Jump to content

chasfh

Are the Ilitches the Right Owners For the Detroit Tigers?

Do you think the Ilitches should sell the Detroit Tigers?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think the Ilitches should sell the Detroit Tigers?

    • Yes, I've seen enough and would prefer the Ilitches sell as soon as possible.
      11
    • No, I like the Ilitches as owners and would like them to continue on for the foreseeable future.
      5


Recommended Posts

Here are the pros and cons of each side, as I see them.

Pros:

  1. The Ilitches have delighted Tiger fans by guiding the team to five postseasons in 25 years, including four ALCS and two World Series.
  2. They brought the team to the playoffs and Series after their first rebuilding process.
  3. They guided the team to four consecutive Central Division titles with the best big league winning percentage overall from 2011-14, tantamount to a dynasty.
  4. They are proven spenders when they believe they have a chance to win a ring.
  5. They successfully traded for and signed several All-Stars to productive tenures.
  6. They drafted a future Hall of Famer (Verlander) and another 3x All-Star (Granderson).
  7. They properly value continuity in their front office.
  8. According to Al Avila, the Tigers have perhaps the fourth-best analytics department in Baseball.

Cons:

  1. The Ilitches have run the team through two long and arduous rebuilds, including the current one, so far yielding four seasons under .400 (through 2018).
  2. The Randy Smith portion of the rebuild was a failure, and the 2006 team was basically a one-off, as they fell back to last in 2008.
  3. The division was weak during their division title run—during no season did the Tigers ever have even the third-best record in the AL, raising doubt as to whether it could be considered a dynasty.
  4. Only Mike the father has proven to be a spender, and he’s not there anymore.
  5. They signed too many bad contracts and traded too much good talent for poor returns.
  6. Despite two prominent draft hits, their drafts have been poor overall, and they’ve been a non-factor in the international markets.
  7. They overvalue loyalty in their front office.
  8. Three seasons since the announcement of “Caesar”, its success has to all appearances not yet been reflected in team philosophies or performance at either the major or minor league levels
     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just made this point regarding the Lakers in the basketball thread, but it bears repeating. There is no such thing as the "Ilitches." There was Mike Ilitch, and now there is Chris Ilitch, and any similarity is purely accidental. 

The Lakers went from the paradigm for NBA franchises to pretty much a running joke under the same family. The Lions still haven't won anything but they are still a very different franchise under Martha than they were under William.

Chris' regime should get neither any credit for his father's success nor debit for his father's failures and extrapolation of his likely path based on his father's is likely to fail.

Share this post


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

Chris' regime should get neither any credit for his father's success nor debit for his father's failures and extrapolation of his likely path based on his father's is likely to fail.

Correct.

Share this post


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

just made this point regarding the Lakers in the basketball thread, but it bears repeating. There is no such thing as the "Ilitches." There was Mike Ilitch, and now there is Chris Ilitch, and any similarity is purely accidental. 

The Lakers went from the paradigm for NBA franchises to pretty much a running joke under the same family. The Lions still haven't won anything but they are still a very different franchise under Martha than they were under William.

Chris' regime should get neither any credit for his father's success nor debit for his father's failures and extrapolation of his likely path based on his father's is likely to fail.

A good number of people in here believe that, as the owner steward, the son will be just like the father. I think it’s been pretty well established that I am not one of those people. 

That said, I maintain that use of “the Ilitches” is proper, because regardless of the personality differences between Mike, Chris and any other family member, the team will stay in the family until it is not, and if Chris doesn’t sell before he dies, it’ll merely pass on to another family member after he expires. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got spoiled because Mike was desperate to win.   

 

That's over now, and the chances of getting back to that, with just about any owner, is very slim.   

 

The economics of baseball are going to be very interesting in the future.   Younger people are just not into the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I would clarify in your “pro” section is the use of the word “they”. I don’t think there was a “they”. It was him. Only him.  The Tigers were owned and run by Mike Ilitch. It wasn’t a family run business like the Red Wings were   

I don’t like Chris Ilitch   I don’t like what they’ve done to the downtown areas they own   They get too much credit

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Dan Gilbert would be more willing to do whatever it takes to build a winner than Chris Illitch will ever be. He can be overly emotional but he wants to win

Share this post


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

A good number of people in here believe that, as the owner steward, the son will be just like the father. I think it’s been pretty well established that I am not one of those people. 

That said, I maintain that use of “the Ilitches” is proper, because regardless of the personality differences between Mike, Chris and any other family member, the team will stay in the family until it is not, and if Chris doesn’t sell before he dies, it’ll merely pass on to another family member after he expires. 

I don't believe that Chris will follow Mike's footsteps.  I don't think that is necessarily good or bad.

But even if he did, look, it ain't like what Mike did was foolproof.  He had good teams, he had bad teams.  That happens to a lot of owners, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, leflore said:

I think Dan Gilbert would be more willing to do whatever it takes to build a winner than Chris Illitch will ever be. He can be overly emotional but he wants to win

Dan Gilbert is probably focusing on how to walk and talk right now.     Not saying that to be cruel or make fun, but he's got other concerns at the moment.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Dan Gilbert is probably focusing on how to walk and talk right now.     Not saying that to be cruel or make fun, but he's got other concerns at the moment.  

Yeah, I think Dan Gilbert's days of acquisitions are essentially over.   It's much more likely we see him beginning to divest himself of assets and taking life easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not but we are stuck with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Not understanding the relevance of the question.

Biggs, don’t you know relevance sometimes isn’t necessarily  relevant. 🙄

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Not understanding the relevance of the question.

Everything sucks right now and we're all going to die.  I think that's the jist of it.

Share this post


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

Yeah, I think Dan Gilbert's days of acquisitions are essentially over.   It's much more likely we see him beginning to divest himself of assets and taking life easy.

I don't think he's the kind that takes life easy.............ever.     We don't know how severe things are, but it wouldn't shock me to see him back in the game at some point,  on some level.        

It's like telling a dying Bo Schembechler not to talk about the #1 vs. #2 Ohio State vs. Michigan game.    Staying silent about it would have killed him faster.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Not understanding the relevance of the question.

Feel free to not participate, then. The rest of us who like expressing our opinions about the team and its ownership can feel free to continue doing so.

Share this post


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

One thing I would clarify in your “pro” section is the use of the word “they”. I don’t think there was a “they”. It was him. Only him.  The Tigers were owned and run by Mike Ilitch. It wasn’t a family run business like the Red Wings were   

I don’t like Chris Ilitch   I don’t like what they’ve done to the downtown areas they own   They get too much credit

 

Organizations are organic bodies unto themselves, and the guiding principles of the various people who lead them across the years, different though they may be, all accrue to its legacy, so I think it’s fair to refer to them as “they”.

That said, I agree that it was solely Mike’s domain when he was alive and in charge, but even it it wasn’t a family-run business with him at the helm, it was still a family-owned business, and I wouldn’t doubt if Chris piped up with his opinion here and there. After all, a lot of those high dollar contracts came out of his inheritance, so he had skin in the business. Either way, it appears to be solely Chris’s domain now. 

Speaking of getting credit, it looks like he’s getting less and less these days, based on reporting I’ve seen about the broken (or at least as-yet-fulfilled) promises set forth by the District Detroit project.

Share this post


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

Feel free to not participate, then. The rest of us who like expressing our opinions about the team and its ownership can feel free to continue doing so.

Thank you for allowing me and us to do that?

To answer the question as posed, I frankly have no clue -> no opinion.  I find it too open ended to speak intelligently about.

Share this post


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

I don't believe that Chris will follow Mike's footsteps.  I don't think that is necessarily good or bad.

But even if he did, look, it ain't like what Mike did was foolproof.  He had good teams, he had bad teams.  That happens to a lot of owners, doesn't it?

He sure did. The pros and the cons above don’t represent my opinion insomuch as they represent what I believe reasonable pros and cons would be. I tried as much as possible to present two sides of each coin.

I was nothing like an unabashed fan of Mike Ilitch. I enjoyed the thrill of bringing in top talent and winning divisions and going to playoffs and World Series as much as anyone, but I sure didn’t enjoy the dozen years of wandering in the desert to get to that point, and I certainly wasn’t blind to the cost we were going to have to pay the piper once the team aged out of that era. Now that we’re here, it stinks, and I wouldn’t feel any better about it if Mike were alive today. I have my doubts that it would be going any differently under Mike than under Chris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Thank you for allowing me and us to do that?

To answer the question as posed, I frankly have no clue -> no opinion.  I find it too open ended to speak intelligently about.

That’s a strange response.

I was only defending against your challenge to the legitimacy of the question. It’s nothing more than (what I believe is) an interesting topic to discuss, the kind of thing forums like this are created for, so I posed the question. If no one wants to discuss it then the thread will wither and die, as the marketplace dictates. Nothing personal. I’m not itching for a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest Tom Selleck buy the team. The late Jonathan Quayle Higgins would have been an excellent G.M. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Chris Ilitch is being cheap--I'm fairly  confident they'll spend once they think the team is ready to complete.  They are clearly building the team through the draft and  pitching and will supplement  to get position players through free agency.  

A guy can dream, can't he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chasfh said:

Pros:

4. They are proven spenders when they believe they have a chance to win a ring.

No ... "They" are NOT proven spenders.  Only Mike was a proven spender.  Thus far to-date, ..Chris I is a proven non-spender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chasfh said:

Cons:

  1. The Ilitches have run the team through two long and arduous rebuilds, including the current one, so far yielding four seasons under .400 (through 2018).

"...two long and arduous rebuilds" .. .. ..is not accurate.

Chris Ilitch has been in 'rebuild mode' only since July/August 2017 when the Tigers traded JD, JW & AA, JUp, and JV.  Prior to that ..the organization was still in the process of attempting to compete for the playoffs.

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...