microline133

OBP is exceptionally misleading in the complex leagues, particularly the DSL, because the caliber of pitching is so wildly variable. Frankly, stats of any kind at that level of affiliated ball are borderline meaningless.

In the house in Boston....

4 hours ago, Deleterious said:

Did Norfolk Southern win the contract to transport the waste?

As an innocent bystander, I'd be amused at the outrage when it came out that the waste was transported by truck and nobody was advised of the route.

"I can't believe you drove that through my neighborhood!"

"I was not advised that any of my constituents would be subjected to the risk of having this waste transported so close to their homes."

I dealt with something similar on a project years ago....contaminated site (cyanide, heavy metals, the soil was bright blue in many areas) in the middle of a residential neighborhood with an elementary school, church, and walking path nearby. Full funding is secured to execute the cleanup in just 1-2 years and the public freaks out that we might drive it past their house to get it out of there....okay, well, there is literally one route available out of the site. You choose....want it to stay there or do you want it gone?

Political theater....those US Ecology facilities are among only a handful of landfills in the country permitted to accept TSCA-regulated (Toxic Substances Control Act) waste. They receive soil and groundwater waste from around the country, much of it as bad or worse than the waste coming from East Palestine; many of my own projects have sent waste there over the years, particularly once the one in Model City, NY stopped accepting material. Government officials in each of those states have permitted the US Ecology facilities and they are never specifically notified of waste received, as long as it is in compliance with their pre-established permit. Coming out now to say they weren't aware their jurisdictions were receiving waste is a bunch of BS and purely theater to be lapped up by the masses.

2 hours ago, mtutiger said:

To be slightly serious for just a moment, it does seem early on that Spencer Turnbull is getting an outsized amount of hype from both the writers and the team (in form of Harris/AJ comments, social media).

He's kind of the forgotten man, but he has always seemed capable of coming back from TJ and being successful. We shall see.

The issue for Turnbull was never really coming back, it's more about what breaks next. His injury history is so extensive, going back to college, that it's hard to envision that suddenly stopping now.

4 hours ago, chasfh said:

This closes the loop for me regarding the Thompson case. He didn't want to play for the Tigers because the Dodgers expressed interest, because really, during the Avila era, who would? Since that appears to eliminate every possibility except (a) do whatever deal you could with the Dodgers or (2) let Thompson's opt out date arrive so he could be sprung and sign with the Dodgers anyway, that reduces the Tigers' leverage to zero. Cash considerations became the best they could get in return. Do I have that straight?

Hypothetical: what if the Tigers tried to promote Thompson anyway, for who knows what reason? (It's a hypothetical, so the idea doesn't have to be defended with an actual reason.) Would Thompson have left the org because ain't no way he's stepping foot in the Comerica home team locker room no how? And if he were to accept such a promotion, would the opt out date clause expire and eliminate his ability to jump to the Dodgers at his discretion? I'm interested in the technicals of such a case, basically because I have never heard of this kind of situation before.

Two last questions: is there a technical difference between "cash considerations" and "cash"? And if you had to guess, how much in "considerations" do you think the Tigers might have received forThompson?

Catching up from earlier....

Cash and cash considerations are synonymous in this context. The official term being cash considerations has always struck me as a means to pilut some distance between the transaction and some potential perception of buying/selling human beings. It just softens the action from what it is actually taking place.

In terms of how much cash, it's not typically a significant amount. I couldn't venture a guess on this one....but probably not a large enough amount of money for most fans to think it's worth it in these type of transactions.

To your hypothetical at the point where the Tigers were not calling him up and he was expressing an interest in leaving, it became as much about public/player relations as anything else. Giving him the finger and calling him up when he clearly had other desires and likely wasn't doing much for your 2023 hopes or your longer range future, is just a poor look when you're trying to sign the next one like him to a minor league deal. You'll get a rep for being difficult in those circumstances and minor league free agents will look for more favorable conditions to try their hand.

Now, to Edman's comments about churning players....it's entirely possible the Harris regime's methodology and propensity to churn may have resulted in Thompson being called up a bit earlier and the Dodgers' interest not having time to manifest on a meaningful way. Similarly, though, it's possible he's called up, doesn't hit right out of the gate, and is DFA'd because of that propensity to churn players.

No, reality as it happened with Thompson. My understanding is his camp was aware of the Dodgers' interest, he had an interest in playing there (close to home, MLB playing time for a contender, etc.), and his camp communicated that desire to the Tigers. They obliged and rather than just letting his opt out pass, got a few bucks for him. 

It's not just a possibility, it's reality.

One other thing that's not really being considered here...and it is relevant to this specific player/discussion.

Higher end minor league free agents are often pretty particular about where they sign....sometimes it centers on money, others it's on potential for big league opportunity, and still others it is the trajectory or position of the org. In many cases, quality minor league free agents like Thompson will sign a deal with an opt out to see if they get their shot somewhere (like Detroit) but then have the option of looking for another opportunity. It is not just possible, but reality, to factor in Thompson not wanting to be called up by the Tigers. These things happen all the time. He simply wanted his opt out to come and be able to look for another opportunity....the Tigers were receptive (as they should be) and decided to honor his request, but instead of just letting that date pass, worked with him to find a destination where they could get "something" instead of nothing. While the player has minimal, if any, leverage in these situations, it is customary for the teams to play nice in situations like this, particularly when they clearly aren't going anywhere and the player has no real bearing on their future.

The difference between 60 and 140 generally isn't that big, let alone a few spots.

27 minutes ago, buddha said:

i dont think much of prospect lists anymore.  i enjoy reading about prospects (which is certainly why they make the lists), but after years of seeing guys on such lists be total busts, im not convinced they mean anything.

This is fair. Personally, I think lists have a place if done properly.

It really boils down to the construction of the list and what the author actually tries to accomplish. If the goal of the list is to educate, give an honest assessment of strengths, weaknesses, potential, etc., then that can have value and the list is really just the convenient vehicle for communicating the information about the players. If the goal of the list is to garner clicks, garner favor with people by saying nice things about players, and gain access by furthering org information, then the list has absolutely zero value.

In this regard, I think the current state of Tigers prospect analysis/writing has regressed substantially the last 3-4 years. There's no education or honesty in the analysis and writing, it's just click bait, puff pieces, and overly positive evaluations because people aren't willing to be honest because they are afraid someone will get mad at them.

I'm not even convinced Jobe should be on there right now. It's not unreasonable to say the Tigers have no Top 100-worthy players in their system as of right now.

55 minutes ago, Shinzaki said:

 

Trying out for Woodward Sports Network...don't want to seem "brainy"

This wins the day.

54 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Oh dude... c'mon...

You're just bustin' my balls now...!

Well, sure, I'm busting your balls, but there are large swaths of the scouting community that believe all three project to a relief role.

22 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Hah!!!

We'll see on that...!!!

Right now I'm pumping Olson, Flores & Madden...

Good to see you're pumped up about three future relievers.

5 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

OK great...

But "end of the year" is a very small sample size and no guarantee of linear development. And "uptick" doesn't state "put-away slider" or "dominant FB".

If he doesn't have a put-away pitch at the MLB level... he'll struggle to get out of innings and allow base-runners even when he limits walks. He'll be limited to the back end of the rotation. 

I'll believe mid-rotation when I see it...

Otherwise... you're reading too much into "uptick"... I mean, maybe it's there. But again, I'll believe it when I see it.

This might be the first time I've ever seen you pump the breaks on a Tigers prospect. I'm not sure how to react.

I look forward to his first appearance of the year when he strikes out four in two scoreless innings (in spring training, no less), and you change your tune. 😁

Regardless of the prospects involved, the Tigers gave the Braves cash to support getting rid of Jimenez...That speaks volumes. Good move and I say that without any care about the actual return.

Antwaan Randle El

19 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I don't know if you would know this...

But before 2022, how close was the Tigers Org to giving up on Parker? Any idea on their thinking?

They weren't close at all...I mean, at all. Only fickle fans that think prospect development is linear had given up on him.

39 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

curious they would bother puttting Parker on the 40 if he can't hit the FB. 

You add a player like him even if there are issues with the hit tool because he goes plus on literally every other tool in the scouting report. The reward is too significant to ignore in this case, particularly when you can very easily create 40-man space to accommodate him.

27 minutes ago, Longgone said:

He did not look promising at 3rd in the AFL, there is no assurance he is going to be able to stick there.

Left field.

6 hours ago, apabruce said:

Thanks for your input, Mark.  Are you and Paul, or separately, considering some resurrection of TigsTown?

No discussion to date of bringing TigsTown back. Never say never, but I'm not sure either of us has the time in our day to day lives to make it work. It's a ton of effort.

I've toyed with the idea of a new podcast the last year or so, but it'd have to be the perfect scenario.

16 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

FYI, a lot of those restrictions are no longer in place as of 2019. See here

 

https://www.thecubreporter.com/arizona-fall-league-az-instructional-league

Good catch. I hadn't been following that.

Even with the loosening if restrictions, teams still have to weigh the AFL assignment of a foreign-born player against the fact that they are going to play winter ball, most likely. Does the team want them getting rest for a month or so, before winter ball, or is the AFL somehow more important than rest.

4 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Do teams use it as an evaluation tool for a potential last look at a player before they need to decide to protect them on the 40-man roster?

Sort of...mostly in cases where the player missed time that year. The sample of observation isn't significant enough in the AFL to outweigh the rest of the season, so it would be pretty limited circumstances where the AFL is influencing the decision making.

On 10/26/2022 at 11:49 AM, Jim Cowan said:

Yeah, generally speaking guys who strike out at ridiculously high rates just keep on doing it.  I don't know if he is on any top 30 lists but I don't think I'd put him on one.  The Tigers disagree or else he wouldn't be at AFL.

I wanted to circle back to this, not because of anything with Workman in particular, but the bolded part grazes the edges of something I think is important for fans to understand about the AFL.

There's a lot that goes into AFL roster assignments, including a lot of restrictions, that drive the assignments and make reading into them nearly meaningless.

For example, there are heavy restrictions on the assignment of foreign-born players, and even if they are assigned, their winter club (LIDOM, etc) often has the trump card to pull them from the AFL early. In addition, because of the typical level of play, you're not sending anyone at the lower levels....usually High-A is the lowest experience level you would send, and even that used to require a waiver (not sure if it still does). On top of that, your pitchers had their workload programs designed to get whatever innings/pitches/stress they wanted that year based on the regular season, not with something like the AFL in mind because it is too far out and things change.

So, at the end of the day, by the time you remove Rookie-level, Low-A, and most High-A players, then remove most of the foreign-born players, and then remove the pitchers that have reached workload restrictions (and this can apply to players, particularly catchers, as well), then your prospective player pool is quite small. You're talking a portion of your Double-A and Triple-A players, and a smaller subset of High-A players. If you set out looking for six guys to send to the AFL, you're probably starting with guys that were injured this year (Wentz/Keith) and then moving onto guys that probably aren't high-end prospects.