Longgone

4 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

Someone who is being MISCHARACTERIZED.

No one likes being mischaracterized.

Now I'm Cheech, or Chong?

Awesome.

Chong, definitely Chong

On 4/27/2024 at 4:46 PM, RandyMarsh said:

I think a Millen grade is a little harsh but I too am not crazy about giving up a 2025 third for him. OTOH assuming we are what we expect to be next year it would equate to around the 100th pick, so giving up the 100th pick next year to get a 150ish ranked prospect this year isn't that outrageous. 

Obviously, the lions had him graded much higher than that, or they wouldn’t have made the deal. The reason for his low rankings in the media was lack of knowledge, not lack of promise.

20 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I feel like Levi is not going to be  on the team this season.        I don't think this is a staff that holds on to him just to not look bad.   I think you either contribute or you're gone.   They liked Buggs, but they cut him loose.  Couldn't use him.   Seems like Levi has dropped on the depth chart rather quickly.    Health is a big reason why.    

He’ll finally be more than a year beyond the significant surgery, so like Latu, he may really come on now that he can properly train. Or he may not, we’ll see.

On 4/28/2024 at 11:37 AM, MichiganCardinal said:

I think this is right, though I don't think Sorsdal's spot is guaranteed over Awosika's. Neither of them were very good last year when they had to step in, and they finished with almost identical snap counts (252 for Awosika to 253 for Sorsdal), but Awosika seemed to be the preferred option late in the season and in the playoffs when Jackson went down. In fact, Sorsdal didn't see a single offensive snap during the playoff run. They both have the flexibility to play tackle or guard, which is good, but ultimately we can only keep three or maybe four backups on the active roster. The other will almost certainly get a practice squad invite if they clear waivers. It's worth mentioning that they don't usually use Skipper as a LT or RT, but rather as a jumbo TE. He would only fill in for Decker or Sewell in the case of a real all-hands-on-deck emergency. This could be the transitionary role Manu takes over this year or next as he develops.

I would think we would go with one of Awosika or Sorsdal as a backup lineman available to plug anywhere on the line, Skipper in the jumbo TE / emergency tackle role, Mahogany as a backup guard, and Manu as a 3rd string tackle who is inactive most weeks this year, unless forced in due to injury. The tough part is that our first alternative at center is probably going to be Glasgow, which means we are shifting two spots on the line with one (probably most likely) injury.

Sorsdal was a developmental pick; small school guy, switching positions, training at several spots, I think he probably exceeded expectations for his rookie year.

On 4/3/2024 at 5:04 PM, Sports_Freak said:

It would be a huge deal if we were up against the salary cap. I'm assuming we're still in good cap space?

Actually saved on cap space 

1 hour ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I'm surprised, but glad.

Kudos to the 49ers for losing nothing and getting a conference foe to spend more money.

Appears to be negligible.

13 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

He's not worth that.

Hard to say. What are the guarantees? How much is the bonus? What are the cap hits?

11 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Faedo made the team with a strong spring. From the Free Press;

"Faedo, 28, shredded hitters in spring training.

He logged a 1.35 ERA with two walks and 17 strikeouts across 13⅓ innings in seven games."

But...yeah...stats don't matter. 😆

What makes you think it was the stats, because that's all you see as a fan? Maybe it was his stuff, command, poise, etc. Maybe his ability fit the role they wanted to fill better than the competition. Stats may reflect that, sure, but they also may not.

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

Ok. So if Brieske had a 28.50 ERA he would make the team as long as he was throwing quality strikes? 

If the organization deems that Brieske has the greater ability and the better capability of getting major league hitters out, he gets the job, even if his era is 28 and his competition era is zero. They will weigh all factors of his spring and past performance, not simply his spring training stats.

5 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

They had strong springs and made the team. Saying spring training doesn't mean anything isn't always true. Players make a team or get cut from their spring performance every year. Some of it shows up in the spring stats, sure. But look at Torkelson this spring, he's hitting under .200. There's no doubt in my mind he wouldn't make a ML team if he were a rookie. So yeah, sometimes stats don't matter. But we also have a BP battle of 4 pitchers for 2 spots. I bet spring stats will be part of that decision. As well as who has options left. Spring performance matters, sometimes.

What if a couple of big leaguers had run into a couple of Zumayas fastballs with men on instead of missing them? It’s baseball, could easily happen. That drastically changes his stats. Does that change his capabilities or projection? Does it alter the team’s perception of him? Not at all.

1 minute ago, Sports_Freak said:

They had strong springs and made the team. Saying spring training doesn't mean anything isn't always true. Players make a team or get cut from their spring performance every year. Some of it shows up in the spring stats, sure. But look at Torkelson this spring, he's hitting under .200. There's no doubt in my mind he wouldn't make a ML team if he were a rookie. So yeah, sometimes stats don't matter. But we also have a BP battle of 4 pitchers for 2 spots. I bet spring stats will be part of that decision. As well as who has options left. Spring performance matters, sometimes.

Ability matters, performance matters. Stats may or may not reflect those two, so by themselves, stats don’t really matter in the spring environment  and with such small samples.

18 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

They don't mean as much on a team with established stars. But there are eye opening players during ST. I remember a time when Verlander and Zumaya made the team with very strong springs. But yeah, most of the time the spring stats are meaningless.

Their strong spring had everything to do with the level of ability they had attained, and nothing to do with their spring stats.

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

Many ST stats are useless. Look at what Javy did all spring and compare it to Kreidler. Ryan should have made the team. But it's all about money...

Spring stats; Kreidler hit .355 with two home runs, eight walks and 10 strikeouts over 40 plate appearances in 18 games during spring training.

Here's why spring training stats mean nothing; first, small samples, you could take a random 40 ab sample from throughout the regular season, and the same player could look like a hall of famer or the biggest piece of crap, neither of which is indicative of his true ability. Secondly, you are dealing with players not yet in shape, don't yet have their timing, may be out of sync implementing mechanical changes, may be dealing with an injury, and they may be facing major leaguers not game ready, or minor leaguers far from the bigs, etc. etc.

Spring stats mean nothing.

12 hours ago, Longgone said:

And they are evaluating the progression of abilities throughout the fall and spring, not just games.

It's everything they do in games, on the back fields, in practice sessions. It's the mechanical changes and adjustments they have made, overall health and conditioning, mental stamina, everything. It's not results at all, but the estimation of capabilities vs. the competition in providing team needs.

22 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think Hinch has been clear they do grade ABs but that that grade doesn't necessarily correspond to the game value result of the AB. So I guess you could say guys are still graded on a set of stats, but they're not the stats we see. Same kind of thing hold for the pitching.

And they are evaluating the progression of abilities throughout the fall and spring, not just games.

1 hour ago, 1776 said:

My primary concern is the total lack of offense from Torkelson and Baez. Offense in general is a concern as well for me.

If we’ve learned any one thing over the years, it’s that spring training means nothing.

8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jRnDAcv86yGYl1Tq6fdXD1VoGr2Ls5PiRBNEFBXHL3Y/edit?usp=drive_link

this is Edman's spreadsheet. Page one says Huira is out of options, page two says he can declare FA if outrighted.

No need to option or outright him, he's not on the 40.

1 minute ago, bobrob2004 said:

Spring Training stats:

.105/.227/.184, 0 HR

.105/.122/.105, 0 HR 

One is Javy Baez, the other is Spencer Torkelson.  Who is who? 

Who cares? It's spring training.

34 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I came here to check if the Lions renegotiated another contract and it’s just bickering about the bickering. 

Says the perp.

8 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

I agree with what MB is saying in one regard as it pertains to the way the Lions treat players and their cap space/flexibility. After how badly Martin Mayhew and Tom Lewand managed the cap around here and after Quinn blew a bunch of it on the likes of Trey Flowers, it is nice to see Brad Holmes and Mike Disner being responsible. But there is a fine line between being responsible with it and looking like you're a cheap organization. Nobody is accusing them of being Mike Brown or the Bengals. However, if the Lions are so hard up to be as fickle and responsible as possible that they have to ask a guy to take a $2 million pay cut and have done this before, that shows you how they treat their salary cap and having financial flexibility.

My question is, if they do that to their own players, would they let a free agent on the open market walk over $1.5-$2-$3 million in a contract negotiation?

Let's say DJ Reader, whose been linked to the Lions, wants 2 at $25 million and the Lions only want to go 2 at $22 million. Given how he treats some of his own players, would Holmes negotiate with a free agent like that? Would he let someone walk over a couple million he doesn't feel they are owed?

You guys are connecting imaginary dots.

20 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Okay, so given that NFL contracts are not guaranteed unless specifically written as such, and given that NFL players, especially fringe players, are cut all the time, why are the players assuming that the second year WILL happen? I mean, unless the Lions are like: "Yeah, we're not gonna put it in writing, but we REALLY like you and we REALLY want you for both years, so consider it a done deal, except not in writing." Which I don't think the Lions are doing.

If I was a player and someone offered me less month this year with the potential to earn more money next year, I'd take the contact with more money this year. If I play great this year, I going into next being able to command more. If I play poorly this year on a 2 year deal, I face getting cut and not getting the extra.

He's not thinking this through. Non guaranteed years are not an incentive for the players because they're NON GUARANTEED. They benefit the team, not the players, the team can choose to either continue the contract if it's a good value, or cut the player, a win/win for them.

2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

No I'm not saying that. Guaranteed money is the same but the Lions can add non guaranteed money and years to entice a player with a higher total value only to come back the next year and ask them to take a pay cut. 

Every player knows that the non guaranteed year(s) are to the teams benefit and not the players, and they will only get them if they earn them

4 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Right and then in year two they can be like either take this reduced amount or try your hand at free agency. I don't particularly think it's a good way to do business. 

You are saying players, and especially agents, don't understand what the words " not guaranteed" means. It's your understanding that is off.

7 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Like I said numerous times, they are establishing one and will start getting a reputation. That's four players in two years and three originally signed by Holmes. 

The fallacy in your thinking is that the renegotiating is somehow onerous, deceptive or unfair to the players. There is no basis for thinking that way, in fact, it is a good and positive indicator.

2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Like I said numerous times, they are establishing one and will start getting a reputation. That's four players in two years and three originally signed by Holmes. 

The only one getting a reputation is you.