

"As well as the usual database of video of each players’ at-bats and cage work, the Tigers have invested a small fortune in high speed cameras, motion and bat tracking systems, force plates to track balance and weight transfer throughout the swing, and much more. As he told reporters on Wednesday, Torkelson isn’t particularly interested in knowing all that information in detail.

“That’s not me. That’s not the way I roll. I’m pretty old-school in the fact that, you know, that felt good. the ball flight looked good. That must’ve worked.”

https://www.blessyouboys.com/2025/2/14/24365162/detroit-tigers-news-spencer-torkelson-spring-training-preview

Nowhere does that say he is not changing or working on anything, only that he wants to approach it more viscerally and not so analytically. 

13 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

I think he was already working on his stance and swing but got SO tired of the media questions that he just blew them off by saying he wasn't changing. ML players don't make this big of a change and have this much success in a couple of weeks, more like a couple of months 

He never said he wasn’t changing anything. He said it wasn’t his swing that was the problem, it was other things. Totally misinterpreted.

22 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

His stance is noticably different... He was much more upright previously, now he's a bit more hunched over and in a more athletic position before each pitch.

I do think the Gleyber Torres signing was a come to Jesus for him... I'm just glad he woke up and appears to be getting there, he's too good a hitter to let go and see blossom somewhere else

He knew what he needed to work on, the Tigers knew, and he worked on it. This crap about him being resistant to change is just that.

2 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I don’t really care if they win or not because it’s just spring training, but I really do care and it bugs me when they lose. I wish I had an attitude of serene detachment, but I don’t.

Serenity Now!

15 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

I guess you'd have to define unrealistic, A guy who's had 1 good year in his career suddenly hitting 50 hrs which only a tiny fraction of baseball players ever do is unrealistic to me. 

 

? He’s only 25 and he’s only had the one full year. Lots of players struggle for the first few years in mlb. They either make the necessary adjustments or they don’t, remains to be seen.

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

lol, oh really?

I have directed nothing toward you, the person—I even said you'd made a good point about Tork—and yet you are offended by my opinion and are taking it very hard, and weirdly personally, and insulting me in the process. I guess trying to make sense of that is also a fool's errand.

Look, we can stop here and part friends if you want. I'd rather, if you don't mind.

Okay, if I have to, I’ll admit I actually believe you can feel shame, and we can be friends as long as you promise not to be irritating, ever again.

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Just can’t quit me, huh? 🤣

Well, first of all, I was not “acting as if pure assumptions are fact.” My post was littered with qualifiers such as “I suppose”, “I think”, and “I believe”. If I was stating something as though it were fact, I wouldn’t have used any of those qualifiers.

Secondly, you’re not going to succeed at shaming me for spouting my opinion on an Internet opinion board, so you might as well stop trying to do that and go back to talking about the Tigers instead. 😁

I was more expressing my irritation at the gratuitousness of it, rather than an attempt to shame you, which I know is a fool’s errand.

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Maybe people mis-apply an analogy to football here. Everyone on a football team uses film to learn what the opposing team does tactically, but baseball isn't football. In baseball taking and watching video is what you pay coaches and your bio-med people to do. If they see something that can help a hitter they take it to him. There is no value in requiring players to become kinesiologists - adding non-performance based requirements to your player selection criteria just reduces the pool of good players you give yourself access to and I'm sure AJ and Scott Harris know that well.

I’m talking more about taking a few random interview quotes and then building an elaborate fantasy universe filled with projected motivations and then acting as if pure assumptions are fact.

I know, it’s the internet.