05/19/2026 6:40p EDT Cleveland Guardians at Detroit Tigers

[gehringer_2]

Tigers sent the following OPS hitters to the plate tonight: 278, 470, 480, 577, 592

[Tiger337]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Tigers sent the following OPS hitters to the plate tonight: 278, 470, 480, 577, 592

OPS of players who could be in line-up if not injured: .750 .716 .678 .641

 

[Tenacious D]

Kind of a win, right?  Got within a run.

[gehringer_2]

23 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

OPS of players who could be in line-up if not injured: .750 .716 .678 .641

 

and nobody yet on rehab....

[Tiger337]

Just now, gehringer_2 said:

and nobody yet on rehab....

I am kind of tuning out at this point - just listening on the radio as I do other stuff.  

[gehringer_2]

21 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I am kind of tuning out at this point - just listening on the radio as I do other stuff.  

yup, radio and gameday in a window if I'm on a computer. Although watching hitters on gameday and seeing the fine detail of what they are and are not swinging at just makes you more aware how bad tiger hitters have been.

[IdahoBert]

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

yup, radio and gameday in a window if I'm on a computer. Although watching hitters on gameday and seeing the fine detail of what they are and are not swinging at just makes you more aware how bad tiger hitters have been.

Watching on gameday the bad calls by umpires become more and more infuriating because there is a solution. I’m not sure how much the complexion of the game would change if balls and strikes were completely taken out of the hands of umpires. If hitting dominated vastly more than we are used to or pitching was favored it would be weird.

[gehringer_2]

11 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

Watching on gameday the bad calls by umpires become more and more infuriating because there is a solution. I’m not sure how much the complexion of the game would change if balls and strikes were completely taken out of the hands of umpires. If hitting dominated vastly more than we are used to or pitching was favored it would be weird.

I'm coming around more and more to the idea that they have to move the mound back to start fixing what is wrong with the game. Give hitters back a little more chance to see what they are hitting. As Chasfh notes, you would have to deaden the ball as well to prevent scoring from going through the roof, but I'd really like to see skill rewarded a little more in hitting and a little less reliance on having to have guessed right to even get the bat on the ball.

[diaspora04]

9 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

and nobody yet on rehab....

Except some fans

[chasfh]

10 hours ago, kdog said:

They staked this season on internal development...but it's not linear. Sometimes guys you think are good can't stack good seasons..and then you are stuck with just rolling them out there every night praying they can find their groove..And there are no answers coming from the minors. This is it.

This is the immediate problem. The real answers expected to come from the minors are later this year and across the next two years. There are more answers due to come off the List but that’s only once they can. This is one of those tough stretches organizations can go through even when there on the right path. I don’t think we are anywhere near the blow-it-all-up-stage, but I can’t argue that it’s not so tough to watch.

[chasfh]

8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I'm coming around more and more to the idea that they have to move the mound back to start fixing what is wrong with the game. Give hitters back a little more chance to see what they are hitting. As Chasfh notes, you would have to deaden the ball as well to prevent scoring from going through the roof, but I'd really like to see skill rewarded a little more in hitting and a little less reliance on having to have guessed right to even get the bat on the ball.

I don’t know that thousands of baseball clubs and schools will want to move their mounds back however many feet it would take. I think changing the ball over a period of time might be a better solution, although the tricky part will be doing any of this without precipitating a rash of injuries, something that has already happened as pitching incentives coupled with team demands have dramatically changed.

[kdog]

11 hours ago, IdahoBert said:

If I go AWOL for a while, don’t be surprised. I’ve gone into low ebbs before and then come back. 

Absent without runs.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I don’t know that thousands of baseball clubs and schools will want to move their mounds back however many feet it would take. I think changing the ball over a period of time might be a better solution, although the tricky part will be doing any of this without precipitating a rash of injuries, something that has already happened as pitching incentives coupled with team demands have dramatically changed.

Nobody in a league where people aren't throwing 95+ should bother. The break could be at MiLB and the NCAA, where there are plenty of groundskeeping resources, everyone else can stay put. It wouldn't be the only place the diamond changes as the players get older.

[SoCalTiger]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

Nobody in a league where people aren't throwing 95+ should bother. The break could be at MiLB and the NCAA, where there are plenty of groundskeeping resources, everyone else can stay put. It wouldn't be the only place the diamond changes as the players get older.

is it possible to just lower the mound ? 

[gehringer_2]

11 minutes ago, SoCalTiger said:

is it possible to just lower the mound ? 

Interesting question - throwing downhill allows a pitcher more follow-through. The big question would be what  a change in the mound large enough to actually lower pitch velocity would do to pitcher's arm health.  Could go either way for all I know.

[KL2]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Interesting question - throwing downhill allows a pitcher more follow-through. The big question would be what  a change in the mound large enough to actually lower pitch velocity would do to pitcher's arm health.  Could go either way for all I know.

https://www.theringer.com/2021/03/15/mlb/pitching-mound-move-distance

 

It’s understandable that pitchers would be uneasy about the mound moving under them, and no athlete with a limited time in their prime is eager to be treated as a guinea pig. To assess the real risks, MLB approached Fleisig and ASMI in February 2017 about studying the effects of lowering the mound, and again in January 2019 about studying the effects of moving the mound back. The resulting MLB-sponsored studies, published in January 2019 and February 2020, respectively, reached a couple of counterintuitive conclusions. Fleisig and his colleagues found that lowering the mound might “slightly reduce shoulder and elbow kinetics, possibly reducing the risk of injury.” But no significant differences in ball movement were detected at the lower elevations.

“Dropping the mound, to me, is not as radical an idea, but our study showed it might not give the advantages you’d think it would,” Fleisig says. Although it’s commonly believed that lowering the mound from 15 inches to its current 10-inch height played a part in reviving offense after the anemic 1968 season, the more robust offensive environment of 1969 may have had more to do with the strike zone returning to its smaller 1961 size.