mtutiger

I really couldn't care less about how the team markets him, or whether he makes himself more available than other players for media interviews, I am rooting for him to succeed. He's been terrible thus far, but he's not the only one... and with the way that the fan base seems to just tee off on him in particular, his role almost acts like a heat shield for everyone else (except for Javy) who aren't performing to the level.

Finally lol

As much as people talk about Matt Chapman, he's not enough to overcome the totality of the young talent sucking all at the same time.

Yeah, the Flaherty piece is way less concerning that this... just cannot do it.

I'm fine with Bobby Scales, but I can see where you are coming from... I think his specialty is the analytical side of the game, but I think he struggles to put it in context for the casual listener.

The Tigers are not the only team in baseball whose lead analyst doesn't do all 162 games

Along these lines too, if there was a time to let go of Craig, the Matt Shepard dismissal would have been it.... it would have been very easy to justify it as a "booth shakeup" or something like that. Bally/Tigers did not do that.... they actually retained him and (iirc) he'll actually be involved in more games in 2024 than 2023.

There's a similar conversation being had in regards to Ty Madden over in the Tiger Cubs thread, the gist being that teams tell you what they think of players by what their actions indicate. And this year (yes, due to Benetti's work schedule), between TV and radio, there isn't a member of the Tiger broadcast crew that isn't named Dan Dickerson that will see more work than Craig Monroe. His job title is literally Lead Analyst for crying out loud, a title that was hung on him after publication of that Stavenhagen piece lol I don't need anyone to come right out and say it, but I need more than literally nothing to work off of before adjusting my priors here.

Ultimately, it comes down to who signs Monroe's checks and to their level of toleration. https://theathletic.com/3353514/2022/06/08/tigers-craig-monroe-radio-tv?source=user-shared-article Based on this article by Stavenhagen, and the included praise from Dan Dickerson (about as good an avatar on the company line as you will find, especially in regards to the broadcasts), and his increased role since the above article was written, their views go clearly go beyond tolerating I'll await the next review that takes into account the new announcing crew...

I mean, they brought Cam Maybin in for a slug of TV games last year. It's not they don't have other options. Just think people are avoid the Occams Razor explanation here....

I used to think that, but the reality is that they have a pretty large market that they air these games for, and that what appeals to me or you may be different than what other fans want. Or at the very least doesn't engender the same level of antipathy that he seems to here. And I'm guessing there's a little more market research prowess at Bally or with the Tigers than what we have. If he was as big of a liability as he's made to be here, he would have been gone a while ago. But instead, as G2 has noted, his role has only grown as time has gone on. It's just really clear he's not going anywhere, whether we like it or not.

With Monroe, I think there's a possibility than what our MTS universe thinks and what the average person dialing up Bally to watch the Tigers on a nightly basis thinks are two different things. I can't remember when Stavenhagen wrote his piece about Monroe, but that was one takeaway from it for me

Unironically, maybe yes? The Tigers would be screwed if they were in any other division, but relative to this one, they are in contention. Nothing about today changes that

But also a team they are competing with for the AL Central

HKG

I dont think there is a decision that will need to be made on Craig Monroe. Because there is no evidence that his employer is upset with him, or the employers high priced PBP guy doesn't like working with him, nor has there been any reporting from respected reporters around the team that his position is in trouble. Until that changes, my prior that he will be calling games for the Tigers on Bally (or whoever), and that it will not involve any drama, isn't going to change

Your second paragraph implies that the Tigers "don't know it yet, but are gonna need to make a decision on Monroe". My point is that, based on what I've seen so far, there really isn't one.

I dont know, actual annoyance with Monroe attitudinaly while calling games? Actual reporting about friction between them? Something? Anything? Cody Stavenhagen, who everyone seems to respect, has said in the past that he thinks Monroe is here for the long haul. That's kinda my baseline. There needs to be more than baseless speculation to move me off of that.

Monroe has issues with any of his partners in speaking over them. It's his biggest weakness... as bad as people think he's been with Benetti, it was most evident in a game he did with Greg Gania in the spring against the Yankees. That said, the booth, even when he's in it, has been better than last year. And if things were as bad between him and Benetti as people are speculating, there's a good chance Monroe wouldn't even be in the booth right now. I'm sorry if people don't like it, that's just how I see it. If it were up to me, they'd just hire Carlos Pena full time, but that's not in the cards and I dont see a lot changing going forward

"Any sort of indication" =/= "Jason Benetti has to say it"

I never implied that...

Look, they aren't going to win every game and even a team like the A's will at least 1/3rd of their games. Blackburn is also a better pitcher than I think he's given credit for. But the quality of the ABs was pretty frustrating today. Cannot do that against better competition

Umm, no. But I would expect there to be some evidence that chemistry doesn't exit between the two of them or some subtle indications that there is friction before beginning to actually speculate these things. To-date, I haven't seen basically zero evidence that this is the case. So yes, one can continue to dislike Monroe's color commentary without losing objectivity in the process.

The first of a few, one imagines.

I'll wait for Benetti to give any sort of indication before making that leap. Until that happens, it's people who are predisposed to disliking Monroe projecting their feelings on Jason Benetti