mtutiger

https://www.motownforums.com/topic/1002-2023-detroit-tigers-spring-training/#comment-118595

It's moments like that that make you wonder why you watch this sport.

What am awful way for that game to end...

Understood, as I suggested, where the team is organizationally plays a role as well. I just think people haven't done much to try to understand how his former tended to operate in terms of talent acquisition. A lot of one year deals, waiver wire churn, and bringing in distressed or underappreciated assets. I'd like to see more aggressiveness as they do become a better destination spot, but for where they are at now, the strategy is fine. If nothing else, it is helping them establish some organizational depth, which they have lacked for years.

Clearly another example of how political bias on Twitter is the biggest issue the platform faces.

Same amount (6.5 mil) as if he would have exercised his option this off-season, albeit with incentives. I'm a little surprised by that... The market for his services seems like it should have been hotter

The thing about Harris and what he did this offseason is that it wasn't, at least in my view, incredibly surprising. Not just because of where the Tigers are at organizationally, but also because of his pedigree, particularly during his time under Farhan in SF. They have tended to rely on trades and short term deals, often with distressed or underappreciated assets in the past. And while 2022 wasn't great for the Giants, that strategy, through some level of luck and performance, was enough to win 107 games in 2021. Given that, as has often been mentioned around here, both the Tigers and Giants had the same record (64-98) in 2017 and have been a much different trajectory since then, we'd be more open to the change in philosophy being implemented. But then again, seven straight years of losing sucks and tends to breed impatience.

No different than any free agent acquisition would have been at the position... and no different than keeping Candy would have been. Regarding the guys Ed mentioned, you dont just acquire for past track record, you acquire for what they could become. For all we know, as Ed suggests, Maton may be a underrated commodity and hold the position more firmly than we think. We just don't really know until they play the games

As another poster in these parts would say..... "Atta boy!!!!"

I'm not concerned about AJ, I'm concerned about Miggy being satisfied with a smaller role.

My comment had more to do with Miggy than AJ, let's just put it that way....

Hope he's had this conversation with AJ as well lol

sensing a pattern here

I look forward to the Twitter File on this episode lol

Correct, my bad. Still not sure they both would be carried. Easier to imagine Kreidler or Hernandez getting that last spot

I know there is regulation on swearing and nudity (old enough to remember the Janet Jackson boob-gate Super Bowl lol), but in terms of information or balance or anything like that, they have all the latitude. That's sort of why pointing to the Times and Post to suggest that Twitter be regulated doesn't make sense to me. If Marjorie Taylor Greene submits an op-ed to the Washington Post discussing the Jewish space lasers' role in the 2020 election, they are under no obligation to publish it. If the Times decides they don't want to publish Ross Douthat anymore, they are under no obligation to keep him employed (contractual obligations notwithstanding). To that end, why should Twitter be obligated to allow Nick Fuentes or Baked Alaska or even Donald Trump onto the platform, particularly as each were repeatedly in violation of the platforms TOS?

The platforms for the most part really aren't "news" imo... they are basically tools for big content generators (ie. In the news space, local and national news outlets, journalists, etc.) to more broadly disseminate their message, and for non-content generators, they are a big news aggregator. Not unlike Facebook or Reddit or other sites, just in a different format. The question then becomes, should these platforms have any discretion in what is disseminated on their platform. Seems like the answer should be yes.

Still waiting. My understanding is that newspapers and outlets have pretty broad latitude to publish or broadcast news as they see fit. And to the extent that there is government regulation (ie. Libel laws), it's a really high bar to clear.

Roster wise, I'm not sure they have the flexibility to carry both Baddoo and Carpenter at the same time, which complicates matters some. Hypothetically: C Haase 1B Torkelson 2B Schoop SS Baez 3B Maton LF Meadows CF Greene RF Baddoo DH Cabrera BENCH C Sands or Rogers IF Nevin or Hernandez OF Vierling That's 13, and Vierling seems like a lock given the fact that he bats right handed in an outfield full of lefties.

And really, blaming Twitter denies agency to those content generators. At the end of the day, most Americans get their news from both local and cable news. The networks and the producers maybe use Twitter as a tool in their toolbox, both to gather and transmit information, but ultimately they get to decide what they put out over the airways and all of them collectively have a ton of power to drive the conversation.

Gonna go out on a limb and suggest that, given that most people don't use Twitter, producers at cable news networks have more power over what drives news cycles than Twitter given that people cumulatively use those platforms more than Twitter and that they have a lot of discretion as to what is transmitted over their airways.

Clearly things are going well at Twitter dot com

Can you be more specific here?

Because MotownForums, naturally, is a reflection of society as a whole.... lol