casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 11 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said: That's a good point and according to GameDay that wasn't a very buntable pitch, high and outside. Apparently it was buntable enough. 😆 He attempted earlier in the count and then briefly showed again on the next pitch. So, as the plate appearance went, it was somewhat on and never fully off. I don’t know if that’s Verdugo, the coaching, a combo of both. But I’m the current game of baseball, that opportunity was prime to deploy a bunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 12 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Yeah, I think he's going to have to do something fairly quickly or risk being out of the starting lineup (in pinch hitting mode as kdog has suggested) or sent down. We're not there yet, AJ and Scott probably aren't there yet, but it's getting closer IMO. In general though, at least on the SM, it seems to have reignited the debate about whether they should have brought Chapman in or whoever (who, btw, only has a 0.642 OPS at the moment), but the fact remains that the long term success of this team rests on these younger players. Even beyond Spencer Torkelson, Colt Keith and Parker Meadows.... all of them did what they needed to do in Toledo, sending them down may help for a reset but, in terms of gaining experience, there's nothing to be gained by that. And at some point, you have to give players runway to sink or swim. You have to be able to find out who these guys are and whether they fit into the long term plans. In the larger context of this being a much improved team over previous seasons, it's not ideal. But its the reality.... and it would have been the reality regardless of whether they signed a Matt Chapman or JD Martinez or whoever. I don’t know if benching the “core” players is the solution. I think they need to play. If that’s in Toledo while another option is tried in Detroit, even if only temporarily or to spark something, it is what it is. Specifically in regards to Torkelson, his asset is his bat. It’s not defense. It’s not versatility. It’s not base running. I’m not sure he has any value as a bench option. Contrast that with Meadows. He can be a late game pinch runner and/or defensive substitution at a prime defensive position. Its odd because we normally don’t look at it in these terms. But while Torkelson is arguably the better overall prospect and has shown a better MLB resume, Meadows is the better bench/depth option. And if they can both get back to what we think they can be, that starter/bench value relationship will still exist (even if Meadows can carve out a starting role in CF). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, casimir said: I don’t know if benching the “core” players is the solution. I think they need to play. If that’s in Toledo while another option is tried in Detroit, even if only temporarily or to spark something, it is what it is. Specifically in regards to Torkelson, his asset is his bat. It’s not defense. It’s not versatility. It’s not base running. I’m not sure he has any value as a bench option. Contrast that with Meadows. He can be a late game pinch runner and/or defensive substitution at a prime defensive position. Its odd because we normally don’t look at it in these terms. But while Torkelson is arguably the better overall prospect and has shown a better MLB resume, Meadows is the better bench/depth option. And if they can both get back to what we think they can be, that starter/bench value relationship will still exist (even if Meadows can carve out a starting role in CF). Defense is a big reason for my tone shift on Torkelson.... I'd be more willing to be patient if he could field decently, but that two week stretch where he was booting balls left and right raises a ton of questions about his overall ceiling. Having said all of that, despite the difference in usefulness / tools, Meadows is tricky for the exact same reason you state up top.... he needs reps. Sure, he can be a little more useful while being overall a drag on the team because of speed and defense, but it's not good for his development if he's in a purely bench role or late pinch runner role, he has to be playing. Same with Colt Keith as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 6 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Defense is a big reason for my tone shift on Torkelson.... I'd be more willing to be patient if he could field decently, but that two week stretch where he was booting balls left and right raises a ton of questions about his overall ceiling. Having said all of that, despite the difference in usefulness / tools, Meadows is tricky for the exact same reason you state up top.... he needs reps. Sure, he can be a little more useful while being overall a drag on the team because of speed and defense, but it's not good for his development if he's in a purely bench role or late pinch runner role, he has to be playing. Same with Colt Keith as well. You’re right about Meadows needing reps. He’s probably the one on thin ice once Urshela is ready to come back, unless Perez suddenly bottoms out. I’m not sure Keith is going anywhere soon. His defense seems to be better than advertised. He also has shown in his past that he has a bit of a slower performance upon promotion, but eventually catches on. And, politically, there’s the contract, which shouldn’t matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 It sure would have been nice if Greene batted with guys on base. Getting 3 hits is pretty good, it would be better with runners in scoring position. No wonder the Tigers can't score any runs, our manager is either too stupid or too stubborn to fill out a lineup card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 15 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: It sure would have been nice if Greene batted with guys on base. Getting 3 hits is pretty good, it would be better with runners in scoring position. No wonder the Tigers can't score any runs, our manager is either too stupid or too stubborn to fill out a lineup card. Alright, what should the lineup be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 7 minutes ago, casimir said: Alright, what should the lineup be? Switch Perez and Greene. Let Greene hit with runners on base. Score runs. It's not really that complicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 48 minutes ago, casimir said: You’re right about Meadows needing reps. He’s probably the one on thin ice once Urshela is ready to come back, unless Perez suddenly bottoms out. I’m not sure Keith is going anywhere soon. His defense seems to be better than advertised. He also has shown in his past that he has a bit of a slower performance upon promotion, but eventually catches on. And, politically, there’s the contract, which shouldn’t matter. Keith also looks the closest to getting out of this stretch... approach is good, hits the ball hard, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: Switch Perez and Greene. Let Greene hit with runners on base. Score runs. It's not really that complicated. So, one guy who might be the beneficiary of beginner's luck until the league gets a book on him? How about the entire lineup? It's not really that complicated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Just now, casimir said: So, one guy who might be the beneficiary of beginner's luck until the league gets a book on him? How about the entire lineup? It's not really that complicated? Why didn't Jim Leyland use Cabrera as his leadoff hitter? He was the Tigers best hitter. Didn't he want to get him an extra 3 at bats per week? I don't care who they replace Greene with at the top of the order, he has 6 or 7 black holes in front of him. One hit from the bottom of the lineup and 10 runners left on base!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 10 hours ago, Jim Cowan said: Disagree, set up the force at home right away. Why wait for one batter? If you don't load them up, and it's not hit decently hard right to you, the guy scores standing up. I don't want to overthink these situations, they are straightforward...set up the force. The strikeout would be ideal, sure, but you can't rely on it. Take the next best thing, set up the force. Yeah, it sure didn’t work out this time, did it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 3 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: Why didn't Jim Leyland use Cabrera as his leadoff hitter? He was the Tigers best hitter. Didn't he want to get him an extra 3 at bats per week? I don't care who they replace Greene with at the top of the order, he has 6 or 7 black holes in front of him. One hit from the bottom of the lineup and 10 runners left on base!! He had a much deeper lineup to use. What's your lineup, 1 through 9? All your bitching and moaning about Greene leading off and the rest of the lineup, but you never suggest a "better" lineup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 3 minutes ago, casimir said: He had a much deeper lineup to use. What's your lineup, 1 through 9? All your bitching and moaning about Greene leading off and the rest of the lineup, but you never suggest a "better" lineup. I already did. Perez was on base last night. Canha was on base. Hit Perez 1st, Canha stays 2nd and Greene hits 3rd. Using your best hitter leadoff with 7 black holes in front of him means he'll never bat with RISP. But yeah, you're right, why bother changing anything? Our offense is fine. Yeah, sure... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: I already did. Perez was on base last night. Canha was on base. Hit Perez 1st, Canha stays 2nd and Greene hits 3rd. Using your best hitter leadoff with 7 black holes in front of him means he'll never bat with RISP. But yeah, you're right, why bother changing anything? Our offense is fine. Yeah, sure... Greene LF, Perez CF, Canha RF, Carpenter DH, Vierling 3B. These are the best bats right now. I can see movement among this group from spot to spot. I think saying 7 black holes is quite thoughtless, but that's just my opinion. Keith 2B. He's got a good approach right now. The results aren't necessarily evident, at least the traditional stats. Torkelson 1B, Baez SS, Catcher. This group is what it is right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, casimir said: Greene LF, Perez CF, Canha RF, Carpenter DH, Vierling 3B. These are the best bats right now. I can see movement among this group from spot to spot. I think saying 7 black holes is quite thoughtless, but that's just my opinion. Keith 2B. He's got a good approach right now. The results aren't necessarily evident, at least the traditional stats. Torkelson 1B, Baez SS, Catcher. This group is what it is right now. Even Vierling would be a better choice leading off. My idea is to have Greene hit with runners on base so the Tigers could possibly score more runs. The best hitter on the team should be hitting 3rd or 4th, not leading off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, Sports_Freak said: The best hitter on the team should be hitting 3rd or 4th, not leading off. OK, boomer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 6 minutes ago, casimir said: OK, boomer. What I'm hearing you say is...hey, the Tigers scored a run. Everything is fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdog Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 I'm pretty confident that Tork is broken enough that he won't be a consistent hitter. There's something in his swing decisioning or mechanics that doesn't allow him to barrel up the ball to get the .800 minimum OPS that he needs to be consided a core guy. It should not be this hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalTiger Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Lineup changes only help marginally unless a player has a mental block for a certain spot. Best hitters one and two for the possible 5th at bat that game is it really. Maybe switch Canha and Greene but how much does that really help. I would put the best defensive team on the field and stop platooning so much. Verling and Carpenter hitting for each other is dumb when you have 2 to 4 weaker bats to hit for. As for Tork I would DH him against lefthanders only for the next 6 weeks then progress to playing him against some righties if he is hitting lefties. Finally let him play first. Baby steps at the MLB level. He’s a head case in my book so a trip down won’t ease his anxiety about hitting in the bigs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalTiger Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 hours ago, mtutiger said: Yeah, I think he's going to have to do something fairly quickly or risk being out of the starting lineup (in pinch hitting mode as kdog has suggested) or sent down. We're not there yet, AJ and Scott probably aren't there yet, but it's getting closer IMO. In general though, at least on the SM, it seems to have reignited the debate about whether they should have brought Chapman in or whoever (who, btw, only has a 0.642 OPS at the moment), but the fact remains that the long term success of this team rests on these younger players. Even beyond Spencer Torkelson, Colt Keith and Parker Meadows.... all of them did what they needed to do in Toledo, sending them down may help for a reset but, in terms of gaining experience, there's nothing to be gained by that. And at some point, you have to give players runway to sink or swim. You have to be able to find out who these guys are and whether they fit into the long term plans. In the larger context of this being a much improved team over previous seasons, it's not ideal. But its the reality.... and it would have been the reality regardless of whether they signed a Matt Chapman or JD Martinez or whoever. I totally agree with you but what I do not understand is why management presents this as an all or none situation. They play 162 games - 9 innings per game - 4 AB's per game . Add it all up thats a heck of a lot of runway ! I agree no Chapman or long term guys but we could have added two more veteran bats in the 5 to 12 million range to sprinkle in with the kids to keep our offense off the bloody floor. Look how much Urshela helped in his limited time. Where would we be without Canha ? Does Colt Keith HAVE to play EVERY day ? Does Tork have to play every day..etc..etc..Does McKinstry need to be on the team ? I mean isn't 100 to 120 games and 400 ABs enough runway for first and second year players ? It would be nice to come into New York for a tough series and have four established bats in the lineup with Greene instead of one. Why does it have to be all kids all the time ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 3 hours ago, Sports_Freak said: Why didn't Jim Leyland use Cabrera as his leadoff hitter? He was the Tigers best hitter. Didn't he ... This is exactly frickin' IT. Best player, was Cabrera now it's Greene, bats THIRD in the lineup, with OBP guys in front of him. No... it's NOT that complicated. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 3 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: This is exactly frickin' IT. Best player, was Cabrera now it's Greene, bats THIRD in the lineup, with OBP guys in front of him. No... it's NOT that complicated. You won't catch me arguing with you. While Perez is hitting/getting on base, lead him off. If he cools down or teams get a book on him, move him down or sit him. But the Tigers aren't scoring runs and we're wasting hits from our best hitter. I think Hinch is just being stubborn, getting Riley an extra 3 at bats a week isn't going to help us score runs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenacious D Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 I personally would go: 1. Perez 2. Canha 3. Greene 4. Vierling 5. Carpenter 6-9. Doesn’t matter right now. Lump the guys that are hitting together. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 hours ago, Sports_Freak said: What I'm hearing you say is...hey, the Tigers scored a run. Everything is fine. If you’re hearing my typing, no wonder we can’t agree. 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 hour ago, Tenacious D said: I personally would go: 1. Perez 2. Canha 3. Greene 4. Vierling 5. Carpenter 6-9. Doesn’t matter right now. Lump the guys that are hitting together. Bingo! Thank you very much! Actually... The one thing I would do is: Bat Tork 9th. OR... if Malloy gets called up and Tork gets sent down, again, bat Malloy 9th. Tork would be to drop pressure-to-produce to zero on him. Or if he figures out how to start hitting again he's actually "at the front of the top of the lineup" after the 1st inning... And with Malloy: same thing. Zero pressure at #9, if he is OBP'ing then he's getting on base right in front of the top of the lineup. If it at some point either of these guys is worthy of moving higher up in the lineup then, IMO, that's a decision for a little bit later on. IMO, the right now decision is to put a Tork or a Malloy in the #9 spot, for reasons stated... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.