2025-2026 Tigers Off Season Thread

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, casimir said:

I would say a lack of “I” has killed the internet as well as making every day life more complicated, but that’s just my opinion.

One thing both the internet and 24 hr news programming are combining to kill is any kind of concision in the use of the English language. When all you have is time to fill, clicks to generate and influencer rep to burnish, there is never any point is using less than 2 minutes to say what can be said in 15 seconds. For a long time at least, with print, there was some motivation to be concise because there is no credit for typing (or even dictation) time, but with AI available to spew unlimited ASCII, that last bastion of efficient media communication is likely doomed as well.

[theroundsquare]

On 12/5/2025 at 7:31 PM, KL2 said:

Yeah my comment was more getting at Tork is a top half first basemen in the league and we’re trading him to make room for a guy we know little about could be better could be worse in time.

i get people have totally soured on tork, but he’s not as bad as many portray and not sure we should be moving any player for a downgrade.

i don't suggest this because i'm sour on tork.  i think he has value, and it is value that the tigers might be able to translate into a different kind of value (i.e., different position, something like that), with a possible play for upside with keith.  also, to somebody else's point, keith isn't as good as tork defensively, today, but given a chance he can probably be much better than he is  keith needs a position where he can learn and grow.  he hasn't had that.  and it's not like tork is keith hernandez

[buddha]

can the hall of fame get less relevant?  what a joke.

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, theroundsquare said:

given a chance he can probably be much better than he is 

I wonder about that. Keith should be/could become a better ground ball fielder at 1st then ST, then but when he played 1st he was very stiff receiving throws, just didn't seem to have a comfort level or even the flexibility for it. He might learn it, but he's got far enough to go I would call success a sure thing, 

But by far the most likely scenario for Colt is they park him at 3rd this season and by the end the season we either have a solid lineup piece for several years, or they'll be looking to off load him a la Castellanos.

[KL2]

3 hours ago, theroundsquare said:

i don't suggest this because i'm sour on tork.  i think he has value, and it is value that the tigers might be able to translate into a different kind of value (i.e., different position, something like that), with a possible play for upside with keith.  also, to somebody else's point, keith isn't as good as tork defensively, today, but given a chance he can probably be much better than he is  keith needs a position where he can learn and grow.  he hasn't had that.  and it's not like tork is keith hernandez

If you take an average/good piece off the team you aren’t doing anything to improve value, you’re just shuffling chairs. It’s why prospects are traded for today value.

if you move tork for “value” let’s say a No.3 pitcher, you’ve weakened the lineup to make room for an unproven guy. You just shifted the hole in the dam. Now if you meove a Keith or other players you keep the lineup as is but made that other area stronger. 

the only way your idea works is if you think Keith is gonna produce a 2.2 war (what tork did, 5th best on team) soon. So far he’s done little to show that. 
 

Your whole idea is based on the idea Keith needs somewhere “to learn and grow.” That concept works if your building we are already a playoff team. Let’s add to what we have an upgrade not just shift holes.

Edited 10 hours ago by KL2

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

can the hall of fame get less relevant?  what a joke.

Kent is more like Kinsler than guys like Grich and Whitaker.  

[buddha]

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

Kent is more like Kinsler than guys like Grich and Whitaker.  

its an absolute joke.

the biggest laugh is not giving bonds or clemens enough votes to even stay on the ballot!  because of roids!  or schilling because of politics.

and instead you vote in ortiz!  and pudge!  and bagwell!  and now kent!  ortiz was CAUGHT but because he's fat, happy, and plays for the red sox he gets a pass.  pudge miraculously lost 100 pounds in one summer which just happened to be the summer they started testing.  bagwell and kent suddenly got quite large and starting hitting homers but could never have done roids...

come on.  sportswriters are some of the dumbest hypocritical beings on the planet.

i was always on the fence about whitaker and trammell.  theyre "hall of very good" for me.  but if youre going to let in the likes of harold freaking baines and jeff freaking kent, then by all means whitaker and trammell both belong.

[Tiger337]

20 minutes ago, buddha said:

its an absolute joke.

the biggest laugh is not giving bonds or clemens enough votes to even stay on the ballot!  because of roids!  or schilling because of politics.

and instead you vote in ortiz!  and pudge!  and bagwell!  and now kent!  ortiz was CAUGHT but because he's fat, happy, and plays for the red sox he gets a pass.  pudge miraculously lost 100 pounds in one summer which just happened to be the summer they started testing.  bagwell and kent suddenly got quite large and starting hitting homers but could never have done roids...

come on.  sportswriters are some of the dumbest hypocritical beings on the planet.

i was always on the fence about whitaker and trammell.  theyre "hall of very good" for me.  but if youre going to let in the likes of harold freaking baines and jeff freaking kent, then by all means whitaker and trammell both belong.

yup, if you don't put Bonds and Clemens in then you can't put Otiz in.  Pudge and Bagwell are a little different in that nothing was proven.  Kent doesn't belong regardless.    

[Tenacious D]

Do they publish who were on the veterans committee voting?

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

go I would call success a sure thing, 

ooops

"would NOT.."

 

[Edman85]

7 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

Do they publish who were on the veterans committee voting?

Yes, Trammel was on this panel. I know Jayson Stark and Tyler Kepner were too. I forget the whole list off hand.

A few years ago I stopped caring about the Hall of Fame. There's too much to get upset about, why waste emotion on who does and doesn't get in?