2024 Detroit Tigers Spring Training Thread

[oblong]

In general I’m going to believe the woman because historically they have gotten the short end of these situations both in terms of lack of Justice and overall shaming and questioning. So if that means a douchebag like Bauer is unfairly accused… so be it.  I’m fine with him being allegedly falsely accused if it means other women are rightfully believed and feel courage coming forward when it happens to them.  I’m sure there’s millions of women out there saying “yeah it sucks when you are unfairly judged on something. welcome to the club. My rapist got off because I had a black bra on.” 

[Hongbit]

I just read an article on Wyatt Langford and am trying to not get depressed.    I really hope that passing on him in favor of Max Clark isn’t something the franchise regrets for the next decade.   

[Tiger337]

13 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

I just read an article on Wyatt Langford and am trying to not get depressed.    I really hope that passing on him in favor of Max Clark isn’t something the franchise regrets for the next decade.   

Max has the attitude.  He knows he's going to be a superstar.  Ultimately, he is going to either a superstar or a bust, because Max aint got no time for mediocrity or average or solid.  That's just the way it is.

[casimir]

Once Max starts referring to himself in the third person, we’ll know he’s legit.

[Edman85]

4 hours ago, Hongbit said:

I just read an article on Wyatt Langford and am trying to not get depressed.    I really hope that passing on him in favor of Max Clark isn’t something the franchise regrets for the next decade.   

My only request is to maybe wait a few years to come to that conclusion, and to also factor in the rest of the draft made possible by going under slot at #3 overall.

Also, it is possible Langford raised his price for the Tigers.

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, Edman85 said:

My only request is to maybe wait a few years to come to that conclusion, and to also factor in the rest of the draft made possible by going under slot at #3 overall.

Also, it is possible Langford raised his price for the Tigers.

I will grant you that request.   Let’s continue the discussion in 2027.  

[Tenacious D]

8 hours ago, Hongbit said:

I just read an article on Wyatt Langford and am trying to not get depressed.    I really hope that passing on him in favor of Max Clark isn’t something the franchise regrets for the next decade.   

After the Mayer/Jobe debate, I’ve learned to be more patient.  In addition to Langford, Jenkins could end up being better than both of them.

I like Max—he’s going to be a good one, and if he gets close to his potential, I think he’ll be the more interesting/likable guy.

[romad1]

 

[mtutiger]

11 hours ago, Edman85 said:

My only request is to maybe wait a few years to come to that conclusion, and to also factor in the rest of the draft made possible by going under slot at #3 overall.

Also, it is possible Langford raised his price for the Tigers.

It will be a sign of progress for this organization whenever we finally have a draft where the fans aren't endlessly comparing the Tigers pick to some other teams pick.

The Zach Neto discourse last year whenever he was called up by the Angels was pretty insufferable 

[RatkoVarda]

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

It will be a sign of progress for this organization whenever we finally have a draft where the fans aren't endlessly comparing the Tigers pick to some other teams pick.

The Zach Neto discourse last year whenever he was called up by the Angels was pretty insufferable 

unclear to me why draft pick mistakes are exempt from criticism.

if they hit on Jung, great, good for them.

but right now the Tigers would be absolutely do a Jung for Neto swap.

even if Jung turns out to be a better player, Neto is a much better short term and long term fit

[LongLiveMaroth]

9 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

unclear to me why draft pick mistakes are exempt from criticism.

if they hit on Jung, great, good for them.

but right now the Tigers would be absolutely do a Jung for Neto swap.

even if Jung turns out to be a better player, Neto is a much better short term and long term fit

You mean Zach Neto, owner of .225/.308/.377 slashline? Who was only able to play in 84 games due to injuries? Let's not act like he was an all-star when he was called up and he also wouldn't have pushed Javy off of SS and with Keith 2B is more than likely occupied. I would not call him a fit short-term just based on roster construction. Long-term maybe but short term I don't see it. 

[RatkoVarda]

he's a better short term fit in that McKinstry is the back up SS, with Kriedler behind him, and any long term absence by Baez would be filled by one or both

also, he's the better short term fit in that if Harris goes with the nuclear option on Baez's contract sometime in 2025, the Tigers would actually have an in house replacement, which right now, they don't seem to have anywhere in the system

as others noted, its early, and Jung may turn out to be a fantastic ML player

[Tiger337]

10 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

After the Mayer/Jobe debate, I’ve learned to be more patient.  In addition to Langford, Jenkins could end up being better than both of them.

I like Max—he’s going to be a good one, and if he gets close to his potential, I think he’ll be the more interesting/likable guy.

The Mayer/Jobe debate hasn't even begun.  They are both prospects who haven't reached AAA yet.  The Tigers could win that debate by a lot or they could lose it by a lot.  Like the Wyatt/Clark debate, we won't know the answer for years.  

[mtutiger]

1 hour ago, RatkoVarda said:

unclear to me why draft pick mistakes are exempt from criticism.

Like any of these picks, whether they are mistakes or not are subjective, and it takes a lot more track record for each of these players to make a determination.

[TigerNation]

24 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Like any of these picks, whether they are mistakes or not are subjective, and it takes a lot more track record for each of these players to make a determination.

If the drafted player reaches the majors and is a quality player there, the pick was a success. The odds of any one pick being the best possible pick are far too small for there to be any reason to compare who you got with somebody who was drafted after.

[SoCalTiger]

Hopefully these anquished debates will end as we draft farther and farther down as we win and win more each season. 

[Toddwert]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

The Mayer/Jobe debate hasn't even begun.  They are both prospects who haven't reached AAA yet.  The Tigers could win that debate by a lot or they could lose it by a lot.  Like the Wyatt/Clark debate, we won't know the answer for years.  

the debate for me wasnt that who was gonna be  better it was the risk in drafting Jobe was too much when we can clearly use a good young SS

[Tiger337]

5 minutes ago, Toddwert said:

the debate for me wasnt that who was gonna be  better it was the risk in drafting Jobe was too much when we can clearly use a good young SS

I am generally in favor of selecting position players with draft picks, but there is a lot of risk even with prospects.  So, it's going to be really hard to fault the Tigers if Jobe ends up being successful.  

[Tenacious D]

12 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I am generally in favor of selecting position players with draft picks, but there is a lot of risk even with prospects.  So, it's going to be really hard to fault the Tigers if Jobe ends up being successful.  

Hence, the ongoing debate.  We won’t have a winner for quite a while, but interesting to monitor as they are both linked together (at least for Tiger fans).

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, LongLiveMaroth said:

 and he also wouldn't have pushed Javy off of SS 

The weakness behind Javy at shortstop concerns me. It's probably going to mean that his bat is going to  have to get really bad before there is any move to limit his ABs - assuming he doesn't turn it around and make it a moot point . Kreidler has the glove but his bat coming around would be a real development  coup at this point. Eddys Leonard is interesting but not much track record to go on.

[oblong]

With binary choices you will be correct enough times to warrant them to keep going.   You have a 50/50 chance of being "right" and with only 2 choices available then I don't put stock into the opinion because I had just as much of a chanc eof being right as well.

Like theories on whether a baby will be a boy or a girl depending on some old wives tale. 

[Tiger337]

Process generally carries more weight for me than results when it comes to predictions.  The problem with draft picks though is that hardly any fan knows enough about these guys to have an informed opinion abut the process.  From my perspective, it's pretty random.  

Edited February 28 by Tiger337

[Edman85]

A lot of this assumes that Mayer would have signed with the Tigers at the price he signed with Boston, or that Langford would have signed with the Tigers at the Rangers' price. And in the case if Langford, that the rest of the draft would have fit in place with less pool money to work with.

In the case of Mayer, given the Tigers' player dev reputation pre-Garko, it is entirely possible he wanted nothing to do with us and floated a huge number to scare us off him. Not only is it possible, it is likely.

There is a reason Harris is really trumpeting player development successes. A strong player dev reputation helps you in putting a draft together in the draft pool era, when you may not have to pay a premium to get players.

[mtutiger]

6 hours ago, Edman85 said:

A lot of this assumes that Mayer would have signed with the Tigers at the price he signed with Boston, or that Langford would have signed with the Tigers at the Rangers' price. And in the case if Langford, that the rest of the draft would have fit in place with less pool money to work with.

In the case of Mayer, given the Tigers' player dev reputation pre-Garko, it is entirely possible he wanted nothing to do with us and floated a huge number to scare us off him. Not only is it possible, it is likely.

There is a reason Harris is really trumpeting player development successes. A strong player dev reputation helps you in putting a draft together in the draft pool era, when you may not have to pay a premium to get players.

Not that it's amounted to a ton to-date, but Jobe did sign underslot iirc, which I'm guessing helped getting Ty Madden and Izaac Pacheco signed (Pacheco not looking so hot these days). Same with Max Clark, who deferred some earnings which likely helped bring in Kevin McGonigle.

These debates where we hone in on one player (Marcelo Mayer and Wyatt Langford in particular) all miss that nuance IMO. Maybe we all would have had different preferences if we were the ones drafting, but it shouldn't be that hard to see the logic in why they did what they did either.

Edited February 29 by mtutiger

[chasfh]

21 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I am generally in favor of selecting position players with draft picks, but there is a lot of risk even with prospects.  So, it's going to be really hard to fault the Tigers if Jobe ends up being successful.  

It’s hard to argue against success, but to be fair, everyone including me and perhaps even you, criticized the pick of a high school pitcher at 1/3 as being same old Avila.

What would be a fun and even spirited debate is whether Jobe would have amounted to anything has Chris Ilitch been asleep at the wheel like many including I believed, still kept the Avila regime and their coaching choices on board today, and trusted Jobe’s development to that lot. The wild card is that A.J. was here by then, so who knows whether and how much influence he had on the pick, although developmental guru Ryan Garko was not as of yet.