mtutiger

Just now, Tigermojo said:

I wonder how many extra pitches these errors have cost them the last couple weeks.

Extra pitches and, to an extent, probably a win or two mixed in. 

The hitting woes aren't going to resolve themselves overnight, but FFS, at least go out and field your position better than a little leaguer 

Can the pitching staff file a class action lawsuit against the hitters / fielders?

13 hours ago, casimir said:

I don’t care what Hiura is doing in Toledo.  He’s an absolute nonentity to me in terms of an answer at 1B for the Tigers.

Torkelson has been disappointing this season, no question.  He still has a chance at  a long term future with the Tigers.

Exactly. I'm also old enough to remember when Tyler Nevin was raking against AAA pitching, only to get the call to Detroit and become a punchline with the fanbase. People are badly underestimating that possibility with Huira... we've seen this movie before.

It's an unsatisfying answer to the impulses of the fanbase, who apparently would love nothing more than the DFA the guy apparently, but the best version of the 2024 Detroit Tigers (and future Detroit Tigers teams) is one where Spencer Torkelson is meeting or exceeding expectations. We can all be frustrated and disappointed with his start thus far while recognizing this fact.

Just now, theroundsquare said:

that would be a surprise to me.  it seems like robbing peter to pay paul.  for better or worse i expect the tigers to ride it out.  i echo the wish for tork to hit 7th or whatever 

Jobe seems like a key factor to me on that front.... if he moves quickly and were to manage to start to knock on the door of the big leagues (not completely out of the question), it opens up some possibilities IMO

3 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Some people saw this coming with the limited amount of moves Harris made in the off-season. Last year, it was see how far the kids came along, shed Miggys contract and use that money for some quality bats. We got Canha. Good player but not quite enough. Is it time to trade some pitchers for some bats? All we're doing is wasting very good pitchers outings. There HAS to be teams looking for some starting pitching.

I wouldn't be surprised if they shopped some pitchers for bats, quite honestly. Especially if they remain relatively close in the division.

8 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Tork is only good for hitting the ball. Very limited base running speed, below average defense and not much else going for him. If he's not going be consistent at the plate, he's pretty useless. Sometimes early draft picks just don't work out. I hate to see it and say it but when is enough, enough?

When the situation changes to the point where the opportunity cost of giving up on the 1-1 player is lower than it is to roll with another option.

Keston Huira, who tbf may or may not still have something to prove in the big leagues, just isn't gonna move the needle on that front. Not even close.

It's going to take some combination of time and lack of improvement along with another legit option opening up (either internally, through trade or in a future offseason)... until that changes, they are going to see what they have. And are right to do so.

5 minutes ago, kdog said:

Tork was a 1-1 pick who could turn it around at anytime. Hiura is a 4-A player who will hit 3 home runs in the first week and then crater into what he is. How do you think Scott Harris, the captain of lower expectations and development, is going to handle it?

I would add that there was a lot of teeth gnashing by folks last season complaining about Colt Keith not getting called up.... now that he's here, he's not only bad, but he's worse at the dish than Torkelson is (ie. the guy everyone wants to apparently send to Toledo and/or DFA).

It's not a defense of Tork, he has to be much better. His piss poor defense the last couple of weeks was sort of a breaking point for me. Having said that, like Mike McMahon during the Joey Harrington era, the next hot thing down in Toledo isn't always the answer.

2 minutes ago, theroundsquare said:

keston hiura at 1b in to-lay-do.  and on fire

Not on the 40 man.... who gets DFA'd?

Just now, motownblues said:

But when your offense requires the piching to have an sub 2.0 E.R.A. that's asking a lot.

No argument there...

Just now, kdog said:

That’s what this season is about now. Seeing if the rookies can develop in the majors….determine how replaceable tork is if he hits like a jag.

meanwhile, the pitching will be fine aside from a few blips like the 9th inning. 

For sure, the bullpen was due for one of these.... 

3 minutes ago, kdog said:

Nobody is giving up on Tork. You probably have to lower his ceiling significantly now. If he can be a jag first baseman who hits 25-30 homers that would be good.

Correct. Although he's going to need to improve his defense over what we've seen so far, because if his ceiling is lower offensively, he's a lot more expendable if he cannot play the field.

And the wheels fall off.... my goodness

Chris McCoskey's guy coming in lol

Really good start on balance for Reese Olson...

Would be nice if literally someone would provide a little offensive support

I'd be really upset if they overturned that.... bizarre play

CB Bucknor's zone is nuts today

12 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

I haven't listened to Stern in ages. What's his demo these days?

I would imagine mostly 35-49 and 49-64.... he draws about 10 mil/day still

1 minute ago, oblong said:

That will reach more people.

I love that he's doing Stern.  He's flipping off the NYT.

 

An interview with the Times probably has some effects indirectly (ie. coverage in other media, how journalists on cable cover / detail the interview, etc.), but in terms of direct contact, this is unironically true.

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

I don’t think it would be a bad thing at all for Biden to have an extensive interview with a major legacy media vehicle like the Times, provided he nails it, and I think the administration would like to do so. It’s a risk, though, and it could go upside down in unexpected and uncontrollable ways that wouldn’t apply to prior presidents, which may be why they’re avoiding putting Biden out there in the first place.

He did do an interview with The New Yorker around the SOTU, so it's not like hasn't done one with a legacy outlet recently.

I think it's less about his abilities and more about the fact that he just doesn't like or care for The New York Times and doesn't want to give them the time. Whether it's the right posture or not is another matter... like Boehner said in his memoir, sometimes you gotta feed the alligators, and I agree with you that he'd probably be better off just doing it and letting the chips fall where they may.

Doesn't count, not the NYT

11 minutes ago, oblong said:

I'll be at this one.  Going to be nuts down there with the draft stuff going on.  I can't wait to see it.  I wonder if any of hte out of town folks will decide to use the game to fill a few hours?  Tigers should have had a special promotion, like $10 for OF or upper deck seats.

 

Yeah, that was my immediate thought, attendance will likely be higher than a typical game on account of the draft one would think

2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

What's funny to me is how flawed Sulzberger's premise is to begin with. If Trump and the current GOP should teach a journalist anything it's that what a politician has to say for himself should probably be the very least important aspect in forming the basis of your reporting. The readership and the democratic process requires hard fact, and you aren't going to get that from a poll even on the more honest side of the 50/50 split between minor liars and epic liars. Dig, research, report - what are they DOING, how are they doing it. I'm so completely burned out with this society's fixation with empty meaningless verbiage..

Part of the problem with political reporting, and it's certainly not exclusive to the NYT at this point although they are the biggest offender, is that it all feels outsourced to polling. The "shoeleather" stuff isn't actually being on the ground trying to find out what people are talking about, it's the paper hiring a polling outfit to do a poll, and then having the political folks do a large writeup on said poll and drawing sweeping conclusions. And then sending the reporters out into the field to interview folks on the basis of whatever the polling results are.

Obviously old school political reporting can be informed by hard data, and certainly reporters shouldn't be drawing conclusions off of random interactions in the field, but often times it just seems like the data does all the driving and reporters just work backwards. And that really seems mailed in.

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Sulzberger wants that interview because it's prestigious, not because it's going to tell his readers anything important.

100%, it's all about the brand. 

I think it's a fair discussion to have as to whether Biden is out giving independent interviews enough, but the sense of entitlement that the Times demonstrates is off-putting regardless. Especially in a time when other publications in the industry who don't have the resources that the Times has are facing existential challenges

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

Pure speculation but I'am going to guess Joe Kahn would as soon have made no statement about the Politico story at all, it's just inside baseball, but Sulzberger took it personally and couldn't leave it be so it came from corporate.

I disagree. The standard they hold themselves to is that of being the "Paper of Record"... the revelations in this piece were credible and likely well sourced, and they really cut against the brand that they have for years cultivated.

Particularly when their reporters came out on social media in a defensive posture after this piece dropped, it was fait accompli that they would have to respond. Although I'm not sure the response is going to help a whole lot.

None of this is existential obviously, but I'm sure for a lot of readers, it definitely clarified or confirmed some things that were pretty evident about their political coverage in recent years. 

Quite a ratio for this one... and well deserved

19 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Will the White Sox finish with a worse record than the 2003 Tigers?   1962 Mets?  

Games 25 thru 45 for the 2003 Tigers below:

Had themselves a nice 4 game winning streak after starting 3-25.... mostly at the expense of the O's