Jump to content

HeyAbbott

Tiger's GM Contract Extended

Recommended Posts

What I don't get is how people are characterizing the improvement of the system from a consensus bottom 5 or last to a consensus Top 10 in a 2-3 year span as an abject failure.   How is that failing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, TigerNation said:

There are plenty of valid criticisms, but this isn't one of them. Everyone in our top 20 prospects has a BB% of at least 8%. Working counts and drawing walks is about the only thing most of our positional prospects are doing a good job of this year.

Isn’t it? League rankings:

  • Toledo: 12th of 14 teams in walks, 6th in strikeouts.
  • Erie: 10th of 12 in walks, 10th in strikeouts.
  • Lakeland: 10th of 12 in walks, 3rd in strikeouts.
  • West Michigan: 12th of 16 in walks, 6th in strikeouts. 

Criticism looks mostly valid to me. 

Share this post


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

What I don't get is how people are characterizing the improvement of the system from a consensus bottom 5 or last to a consensus Top 10 in a 2-3 year span as an abject failure.   How is that failing?

Because it didn’t happen immediately enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Casimir said:

The same guy wanted to throw lots of money at Juan Gonzalez and Chris Davis and authored the extensions for Martinez and Cabrera which, oh big the way, are disasters as far as return on investment is concerned.

He sure did, and they sure are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LooseGoose said:

What I don't get is how people are characterizing the improvement of the system from a consensus bottom 5 or last to a consensus Top 10 in a 2-3 year span as an abject failure.   How is that failing?

Is it a top 10 one though?  Fangraphs has us at 19th despite us probably graduating fewer prospects of any significance the past couple years than any other team.  Not saying their list is gospel but most others are behind a paywall so I don't know where else to look.   

Share this post


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

He sure did, and they sure are.

Yet we hold Mike up in high regard and ridicule Chris as far as Tiger ownership goes.

Share this post


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

Everybody thought Mike Ilitch was a great owner, but the Tigers went through a heck of a lengthy losing period under his watch.

No one thought Ilitch was a good owner until 2006.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yet we hold Mike up in high regard and ridicule Chris as far as Tiger ownership goes.

Yeah, I kind of wonder why, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the minor league system rankings go, there was really no other place for the Tigers to go.  It was a dead bottom system and they had the “fortune” of some high draft picks.  The system had to improve by default.

Share this post


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

 

Isn’t it? League rankings:

  • Toledo: 12th of 14 teams in walks, 6th in strikeouts.
  • Erie: 10th of 12 in walks, 10th in strikeouts.
  • Lakeland: 10th of 12 in walks, 3rd in strikeouts.
  • West Michigan: 12th of 16 in walks, 6th in strikeouts. 

Criticism looks mostly valid to me. 

The majority of those teams are non prospects, so those numbers really have no value.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bobrob2004 said:

No one thought Ilitch was a good owner until 2006.  

I certainly didn't.  Randy Smith was held onto far too long.  I couldn’t stand it.  It drove me bonkers.  Somewhere in the idiotwebs of circa late 90s and early 00s are my documented diatribes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TigerNation said:

The majority of those teams are non prospects, so those numbers really have no value.

The majority of every minor league team is made up of non-prospects.

Besides, I don’t think they have no value. I think their value is in how they reflect the organizational philosophy of hitting, i.e., stressing two-strike contact hitting, which runs counter to current thinking about how to construct effective, winning offenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TigerNation said:

The majority of those teams are non prospects, so those numbers really have no value.

Maybe, maybe not.

Yes, there are non prospects throughout. At the same time, I would think that a system wide change would gradually improve numbers from season to season.

Share this post


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

Maybe, maybe not.

Yes, there are non prospects throughout. At the same time, I would think that a system wide change would gradually improve numbers from season to season.

That is an interesting question. There are something like 200 guys spread across a minor league system. If you get 2 guys per year to the majors out of that you are doing great. I don't know how good a system has to be as a whole if you are good at picking a few top guys. It make sense they would track together, but does it really correlate strongly or not?

Share this post


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

Maybe, maybe not.

Yes, there are non prospects throughout. At the same time, I would think that a system wide change would gradually improve numbers from season to season.

That would be a valid criticisms about their overall talent acquisition and development, not that they don't understand or value plate discipline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TigerNation said:

That would be a valid criticisms about their overall talent acquisition and development, not that they don't understand or value plate discipline.

Fair enough.

They need to figure out a better way at all aspects of this building from within.  Identifying.  Acquiring.  Developing.  And hopefully eventually maintaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

Is it a top 10 one though?  Fangraphs has us at 19th despite us probably graduating fewer prospects of any significance the past couple years than any other team.  Not saying their list is gospel but most others are behind a paywall so I don't know where else to look.   

I'm not an expert, I've seen as high as 8th even in the last couple weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is frankly absurd that Avila has held onto the job as long as he had. Ilitch fired DD as the relationship cooled and kept Avila on bc 1) he told Ilitch they could turn this around next year with some key moves and 2) Ilitch was comfortable with Avila everything else for the most part. 

It was basically a case of a VP stepping up to finish a President's term after he had been killed. That term was over in 2017 after it was clear the competitive window had closed and the Mike Illitch/DD era of big spending and winning was over. 

If Chris Ilitch was really plugged in, or had any key outside advisors, they would have certainly told him to axe Avila and to poach an upper level guy from an advanced organization, as Brewers, Twins and Giants have all recently done with some success. 

If he had done that, we'd currently be in year 2 of a real rebuild and I think we'd all be feeling a lot better about the future. 

The Tigers system is better than in the past, but how could it not be? We've traded JV, JD, Upton and others and picked inside the top 10 in 3 of the past 4 years. 

There only seem to be 3 consensus top 100 guys in the system, which, not coincidentally, are the first round draft choices in the 3 years we picked in the top 10. 2 of those players are pitchers (high risk) and the other is a high school bat (high risk). 

We're stuck with Avila now, for at least the next couple of years. This deadline may be his last best chance (outside of the draft) to add some impact talent to the system, which might mean last best chance to get the core of players we need to start winning in 22-23.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

That is an interesting question. There are something like 200 guys spread across a minor league system. If you get 2 guys per year to the majors out of that you are doing great. I don't know how good a system has to be as a whole if you are good at picking a few top guys. It make sense they would track together, but does it really correlate strongly or not?

I would think that obviously the eventual major leaguers are going’s to help move team results, at least incrementally.  I would think that even enough of the minor league filler would show enough improvement along the way to move results as well.  And of course there will be filler that doesn’t improve, but not enough to keep the overall results stagnant.

Share this post


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

It is frankly absurd that Avila has held onto the job as long as he had. Ilitch fired DD as the relationship cooled and kept Avila on bc 1) he told Ilitch they could turn this around next year with some key moves and 2) Ilitch was comfortable with Avila everything else for the most part. 

It was basically a case of a VP stepping up to finish a President's term after he had been killed. That term was over in 2017 after it was clear the competitive window had closed and the Mike Illitch/DD era of big spending and winning was over. 

If Chris Ilitch was really plugged in, or had any key outside advisors, they would have certainly told him to axe Avila and to poach an upper level guy from an advanced organization, as Brewers, Twins and Giants have all recently done with some success. 

If he had done that, we'd currently be in year 2 of a real rebuild and I think we'd all be feeling a lot better about the future. 

The Tigers system is better than in the past, but how could it not be? We've traded JV, JD, Upton and others and picked inside the top 10 in 3 of the past 4 years. 

There only seem to be 3 consensus top 100 guys in the system, which, not coincidentally, are the first round draft choices in the 3 years we picked in the top 10. 2 of those players are pitchers (high risk) and the other is a high school bat (high risk). 

We're stuck with Avila now, for at least the next couple of years. This deadline may be his last best chance (outside of the draft) to add some impact talent to the system, which might mean last best chance to get the core of players we need to start winning in 22-23.

 

I doubt that everyone would be happy with a rebuild right now regardless of who is in charge.  Regardless of who is at the helm, it isn’t a quick two year redo.  Not without some basis of talent in the minors.  I think we can all agree that the system was just about as bereft of talent as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said above I'm no expert on farm systems.   I do consider myself pretty good with people and employees based on owning and running multiple businesses over a 30 year span.  I think ChrisI is trying to give AA time to finish what he started.  The very thought that they don't care about winning is absurd, that's when they're making $$ at the ballpark and in related businesses.  I remain a firm believer in letting the wave hit from Toledo/Erie - if they don't pan out then fire Avila and give the next guy a chance.   But to call the rebuild a failure at this point is premature IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Casimir said:

I would think that obviously the eventual major leaguers are going’s to help move team results, at least incrementally.  I would think that even enough of the minor league filler would show enough improvement along the way to move results as well.  And of course there will be filler that doesn’t improve, but not enough to keep the overall results stagnant.

look at it from the pitching standpoint. If you have one pitcher at each level each year that is going to make the majors that would be an awesomely strong pipeline, but that is still only 20% of your rotation at each level - the team could be pretty bad. So overall system winning record and the strength of the development pipeline may correlate, it's logical, but they certainly don't have to. Another factor is a team philosophy on how hard to push developing players. If a team believes in holding players back longer vs promoting them early, that will also have an effect on system winning percentage at each level, but would mean almost nothing in terms of a difference in one system vs the other in value to their major league team. Also at AAA, a team actually making money in their market may be spending more on their older minor league 'professionals' - the Hessman types, which again could drive their winning rate without affecting the MLB pipeline.

So I could be convinced, but there are a lots of confounding factors, I'd have to see that someone actually worked up the data and showed that there was a strong relationship.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

It is frankly absurd that Avila has held onto the job as long as he had. Ilitch fired DD as the relationship cooled and kept Avila on bc 1) he told Ilitch they could turn this around next year with some key moves and 2) Ilitch was comfortable with Avila everything else for the most part. 

It was basically a case of a VP stepping up to finish a President's term after he had been killed. That term was over in 2017 after it was clear the competitive window had closed and the Mike Illitch/DD era of big spending and winning was over. 

If Chris Ilitch was really plugged in, or had any key outside advisors, they would have certainly told him to axe Avila and to poach an upper level guy from an advanced organization, as Brewers, Twins and Giants have all recently done with some success. 

If he had done that, we'd currently be in year 2 of a real rebuild and I think we'd all be feeling a lot better about the future. 

The Tigers system is better than in the past, but how could it not be? We've traded JV, JD, Upton and others and picked inside the top 10 in 3 of the past 4 years. 

There only seem to be 3 consensus top 100 guys in the system, which, not coincidentally, are the first round draft choices in the 3 years we picked in the top 10. 2 of those players are pitchers (high risk) and the other is a high school bat (high risk). 

We're stuck with Avila now, for at least the next couple of years. This deadline may be his last best chance (outside of the draft) to add some impact talent to the system, which might mean last best chance to get the core of players we need to start winning in 22-23.

I always like posts like this. You know the ones that list all our guys as high risk. And who everybody else is somehow more safe.

And says we should have hired X from some winning team, cause thats what the Brewers, Twins and Giants have done. Except, the giants suck and ignores also those teams that hired guys from winning groups that you know, suck.

Seems like someone had his mind made up on Chris and Avila before they even got started and eveyrthing is looked through that prism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

I always like posts like this. You know the ones that list all our guys as high risk. And says we should have hired X from some winning team, cause thats what the Brewers, Twins and Giants have done. Except, the giants suck and ignores also those teams that hired guys from winning groups that you know, suck.

Seems like someone had his mind made up on Chris and Avila before they even got started and eveyrthing is looked through that prism. 

GHWB was RR's VP, any similarity of approach? Jeff Immelt was Neutron Jack's Welch's understudy at GE, any similarity of results? Quinn cut his teeth with that Pats, he does look or is trying to look similar. I could list a few dozen more, but the point is that it may be fair to paint an understudy with his bosses properties, or it may not. Again, another thing where there is no necessary correlation. It really doesn't tell you much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...