gehringer_2

Not the point at all. It's the the opportunity cost to the overall higher education enterprise in the US. Just another case of something that used to be useful becoming another bread and circuses immateriality. Higher ed is just about the last thing in this world we are still good at in the US. Once we **** that up we will can get in line round about the level of Venezuela.

LOL - they are all whistling past the graveyard on inflation.

It was an odd decision by Gleyber to demand to stay at 2b because if he had shown he could play 3rd he'd have increased his FA value big time. Everyone needs 3Bs, but most teams have a glut of IF prospects that can hit but have to move off 3B or SS for lack of arm strength and so have a log jam of 2Bs (like the Tigers). Gleyber came up as a SS, so at least at one point he had a arm that probably could have handled 3rd. Maybe it's gone and he knows it.

I don't think it's a slam dunk either way. I doubt he will be offered a multiyear at near the AAV of the QO and if he likes it here he might decide getting more dollars assured up front is a conservative strategy. Or not.

At the time I though it was a mistake for Roberts to leave Ohtani in the game so long last night if they wanted him to pitch today - especially once it was plain Schnieder would not pitch to him anyway.

The Evangelicals are used to watching their pastors get rich (on their backs). 🙄 They love it, proof of God's favor.

Tarkington had a few big years but even when they had Tarkington I remember them as a defense first team. Page and Eller, the purple people eaters.

It's an iffy thing. There is no way to know if a playoff bound team with the money will also find themselves critically pitching short (i.e. an injury) enough to be willing to overpay that also has something you want/need. It's a narrow set of circumstances that all have to line up. You might get to the deadline and no good deal is there. So then I guess you are no worse off than if you had just decided to keep him going into the season.

Yeah, that could certainly be true. Depends on how it ended. Was the deal just an 'honest' fail because Detroit wouldn't match Boston's last offer or did either side feel like trust had been violated or that they couldn't believe one another?

Denver did that for number of years, results were mixed but it's a totally different game now. It would at least probably be the most entertaining game this team could play. I suppose the downside risk is that you expend a lot of energy playing fast offense and tough D against a team that walks it up the court and basically rests for the 4th while using 20 seconds per possession. Are your athletes up do doing that for 80 games? That and you can't throw away the ball on half your breaks. 🙄

Plus he's ignorant, which is one thing you could never say about Bill Clinton. Despite whatever character failings he had, he had a firm command of both facts and policy.

May favorite "hidden perk" was for a while when I had to fly back and forth regularly from DTW to MSP early in the morning. For whatever reason at that time Delta just had open boarding on that first flight. Just walk to the gate and right onto the plane. Maybe because the plane was already there in the morning pre-prepped and ready to go? Don't know why but it was a real throw back to 30yrs earlier when flying was still something to look forward to.

If they don't pursue Torres they could sign Bregman without blocking McGongle (assuming they think he's going to be here in '26) because Baez can finish his contract in CF. Also have to wonder if Anderson is considered a serious prospect or not, '26 is probably now or never for him.

That's kind of a fun idea - the devil would be in the performance metrics. Could destroy team cohesion if done wrong.

Still, even with Kiner-Falefa not doing much with the bat I'd take his chances over the quality of that send.

It's just such a stupid system where Team B ends up paying for the performance a guy already booked with Team A because Team A was able to vastly underpay him when he was performing. Nothing will make sense until they change it, and they probably won't.

Of course OTOH, we could include the 5 yrs you have to pay him for when you are going to get nothing. 🫠

I like Bregman well enough, but I'd like Bregman and Torres as I think the team is too LH'd. But they are not going to cut bait on Keith. So Bregman means Keith goes back to 2nd and they don't pursue Torres. Bregman is prolly the better bat than Torres and a better 3b than Keith but Torres is a better 2b than Keith. It would overall be a step but not a huge one, but that's OK. They were an 87 win team, there aren't big steps left. If you make even a truly serious try for Tucker with so many likely bidders out there you can have little certainty you land him. Lower certainty there than pursuing Bregman anyway. For me signing pitching is all a matter of whether they can get reasonable years.

Yup. I was not impressed with Roberts or his staff. I thought pitching to Ohtani the last time just to walk him after the 4/5 IBBs was stupid too. And who knows, the extra energy to throw those 4 wasted pitches may have been the difference for Little against Freeman.

actually I had it wrong, What I was thinking about was when Kershaw came in in the 12th with the bases loaded. Went to a full count on Lukes and Luke swung at ball 4, but he didn't K, he grounded out 4-3. What I remembered was the walk was there - so same net outcome but not a K

It's true that the uncertainty around '27 is a wild card. I don't really have dog in the fight either way. I just don't want them to do something stupid, which by my definition means if you trade him, it has to be a good trade, if you keep him you better make a good pick on the comp award.

But if this is an issue, isn't it going to be an even bigger issue if he walks for nothing at the end of '26 as compared to getting some talent back this off-season? The players know the set-up as well as anyone. I assume most of them and us want the team to be able to continue to contend beyond '26? I'm not saying it's not a potential issue, just that you are going to face it either way - it's just a matter of when.

SE Mi is not a particularly rich area by national standards anymore and as good as Tiger TV and radio ratings are, as has been noted the ballpark is already too expensive for most local fans and they average 10k empty seats per date. Now granted, Aces pitching drive sellouts. But even if an ACE is worth 15K extra seats and even at $100 profit per seat sold, on 15 home starts that still only $22.5M/yr. From a purely economic standpoint, there is no sense paying someone $40M for that. 🤷‍♂️ Long story short, fan enthusiasm is nice, but it may not pay the bills.

yeah - exactly. I'm sure there is a trade out there that would work to the Tigers advantage, but it's just a fact that few GMs ever make a trade like that. And I think it would have to be at least a three way deal - it has to be a more complex set of swaps to get enough pieces to fit. And since we have never seen Harris swing any kind of complex deal (cf, DD), there is no precedent to expect one.

The conventional wisdom is that owners, particularly big market owners, don't care about operating loses because teams have been appreciating in value exponentially. Of course, that can't go on forever - anything that must come to an end will. But with no intent to be political here, but just to state an economic fact - it's tied to the oligarchy. As long as the rich continue to get richer exponentially, the price they are willing to pay for their toys will continue to follow suit. Now, that said, it doesn't mean the owners still won't try as hard as they can to remake a system to give them capital appreciation AND operating profits.