Mize

[Jim Cowan]

Some things just stick in your mind because they are so stupid and this is burned into my brain from the draft of righthander Cade Gaspar in the early 90s:  the first two words in the description of his potential were "not overpowering".  Not overpowering.  What?  WTF?  I couldn't believe it.  Naturally he stunk, and was out of baseball in about 3 or 4 years.  That typified drafts for about 20 years.

[Tenacious D]

TJ surgery has become a rite of passage for many pitchers these days.  And many come back fine from it.  Would suck to lose him for 18 months, but I’d like his chances to come back.

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

TJ surgery has become a rite of passage for many pitchers these days.  And many come back fine from it.  Would suck to lose him for 18 months, but I’d like his chances to come back.

if he does need it he needs to have it soon to be back in '24. Can't screw around until this off season. That said the report was out there that the imaging didn't support that surgery was needed, for now that's all we got.

Edited May 16, 2022 by gehringer_2

[Tigerbomb13]

12 hours ago, Jim Cowan said:

Some things just stick in your mind because they are so stupid and this is burned into my brain from the draft of righthander Cade Gaspar in the early 90s:  the first two words in the description of his potential were "not overpowering".  Not overpowering.  What?  WTF?  I couldn't believe it.  Naturally he stunk, and was out of baseball in about 3 or 4 years.  That typified drafts for about 20 years.

In a four year span we wasted first round picks on: Rick Greene, Matt Brunson, Cade Gaspar, and Mike Drumwright. Mind bogglingly terrible. Did they not have scouts and pick names that sounded cool?

[mtutiger]

Mike Drumright.... that's a name I didn't want to be reminded of lol

[Jim Cowan]

26 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Mike Drumright.... that's a name I didn't want to be reminded of lol

Yes he's a future 20 game winner.

[gehringer_2]

if you look back at the complete list of #1 picks the painful thing is the number of busts in taken in the top 10. That they haven't had a bust in a top 10 since Jacob Turner is actually a big improvement over the previous 40 yrs. But of course while you can't call any of them busts now,  the jury is out on Tork, Greene and Jobe and even Manning for that matter and one of them could flame out.

[RandyMarsh]

13 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

if he does need it he needs to have it soon to be back in '24. Can't screw around until this off season. That said the report was out there that the imaging didn't support that surgery was needed, for now that's all we got.

Yeah I understand you want to exhaust every other option before doing tj but I fear it's going to be one of those things that they try to get through all year without surgery only to end up doing it in the offseason anyway essentially costing them an extra season of recovery. 

[Tiger337]

NO WAY YOU CAN TRADE JACOB TURNER HE IS UNTOUCHABLE IF THEY TRADE HIM I AM THROUGH WITH THIS TEAM

[Useful Idiot]

Not just the Tigers, but MLB in general, isn't there a fairly small correlation between "first round pick" vs players who go on to be enduring superstars?  I don't have it at my fingertips , but it seems as though I recall an analysis along those lines and the overlap was surprisingly small.

 

So, while the owners might be winning the "cheap and controllable" sweepstakes by tanking,  how the eventual payoff plays-out is anything but dependable.

Meaning the Who was wrong....we can be fooled again.

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, Useful Idiot said:

Not just the Tigers, but MLB in general, isn't there a fairly small correlation between "first round pick" vs players who go on to be enduring superstars?  I don't have it at my fingertips , but it seems as though I recall an analysis along those lines and the overlap was surprisingly small.

 

So, while the owners might be winning the "cheap and controllable" sweepstakes by tanking,  how the eventual payoff plays-out is anything but dependable.

Meaning the Who was wrong....we can be fooled again.

I've seen an argument that scouting tech is so much better today and that college ball quality is better so that bad misses are supposedly less frequent. Then again, what constitutes a 'miss'? Injuries are always a wild card. If Mize washes out because of arm trouble, that doesn't mean he didn't have the talent to be a successful major leaguer, he's already demonstrated that.

Adley Rutschman and Tork both look to be on track, Mize made the majors, Royce Lewis is now up with the Twins, Danby Swanson is a plus player, Mickey Moniak is in the majors but not looking line much right now, so assuming Tork straightens out that's 6 of 7 recent 1/1s without a confirmed bust.

[buddha]

pedro martinez warned us...

[Jim Cowan]

1 hour ago, Useful Idiot said:

Not just the Tigers, but MLB in general, isn't there a fairly small correlation between "first round pick" vs players who go on to be enduring superstars?  I don't have it at my fingertips , but it seems as though I recall an analysis along those lines and the overlap was surprisingly small.

 

So, while the owners might be winning the "cheap and controllable" sweepstakes by tanking,  how the eventual payoff plays-out is anything but dependable.

Meaning the Who was wrong....we can be fooled again.

Correct, nobody tanks for baseball picks, they aren't worth enough.  If a low payroll team ends up with a losing record, the reward is not a better draft position.  The low payroll was its own reward. 

 

 

 

[SoCalTiger]

On 5/15/2022 at 11:05 AM, buddha said:

the 84 team was NOT pitching centric.  neither was the 68 team.  those teams were built around hitting.

in fact, the tigers' history is one of great hitters and above average but not great pitching (probably due a lot to their stadium).  its when they can pair their hitting with great seasons from their above average pitching that they won.

 

Well I might respectfully differ with you on that. The 68 team had a 31 game winner with a sub 2 era and Mickey Lolich dominated the series including Bob Gibson plus A solid Earl Wilson. 
 The 84 team had Cy young and MVP award winner Hernandez and  a big three of Morris Petry and Wilcox not to mention Senior Smoke. 

[Tiger337]

7 minutes ago, SoCalTiger said:

Well I might respectfully differ with you on that. The 68 team had a 31 game winner with a sub 2 era and Mickey Lolich dominated the series including Bob Gibson plus A solid Earl Wilson. 
 The 84 team had Cy young and MVP award winner Hernandez and  a big three of Morris Petry and Wilcox not to mention Senior Smoke. 

Lolich didn't have a great season until the World Series.  The offense played a big role in them getting to the series.  They led the league in runs scored and home runs.  The second place team in home runs was 50 behind the Tigers!

The 84 team had Whitaker, Trammell, Lemon , Parrish, Gibson and led the league in runs scored and home runs.

Those were two great teams with great balance between hitting and pitching.  

 

[gehringer_2]

22 minutes ago, SoCalTiger said:

Well I might respectfully differ with you on that. The 68 team had a 31 game winner with a sub 2 era and Mickey Lolich dominated the series including Bob Gibson plus A solid Earl Wilson. 
 The 84 team had Cy young and MVP award winner Hernandez and  a big three of Morris Petry and Wilcox not to mention Senior Smoke. 

the 68 team lead the league in runs and run prevention. But my point was that that offense was together a number of years and never produced a winner except that year when Sparma and Wilson had pretty decent years, Lolich had fine year, McLain went supernova and Hiller was excellent relieving and spot starting all together. Plus you expected good run production at Tigers Stadium. Was leading the league by more an 120 runs scored more or less impressive than by 70 in runs prevented in that ballpark?

On the offensive side, Kaline was out half the year and Cash had a down season. 3b, and SS were not strong at the bat and Stanley was not a big stick. Horton, Freehand and Northrup were among league leaders with great seasons and McAulliffe was a good OBP guy.

Edited May 17, 2022 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

Just now, gehringer_2 said:

the 68 team lead the league in runs and run prevention. But my point was that that offense was together a number of years and never produced a winner except that year when Sparma and Wilson had pretty decent years, Lolich had fine year, McLain went supernova and Hiller was excellent relieving and spot starting all together.

That speaks to my point that you build around offense long term and hope that one year you have enough pitching to get to post-season.  It's hard to build around pitching long-term because they get hurt so often.  If you already have the batters in place every year, then the year your pitchers put it together will be a good one.   

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

That speaks to my point that you build around offense long term and hope that one year you have enough pitching to get to post-season.  It's hard to build around pitching long-term because they get hurt so often.  If you already have the batters in place every year, then the year your pitchers put it together will be a good one.   

But in today's trade/CBA environment I don't think you will ever get the pitchers to put it together if you don't grow your own. In trade/FA you will get mostly over the hill guys unless you can spend like the Yankees or Dodgers, and the Tigers can't. How many teams did we have for how many years with all kinds of bats and the best arm we could bring in was a Billingham or Joe Coleman (who had one good year?).  

Objectively, 2011-2014 was the best playoff run in Tiger's history and that was keyed by having that core of Verlander, Scherzer and Porcello, and true we didn't draft Max but we got him before anyone knew he would be much of anything so I'm counting him as a 'build around' talent. 

Edited May 17, 2022 by gehringer_2

[buddha]

15 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

That speaks to my point that you build around offense long term and hope that one year you have enough pitching to get to post-season.  It's hard to build around pitching long-term because they get hurt so often.  If you already have the batters in place every year, then the year your pitchers put it together will be a good one.   

it speaks to my point that those teams were BUILT around hitting.  they got fluke years from pitchers other than morris (who was steadily very good, but never great).  they won when they got fluke good seasons from good pitchers but the core was always the hitters.  dont confuse a fluke season from mcclain or willie hernandez as the "core" of the team.

im not saying youre doing that, but others are.  those teams - and all the great tigers teams in old tiger stadium - were built on the foundations of great hitters.

cobb/heilman/crawford

gehringer/cochrane/greenberg

kaline/cash/horton/northrup

whitaker/trammell/gibson/parrish/evans/lemon

the tigers' problem has ALWAYS been pitching.

[gehringer_2]

and to come back mechanics of team construction, I have long believed that the marginal market/value of hitters is a much worse value proposition than for pitchers. Or better put, I think you are more likely to win (i.e. get to the playoffs) with the best pitching and only 'good' hitters than with the best hitters and only 'good' pitching. Which is to say I like the Atlanta model.

[Tiger337]

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

But in today's trade/CBA environment I don't think you will ever get the pitchers to put it together if you don't grow your own. In trade/FA you will get mostly over the hill guys unless you can spend like the Yankees or Dodgers, and the Tigers can't. How many teams did we have for how many years with all kinds of bats and the best arm we could bring in was a Billingham or Joe Coleman (who had one good year?).  

Objectively, 2011-2014 was the best playoff run in Tiger's history and that was keyed by having that core of Verlander, Scherzer and Porcello, and true we didn't draft Max but we got him before anyone knew he would be much of anything so I'm counting him as a 'build around' talent. 

2011-2014 was more pitching than hitting, but they still barely made the playoffs in three of those yerars.  They wouldn't have won without Cabrera and his supporting cast.  

[Tiger337]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

and to come back mechanics of team construction, I have long believed that the marginal market/value of hitters is a much worse value proposition than for pitchers. Or better put, I think you are more likely to win (i.e. get to the playoffs) with the best pitching and only 'good' hitters than with the best hitters and only 'good' pitching. Which is to say I like the Atlanta model.

Well yeah the Atlanta model!  But how many teams have been able to do that for any length of time?  The problem with pitching is that it's really hard to keep a good staff together for a long time.  It's easier for keep a hitting team together for for the long haul. 

[gehringer_2]

Just now, Tiger337 said:

2011-2014 was more pitching than hitting, but they still barely made the playoffs in three of those yerars.  They wouldn't have won without Cabrera and his supporting cast.  

of course you can't not hit at all. But once Max was gone even that fell apart even though we still had some pretty bats left.

[Tiger337]

Just now, gehringer_2 said:

of course you can't not hit at all. But once Max was gone even that fell apart even though we still had some pretty bats left.

Of course it did.  he was a great pitcher. Take away a great hitter and it falls apart too.  

[gehringer_2]

8 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Well yeah the Atlanta model!  But how many teams have been able to do that for any length of time?  The problem with pitching is that it's really hard to keep a good staff together for a long time.  It's easier for keep a hitting team together for for the long haul. 

harder sure, but if it works better isn't that your objective? I'm being facetious of course but I can picture my roster of great hitters growing old and grey in 3rd place waiting for some kind of inter dimensional space/time warp event to deposit a couple of full grown Cy Young candidates in little force field orbs behind the bullpen shelter one day. 

I just don't think the harmonic convergence of enough winning pitching will ever happen if you don't pursue it pretty hard. Or can afford to buy it.

Edited May 17, 2022 by gehringer_2