2025-2026 Tigers Off Season Thread

[Edman85]

Today is the last day you can put somebody who was added to the 40 man since August 15 on waivers until early March. I am looking at you Tanner Rainey.

[KL2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I would think setting a hard limit on contract lengths would be struck down in court as restraint of trade.

Other sports do

rookie deals are capped as well

Edited Wednesday at 09:50 PM by KL2

[Tiger337]

From a fan's standpoint,  I love the idea of limited duration contracts.  I don't really care how much money a player makes, but I hate seeing a team sign a player to a long-term deal and then having watch the player keep playing years even after he loses all his value.  

[4hzglory]

27 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

From a fan's standpoint,  I love the idea of limited duration contracts.  I don't really care how much money a player makes, but I hate seeing a team sign a player to a long-term deal and then having watch the player keep playing years even after he loses all his value.  

The one aspect from a fan's standpoint I wouldn't like is that you would likely see completely different teams year by year.  I'd have to think jersey sales would plummet as you wouldn't know if your favorite player is going to be on your team next year or another team.

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

Other sports do

rookie deals are capped as well

To the degree it exists in other sports, that's probably because their players' unions had to approve it. I don't see the MLBPA agreeing to it, and since Baseball is a federally-protected monopoly and the other sports businesses are not, I would guess they would try to unilaterally impose that on Players who would have to get the issue adjudicated in a court of law.

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

I would think setting a hard limit on contract lengths would be struck down in court as restraint of trade.

NBA already caps contract length (5yrs). Once agreed to, collective bargaining agreements are exempt from a lot of those legal niceties, plus you still have the infamous baseball AT exemption still in play. 

I guess by definition I'm talking about something that comes out of a new CBA since I'm assuming without a new CBA no-one is playing.

Edited Wednesday at 11:14 PM by gehringer_2

[Dan Gilmore]

Didn’t the NHL put limits on contract length after teams were putting long out years to spread annual cap ceilings?

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, Dan Gilmore said:

Didn’t the NHL put limits on contract length after teams were putting long out years to spread annual cap ceilings?

it says this on the NHL.com site:

Quote

Here are some notable updates that will affect the Buffalo Sabres and the rest of the league when the 2026-27 season begins......

.....Contract term length

Maximum contract term will be seven years for re-signing with the same team and six years for external free-agent additions. This compares to eight and seven years, respectively, under the current CBA.

 

[IdahoBert]

“Former Orioles’ coaching staff Asche (asst. hitting coach), Sanders (first base) among Tigers' coaching hires.” Onward and upward!

As the hippie girls I hung out with in the early 1970s used to say “the coming together is coming together, man.“

 

[Tiger337]

16 hours ago, 4hzglory said:

The one aspect from a fan's standpoint I wouldn't like is that you would likely see completely different teams year by year.  I'd have to think jersey sales would plummet as you wouldn't know if your favorite player is going to be on your team next year or another team.

That depends on how long the duration is.  If it's one year, then you would have chaos.  I am thinking more like four or five years.  Assuming a team can still hold a player for the first six years, then they can extend him another four or five years and there aren't a lot of players you really want to keep longer than that.  A few superstars maybe, but players aren't staying with their same team throughout their career even the way it is now.  

[Edman85]

Options due today, qo's due today, keeping the 40 man at 40 after activating 60 day IL's today, minor league free agents become free agents today.

We should get a resolution on Urquidy and Sewald, as well as the QO decision on Torres. Depending on those options, some 40 man trimming may need to be done.

[4hzglory]

18 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

That depends on how long the duration is.  If it's one year, then you would have chaos.  I am thinking more like four or five years.  Assuming a team can still hold a player for the first six years, then they can extend him another four or five years and there aren't a lot of players you really want to keep longer than that.  A few superstars maybe, but players aren't staying with their same team throughout their career even the way it is now.  

True-I was going off of the comment that started this topic which was suggesting 1 yr contracts after 4 years of control.

i have no problem with 5 - 7 year limits.

Edited Thursday at 03:19 PM by 4hzglory

[theroundsquare]

19 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Options due today, qo's due today, keeping the 40 man at 40 after activating 60 day IL's today, minor league free agents become free agents today.

We should get a resolution on Urquidy and Sewald, as well as the QO decision on Torres. Depending on those options, some 40 man trimming may need to be done.

Thanks for this!

[Dan Gilmore]

28 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Options due today, qo's due today, keeping the 40 man at 40 after activating 60 day IL's today, minor league free agents become free agents today.

We should get a resolution on Urquidy and Sewald, as well as the QO decision on Torres. Depending on those options, some 40 man trimming may need to be done.

Echoing Roundsquare, I appreciate your sharing of the procedures and implications for the rosters. 

[alex]

54 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Options due today, qo's due today, keeping the 40 man at 40 after activating 60 day IL's today, minor league free agents become free agents today.

We should get a resolution on Urquidy and Sewald, as well as the QO decision on Torres. Depending on those options, some 40 man trimming may need to be done.

Also a Thanks!

[Tigermojo]

Max Anderson Has Been the Arizona Fall Leagues’s Hottest Hitter | FanGraphs Baseball

[Tigermojo]

Urquidy says Detroit did not pick up his option.

[papalawrence]

1 hour ago, Tigermojo said:

Urquidy says Detroit did not pick up his option.

Also declined on Sewald

Tigers Decline Mutual Option On Paul Sewald - MLB Trade Rumors https://share.google/POv7DJ1wqFbXwJnMF

 

 

[RatkoVarda]

2 hours ago, Tigermojo said:

Max Anderson Has Been the Arizona Fall Leagues’s Hottest Hitter | FanGraphs Baseball

glasses!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Graterol]

Gleyber given a QO. I think Kim is perfect for this team to bridge SS. I also like Polanco as a 2B/3B/DH. Would love to see 2 of these 3 plus a short term FA pitcher (actually think Scherzer or Verlander would be a good fit).

 

[Shinzaki]

Tigs QO Gleyber

[Tigermojo]

I would be happy to have Gleyber back for a year.

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, RatkoVarda said:

glasses!?!?!?!?!?!?

He's a modern day Scott Lusader.  

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, Shinzaki said:

Tigs QO Gleyber

In case anyone was wondering;

The Tigers tendered a one-year, $22.05 million qualifying offer to Torres on Thursday, Jeff Passan of ESPN.com reports.

[lordstanley]

Neato.