Jump to content

Motor City Sonics

Is there anything that gives you hope for 2018 (and only 2018)

Recommended Posts

Just now, Oblong said:

I agree partially with that but I think it's ok to spend modest money on fringe FA (or retain a guy like Kinsler rather than move for minor league filler) to help keep the team on ML as competitive as possible.  It is still fun to watch your team win sometimes.  I don't buy the argument made my some, not here, that whether the team wins 60 or 70 games doesn't matter. I used to think that but not anymore.  When you ask people to pay ML prices then you should make it fun, within reason.  There's no virtue for me that my team had the lowest possible cost/win ratio. That means nothing to me.

I don't buy that argument either.  I think it matters.  It is not so much the win totals as much as being able to watch a team that is reasonably competitive in most games.  There was a difference between watching the 2002-2003 teams and the 2004-2005 teams.  The former was a joke, while the latter was fun although sometimes frustrating.  I'd rather be frustrated with the team than disinterested because I know they have no chance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

The Cardinals are unique, but there are several teams that are currently good that didn't have to Astrofy their organization to get there:

Botston

NY Yankees

Cleveland

LA Dodgers

Arizona

 

Cleveland had a four year stretch from 2009-2012 where they were below .500 each year, with three of those years having fewer than 70 wins. The diamondbacks have a similar three year stretch prior to this past season.

Yankees and Red Sox and Dodgers are not a model the tigers could realistically emulate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Casimir said:

 

How has St. Louis remained competitive throughout the last 18 seasons?  17 winning seasons.  12 playoff appearances.  Not really any high draft picks.  How can Detroit replicate that success?  Can Detroit replicate that success?

Regarding St. Louis, for years and years I have read and heard it said that they put a lot of resources and emphasis on their minor league systems. Really stress fundamentals and the right way to play the game. Their GM expressed some frustration last year while stating that the Cardinals were getting away from their brand of baseball. He even questioned whether or not there were players at the top that were not committed to doing things the Cardinals way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Oblong said:

I agree partially with that but I think it's ok to spend modest money on fringe FA (or retain a guy like Kinsler rather than move for minor league filler) to help keep the team on ML as competitive as possible.  It is still fun to watch your team win sometimes.  I don't buy the argument made my some, not here, that whether the team wins 60 or 70 games doesn't matter. I used to think that but not anymore.  When you ask people to pay ML prices then you should make it fun, within reason.  There's no virtue for me that my team had the lowest possible cost/win ratio. That means nothing to me.

I also don’t care about cost/win. And it is of course more fun as a fan your team wins. 

But I will definitely say that it doesn’t matter if you win 60 or 70 game. If you went to every home game, that’s five days over the course of six months where you went home bummed instead of happy. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Cleveland had a four year stretch from 2009-2012 where they were below .500 each year, with three of those years having fewer than 70 wins. The diamondbacks have a similar three year stretch prior to this past season.

Yankees and Red Sox and Dodgers are not a model the tigers could realistically emulate. 

This is where I am at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Cleveland had a four year stretch from 2009-2012 where they were below .500 each year, with three of those years having fewer than 70 wins. The diamondbacks have a similar three year stretch prior to this past season.

Yankees and Red Sox and Dodgers are not a model the tigers could realistically emulate. 

Neither the Indians nor Diamondbacks were nearly as bad as the Astros and didn't have a lot of top 5 picks.  I would argue that the three AZ drafts from when they were bad is not why they are good.  

The Tigers did emulate the big market teams for a long time under Mike Ilitch.  I don't know if Chris has any interest in doing that, but it's not impossible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I also don’t care about cost/win. And it is of course more fun as a fan your team wins. 

But I will definitely say that it doesn’t matter if you win 60 or 70 game. If you went to every home game, that’s five days over the course of six months where you went home bummed instead of happy. 

 

But you may have had more fun watching the games because you felt they had a chance to win.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 1776 said:

Regarding St. Louis, for years and years I have read and heard it said that they put a lot of resources and emphasos on their minor league systems. Really stress fundamentals and the right way to play the game. Their GM expressed some frustration last year while stating that the Cardinals were getting away from their brand of baseball. He even questioned whether or not there were players at the top that were not committed to doing things the Cardinals way. 

I’m not convinced there is a fancy “cardinal  way” or that they are doing something particularly special. I think it’s just one of those things that has happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tiger337 said:

But you may have had more fun watching the games because you felt they had a chance to win.  

Nope. I wouldn’t have more fun watching a game thinking we have a 43% chance of winning vs a 37% chance of winning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I’m not convinced there is a fancy “cardinal  way” or that they are doing something particularly special. I think it’s just one of those things that has happened.

They've consistently drafted and developed good players late in the first round and in later rounds. It's not magic, but it's not coincidence either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

Neither the Indians nor Diamondbacks were nearly as bad as the Astros and didn't have a lot of top 5 picks.  I would argue that the three AZ drafts from when they were bad is not why they are good.  

The Tigers did emulate the big market teams for a long time under Mike Ilitch.  I don't know if Chris has any interest in doing that, but it's not impossible.  

I thought you were talking about teams that have been consistently good like the cardinals. 

I don’t particularly care about tanking to get a high draft pick. I do care about throwing away limited assets in the pursuit of 75 wins. 

Every move (or non move) the tigers make at this point should be looked at from the perspective of whether or not the move will help them build a team that can win 87 or more games. I think that is what the Astros did. The losing that resulted was unavoidable, but they weren’t “trying to lose.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

Neither the Indians nor Diamondbacks were nearly as bad as the Astros and didn't have a lot of top 5 picks.  I would argue that the three AZ drafts from when they were bad is not why they are good.  

The Tigers did emulate the big market teams for a long time under Mike Ilitch.  I don't know if Chris has any interest in doing that, but it's not impossible.  

Even when Illitch was allowing big spending at the MLB level, we were not spending in the same league with LA, NY or Boston in things like signing international players, having advanced analytics departments, larger scouting staffs, etc. 

Arizona had one good year, but they did have some down years, including a year where they were worst in baseball, and they probably would have torn it down before last year began if they could've found a taker for Greinke's ridiculous contract. 

I agree that Cle has had a nice run without totally tanking. They were lucky enough to pick 8th in the loaded 2011 draft and end up with Lindor. But they've done well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

I don't buy that argument either.  I think it matters.  It is not so much the win totals as much as being able to watch a team that is reasonably competitive in most games.  There was a difference between watching the 2002-2003 teams and the 2004-2005 teams.  The former was a joke, while the latter was fun although sometimes frustrating.  I'd rather be frustrated with the team than disinterested because I know they have no chance.  

I'm definitely not against modest spending to upgrade positions in FA, particularly if it's a short term deal and the FAs are not blocking good young players  Making the team more entertaining to watch has value, and then you can always flip the vets at the deadline, when people start tuning out of their last place team anyway.

 The Cubs did this during their rebuild, and it was key for them, for example signing Feldman and then flipping him at the deadline for Arrieta and Stroup. 

The Tigers don't have a ton of openings... A SP is always useful. If an interesting OFer like CarGO is looking for a one year pillow contract, I'd love to see him on the team. There isn't much at 2b, but that is another position where an upgrade could be good, since Machado could be the UTIL guy until Iglesias is inevitably traded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

The Cardinals are unique, but there are several teams that are currently good that didn't have to Astrofy their organization to get there:

Botston

NY Yankees

Cleveland

LA Dodgers

Arizona

 

Money

Money

^&%$

Money

LaRussa & Stewart

Hmmmm.... Fire Avila and bring in LaRussa & Stewart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, 1776 said:

Regarding St. Louis, for years and years I have read and heard it said that they put a lot of resources and emphasis on their minor league systems. Really stress fundamentals and the right way to play the game. Their GM expressed some frustration last year while stating that the Cardinals were getting away from their brand of baseball. He even questioned whether or not there were players at the top that were not committed to doing things the Cardinals way. 

I know this will get a chuckle out of some, but there might be something to it.

I guess the problem with the Tigers is that they haven't developed much of anything at all.  But then even the guys that are usable have been generally good bat bad field or bad bat good field.  Not much in the way of developing position players that don't have some significant hole in their game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, irvink said:

I'm definitely not against modest spending to upgrade positions in FA, particularly if it's a short term deal and the FAs are not blocking good young players  Making the team more entertaining to watch has value, and then you can always flip the vets at the deadline, when people start tuning out of their last place team anyway.

 The Cubs did this during their rebuild, and it was key for them, for example signing Feldman and then flipping him at the deadline for Arrieta and Stroup. 

The Tigers don't have a ton of openings... A SP is always useful. If an interesting OFer like CarGO is looking for a one year pillow contract, I'd love to see him on the team. There isn't much at 2b, but that is another position where an upgrade could be good, since Machado could be the UTIL guy until Iglesias is inevitably traded. 

It doesn’t help that we have 40 million committed to victor and zimmermann. Signing a stopgap SP or OF/DH type that lingers on the market is one of the easiest things to do for a rebuilding team that gives them the option of flipping the guy later if they are decent (usually they end up being scrubs, but you never know). 

Maybe Fiers can be our version of Feldman. 

Relievers are a good option, too. Signing Joba back in the day was a reclamation project (and as a contender you have to wonder why DD was content in relying on a reclamation project). But had we not been contending at the time, that’s a guy we could have probably traded for something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sabretooth said:

The only way that we would be able to compete in 2018 would be to have another $30-40M or more in payroll, which could have been accomplished by keeping JV/Upton/JD/Kinsler, or by acquiring a new group of FAs and try to claw back to .500 and make some deadline deals.  Clearly ownership was not down for that level of spending, so it's a moot point.  Without that spend, we're a 65-70 win team hoping for a miracle or trying to tank.

Verlander $28M

Upton was $22.5M (I think)

Martinez in 2017 was $11.8M

Kinsler $11M

I think it would have taken much more than retaining any $40M combination of the above to get them to .500.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shelton said:

It doesn’t help that we have 40 million committed to victor and zimmermann. Signing a stopgap SP or OF/DH type that lingers on the market is one of the easiest things to do for a rebuilding team that gives them the option of flipping the guy later if they are decent (usually they end up being scrubs, but you never know). 

Maybe Fiers can be our version of Feldman. 

Relievers are a good option, too. Signing Joba back in the day was a reclamation project (and as a contender you have to wonder why DD was content in relying on a reclamation project). But had we not been contending at the time, that’s a guy we could have probably traded for something. 

So the Tigers have $42M committed next season to a stopgap DH and a stopgap SP.  Overspend of, what, approximately, what $30M over what market rate would be for stopgap at those positions?  For a below .500 team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Casimir said:

So the Tigers have $42M committed next season to a stopgap DH and a stopgap SP.  Overspend of, what, approximately, what $30M over what market rate would be for stopgap at those positions?  For a below .500 team?

I wouldn’t even categorize zimmermann or victor as equivalent to the stopgap types. If they were free agents this year they would be getting minor league deals at best. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I thought you were talking about teams that have been consistently good like the cardinals. 

I don’t particularly care about tanking to get a high draft pick. I do care about throwing away limited assets in the pursuit of 75 wins. 

Every move (or non move) the tigers make at this point should be looked at from the perspective of whether or not the move will help them build a team that can win 87 or more games. I think that is what the Astros did. The losing that resulted was unavoidable, but they weren’t “trying to lose.”

There are a few different discussions going on here... I agree they should not be making any moves that will lose draft picks or young talent.  However, I don't think they have to be the worst team in baseball for the next three years either.  I think they can sign some moderately price free agents and not necessarily trade guys like Kinsler.  I think it makes them more interesting (at least until some of the prospects are ready) and there is also a chance that one of the free agents might do well enough to be traded at the deadline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I wouldn’t even categorize zimmermann or victor as equivalent to the stopgap types. If they were free agents this year they would be getting minor league deals at best. 

 

I was being kind because the thread title is something about hope.

This offseason sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shelton said:

It doesn’t help that we have 40 million committed to victor and zimmermann. Signing a stopgap SP or OF/DH type that lingers on the market is one of the easiest things to do for a rebuilding team that gives them the option of flipping the guy later if they are decent (usually they end up being scrubs, but you never know). 

Maybe Fiers can be our version of Feldman. 

Relievers are a good option, too. Signing Joba back in the day was a reclamation project (and as a contender you have to wonder why DD was content in relying on a reclamation project). But had we not been contending at the time, that’s a guy we could have probably traded for something. 

Yeah, even after all the payroll they've shed, the Tigers are going to be an expensive last place team. Not much can be done about it tho. I suppose the only chance to shed more is if Zimmerman comes back to life and looks like a decent #4 starter. Victor and Iglesias will be off the books after this year. 

Anyway, that's all dead money. Modest investments in FA market have the potential to reap huge dividends. 

All of these players are still FAs, and there are useful guys beyond this...

Cain, Carlos Gomez, Maybin, dyson, bautista, werth, nunez, jd, holliday, cargo, hosmer, walker, phillips, moose, frazier, lucroy, duda, napoli, lomo, alcides, cobb, jaime garcia, lackey, cashner, buchholz, volquez, vargas, yu, hellickson, lynn, arrieta, tillman, Breslow, rosenthal , siegrist, liriano, benoit, rondon, grilli, clippard, holland, norris, cahill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, irvink said:

Even when Illitch was allowing big spending at the MLB level, we were not spending in the same league with LA, NY or Boston in things like signing international players, having advanced analytics departments, larger scouting staffs, etc. 

 

That is true, although I think the Tigers might have been better off if they had done more of those things and less of some of the other things they did like trading prospects for relievers or marginal starters or making questionable free agent signings.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

There are a few different discussions going on here... I agree they should not be making any moves that will lose draft picks or young talent.  However, I don't think they have to be the worst team in baseball for the next three years either.  I think they can sign some moderately price free agents and not necessarily trade guys like Kinsler.  I think it makes them more interesting (at least until some of the prospects are ready) and there is also a chance that one of the free agents might do well enough to be traded at the deadline

I see no problem with this.  Definitely don't lose any draft picks via free agent signings.  I do think trading guys like Kinsler are acceptable if you can get something for him.  There's probably not much to Machado going forward, but I don't see the harm in trying him on a full time basis to see if he can reasonably hold down a middle infield job.

Detroit should be a destination for pre Detroit Martinez types.  Guys that have lost a bit of luster to their prospect status and have not yet quite put it together at the majors.  Or guys that have flamed out between AA to AAA for that matter.  At this point, there's not much blocking them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

That is true, although I think the Tigers might have been better off if they had done more of those things and less of some of the other things they did like trading prospects for relievers or marginal starters or making questionable free agent signings.  

I think DD, AA, and the tigers made some pretty glaring mistakes. Had they done things differently we might not be in this position. But we can’t go back and change the past. I think they are doing what they need to do at this point in time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,077
    • Total Posts
      2,814,427
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×