1984Echoes

I think you're missing the point. 2nd and long runs are: a) to set up a 3rd down play; which could be play action, misdirection, or a pass, or even another run depending on circumstances. 2nd and long runs are not for the pleasure of fans; they are for setting up the defense the way an OC/ HC wants it to be set up. Quit complaining about 2nd and long runs and "key" in on 3rd down conversions. THAT's the key. Or conversion % if you're just looking at stats (during the game the conversions are more important.) b) They still: take heat off the QB/ eat clock/ keep it conservative if that is what is needed/ wear down a defense/ MAY even set up a play that is NOT in this series but later in the game, during a key drive/ etc. Just my 2 cents.

Bad defense can be hidden, up to a point.

A team also runs those run plays to: 1) Keep the defense off of the passer (so they're not pinning their ears back and teeing off on the QB). 2) Wear on the defense, as you've mentioned above 3) Set up future plays. Which don't even have to be play action. Simply getting a defense moving in the direction you want them to, because they've seen this line movement before. Oh WAIT! Ben just dialed up another trick play by moving the defense where he WANTS them to go and then going the Other Direction!!! 4) Run time off the clock. Etc. There's a hundred reason to run a run play and they are not all/ always to gain 6 yards a pop. The stream of invective towards Ben and these running plays is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. As if the complainant actually knew anything anyways.

The only problem with this, and generally, I agree with you... Is that Riley Greene might be 100% DH the first month or two... I don't think he will be so that's not a block on Malloy... but that's the only argument as of today I believe that makes sense against Malloy on the opening day roster. But I think, otherwise, that Malloy is pretty much a definite (I just don't want to commit to 100%) and, just as you've outlined, in the #1 Lineup spot, leading off, Day 1.

Hi Stephanie, Moderate Republican Representative xxxx of XX, District xx. I will never vote for Fascist Jim Jordan. Not even if Hell Froze over. I wish to live in a Democracy, not a Fascist Dictatorship. Tell Sean Hannity and Jim Jordan to go **** themselves. Just wanted to make certain I was not unclear about my position. Just to reiterate: Jim Jordan can go **** himself.

I don't think he beats out anyone ahead of him. If Bigbie makes the opening day roster, we had a crapload of injuries in ST. Otherwise, I'm saying never for Bigbie on the opening day roster 2024. Same with Hurter... if you note my most recent post just above...

Also... NO. Hurter is NOT an opening day 2024 starter for Detroit.

I agree with that as well... on Malloy. I just don't think they will shut out any rookie in spring training that shows enough to make the roster. But on Malloy... Remember, we no longer have a locked in DH. So there is room for Malloy to be a part-time OF'er and a lot-of-the-time DH... Even with competition from Baddoo/ Vierling on making the roster... And even with Greene maybe holding down DH for the most part the first month or two of the season. Wait: I think I just talked myself into Malloy needing to beat out at least Baddoo... otherwise, even if he has a good spring he may be squeezed on the opening day roster at least until Greene is more of an OF'er than a DH... Vierling can play anywhere... Baddoo & Malloy are mostly limited to LF.

I don't see any possible way that Bigbie opens in Detroit, so in agreement here But I don't agree that they will have any "limit" on the number of rookies on the roster. I don't think they are afraid of turnover, or talent... so if Jung wins 3B in spring training, and Keith 2B, and Malloy LF... Then we're starting with 4 rookies on the opening day roster (including Parker as you've mentioned...); I think there were reasons for holding these guys in the minors this year, and not pushing them to MLB. But I don't think that will hold next spring training. IMO.

Compher looks like he's going to be a good add too. ADB, Compher, Sprong, Gostisbehere all contributing outta the gate... Making Stevie Y look good early... And the Red Wings...

Jobe is pitching tonight... if anyone is interested...

Also... sometimes a player has learned all that they can, regardless whether it's AAA or AA. And the only way they are going to master, or learn, MLB, is to actually, you know... play in MLB.

Some team will take a flyer on him. I would expect almost nothing in return... but again... Some team will take a flyer on him. It happens every year.

I wouldn't want to trade a strength into a weakness. But we already have Turnbull, who I think is not wanted in Detroit. He already is a starting pitcher trade probability. There is almost no free agent bats worthwhile to sign this year. Matt Chapman (who is too old/ will be too expensive/ and command too many years/ and Harris has already stated that he will NOT sign a FA that blocks any of these kids); and Lee Hung-Soo, ands that's about it. Other than those two, we shouldn't throw good money at crappy bats, IMO. But rather, spend good money on good pitching, and look to add bats using alternative methods, IMO. I don't even believe that we need to add any bats. I want to see what the kids do first, including in the field, before making any decisions. I mean... it makes sense to me to do that. If we sign FA pitching, that adds to our depth. I did not say that we MUST trade starting pitching; what I stated is that I believe teams will all be "banging on our door" for our pitching. I don't pretend to know the answers on how to approach this; I would leave that up to Harris to decide on whether to pull the trigger, or not, and for what. I'm just sayin'... I think teams will be banging on our doors. If that revives the Dodgers or any other trade, and that means sending out Lange, Turnbull, Manning, or any combination of pitchers on our roster and any other parts that are required in a trade... it wouldn't be unexpected by me. We have tradable assets: lots of controllable young talent. If a trade comes down this offseason, I won't be surprised. Just sayin'...

I never said we had an excess of pitching. I said other teams will PERCEIVE us to have an excess, and try to take advantage. Last point/ question: What do we do with Spencer Turnbull?

Which means it would be a futures trade, on both sides... Any team trading for a Skubal or Manning or Turnbull or whomever is betting that they can get a higher level of performance out of that player. Either by betting on better health, or refining a pitch or two, or whatever... The reason I believe our starters will be in demand is that I think other teams will look at our rotation and come to the conclusion that we have an excess of starting, young, controllable pitchers. Young, controllable, starters have value. Not Soto or Tatis value (unless part of a much larger package...); but individually, tradeable value. But.. that value will also be for futures IMO such as a blocked AA or AAA guy, plus younger "tickets". Any team looking at the Tigers is going to be interested in our pitching because they'll see an excess and try to take advantage of that. Let's say a team simply wants an Olson or a Gipson-Long or Brieske or Faedo, to fill the back end of their rotation... what would they offer for that? A blocked AAA 3B'man? And... if we were to sign a veteran, Yamamoto or anyone else... that just adds to that perception. IMO.

So take some reading and comprehension classes since you seem to be unable to distinguish these differences.

Walker has already shown himself to be a crappy 3B'man, which is why he's playing the OF. If you're trading for him for the OF, maybe... But if this trade is only to solve our 3B issue, Walker is a WORSE option than Keith or Jung.

Baddoo, Malloy & Carpenter may have a good chance at time in the OF early in the season as Greene works his way back (not counting if Harris makes a big trade for an OF'er or signs someone like Lee Jung-Hoo...). But by midseason as Greene gets back out onto the OF... Baddoo might be the first casualty... but I think 2nd is that Malloy spends a lot of time at DH. Moreso than Carpenter as I think he will be holding on to RF for awhile, and not so much DH. But... we'll see.

I don't know about that... Trump and his fascist ****wad followers have **** all over beefy rules of law and puny norms equally.

Early offseason prediction: Our starters... almost all of them... will be HOT Commodities, even with the available FA's floating around. So I'll predict at least one of our starters gets traded for something Harris wants on this team. My guess is it's more Manning than Skubal... but I'm not willing to take a firm position on any of those guys. I think it could be anybody... Just a guess.

It's not a ridiculous process if a Party has all of its heads on straight. Which has been 100% true the past 230 years. Until this year and the Republican Party.

Dems hold the Ace-in-the-Hole: https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-house-republican-wants-help-194848280.html The ability to actually get a Speaker elected. "Come talk to us, Republicans."

Maxx Crosby is a LB'er, not a DE... that's why I'd be more open to adding him. He's explosive and dominating and a game-changer... I would absolutely consider adding him as long as the cost is not outrageous... But yes, CB is a higher priority due to need. Also... back to the edge... if the right guy is available at the right price, I would NOT say no. I think Montez Sweat is that guy. Other depth guys to think about: a vet WR like DJ Chark. Might be better depth than Jones so that's the thought. A depth O-Lineman if Holmes/ Campbell felt there was a need. Probably not, just sayin'... And always on the lookout for RB depth because health is always precarious there...

Yes... for the following reasons: And I think Shinzaki is correct that Raymond or similar might also need to be included. My overall reasoning is that I am loathe to trade away skillsets that the Org is deficient on. I am certainly willing to trade excess, and the excess can even be a "better" talent... I also noticed you included Kasper, not Danielson. Isn't Danielson going to be the guy the Canucks demand in trade for Elias? Not Kasper? So... my quibbles with this trade are: 1) I expect Raymond to go through a huge upswing. Too young, too early in the NHL to know what his top level could be; which means we'd be selling low. If Shinzaki is correct and it must include Raymond I say no, not because Raymond is better than Elias... but that he could reach a point/ game, or even better, and we would have given him away prematurely. I guess that's the point of the trade from the Canucks point-of-view, the upside. But I'm loathe to give up on guys too early; I just think it's really dumb to do that. It would have to be someone else that we send to the Canucks, not Raymond. Someone that looks maxed out but is still young enough with talent that the Canucks want and Stevie is OK with losing... I'm guessing, but I think Stevie also says a hard NO if it's Raymond. 2) Danielson is showing better than Kasper, but just as importantly, is a RH'd Center that we have zero depth with. If we have 15 LH'ed Centerman in the Org, and 2 RH'ed - I know they're all at different talent levels/ ages, etc... - then I'm not trading Danielson. It has to be Kasper, per your suggestion. 3) Same thing with Pellikka... It's not that we don't have any RH'ed Defenseman in the Org, we do... But no one with the explosive offense/skillset that Pellikka has. That's the rarity that I just can NOT give up. I'm a hard no on Pellikka. I'd rather give them TWO defenseman, their choice of Wallinder, Johansson, Johansson, Tuomisto, Viro, Buium, Gibson, etc... The draft pick I don't care about... but not a 1st... that seems to be a bit too much...