RandyMarsh

I'd love to have Garrett but given the likely cost it will take to get him I just don't know if it would be a wise decision long term. If it's "only" 2 firsts I could live with that but I don't want to sacrifice a handful or more picks including top ones for any 1 non QB, no matter how great that player is.

I'm a bit concerned about Bregman going forward given his subpar season and age but unless he pulls a complete Javy he should still be an upgrade for the Tigers and given that I'm hoping we sign him. A couple years down the road we may have egg on our face but I'll cross that bridge when the time comes.

That's how I am with Manning, with Mize I still have a sliver of hope.

If the picks had protections I'd do it just for the upside but without them I think it's too big of a risk for a player with his injury history and build. If he and/or Cade were to have an injury riddled season the first rounder will almost certainly be in the top 10 and likely top 5 depending on the ping pong balls.

Tigers at number 3 on Kiley McDaniels/ESPN latest system rankings.

Just looking at a few of his years and like I thought he had the rebounds and assists but didn't hit the scoring part. In January of 00 he did hit the scoring part going 28.8 but only had 5 boards and 5 assists.

I wonder what Hill's best stretch was, felt like there was a time where he was getting triple doubles once or twice a week. Don't think he ever put up that type of scoring though, feels like he was more in the mid to low 20s when he was at his best.

Yep, Kobe for an aging Divac, Gasol for Kwame Brown and some picks, AD for Lonzo and Ingram and now this. And this is all in just the past 30 years, I'm sure there were countless examples before and others I'm forgetting about. Not to mention they almost got a prime Chris Paul for relative peanuts if not for the owners actually stepping in and forcing Stern to veto it, if I'm remembering the details correctly.

I remember Humberto Sanchez was ranked by some in the top 50 overall but he was traded for Sheffield, can't remember any other top 100 guys in that Maybin/Miller era.

Like somebody on here said the other day, this team talent wise is essentially the Wizards outside of Cade yet here they are at .500.

SGA just finished the 1st quarter with 21 points on 7-8 shooting. Not bad.

Agreed. I do think though that we tend to underscore how good this team as when Greene, Carpenter and Meadows were all in the lineup. I'm going off memory so I'm sure I'll be off some but IIRC the stat correctly they played at over a 100 win pace in the 50 some games they all played. Small sample and given the injury histories between them getting them to all play 150 games would be pretty fortunate but the team did play to an elite level with them so just having them stay more healthy could lead to a team improvement. Also you would have to expect an improvement from Keith and even though he wasn't great a full season of Sweeney at SS should be an upgrade over what we had last year.

Yep. I always loved the red alternates, even back to the glory days of the Pistons in the 00s. The last Pistons jersey I owned was actually a Chauncey red jersey.

Any particular players you have in mind? Trying to think off the top of my head and I'd imagine it would have to be from a non contending team and there arent alot of elite players out there on teams like that, particularly younger ones. Guys like Melo, Hali, Trae and Cade come to mind but I don't think none of them are viewed as true upper echelon type guys. You could maybe say ANT cause I don't think Minnesota is a real contender but I don't think they have any interest in trading him. There's Maxey as well but again I don't know if that is the type of guy you had in mind. Would the Mavs dare trade Luka for a Godfather type offer?

Well TIgers PR just put out that it is indeed Faedo. Wonder if he will get claimed?

Kreidler would be my choice. I just don't see any realistic scenario where he would provide any real help for the team, not to mention the fact I can't see him getting claimed.

Kiley McDaniel of ESPN put out his preseason top 100 today and only 4 Tigers made the list...good news though is that 3 were in the top 10 with Jobe at 7, Clark 9 and McGonigle 10. Rainer was the other one coming in at number 79. Surprised to not see Lirano or Brucieno. He must have questions about their defensive positioning going forward.

To me it comes down to just how much stock you put into potentially getting the 6th seed and making the "real" playoffs. Barring something crazy you're almost surely going to lose that series but maybe you can make it a relatively tough series and go 5 or 6 games with some going down to the wire. Would getting guys like Cade and Ausar that type of experience along with gauging how they perform in such situations be worth a late 1st round pick? Also got to factor in the possibility that for atleast a short period you may generate actual fan interest around the team for the first time in awhile. If you don't think things like that mean much or will help the team much in the future then it should be a no brainer to trade him, get the 1st and just play out the rest of the season with hopes of getting a play in spot.

Malik Willis is a close comp with Hooker in terms of situation if he were to be traded this offseason. Both were QBs drafted in the 3rd round despite being projected to go earlier, Willis was entering his 3rd season like Hooker is this year, Willis had 66 career passing attempts so extremely small sample and Willis went for a 7th. It's not apples to apples since Willis was exposed more than Hooker has been but it was still such a small sample that it shouldn't have carried too much weight, especially given the fact that he was deemed to be more raw coming out of school.

I like the signing but wish we could have gotten Yates on a 1 year deal as well. Dodgers got him for 1/13, wonder how much we would have needed to offer to get him to come here instead?

On the topic of BPA when teams say that do they literally take who the best player is in a vacuum or is need/"position value" part of the formula they use when ranking the players? So if its the latter they very well are going to take the player they have at the top of the board everytime but part of the formula for that player getting there could be because of need.

Yep I remember that.

I don't think players care all that much about the actual city, especially baseball where you play essentially everyday during the season so with no free time anyway it doesn't matter whether you're in Detroit or Paris. Also your off-season is in the winter so you miss the worst of the weather as well. What they do care about is the franchise in general, they can handle a sub par city if the franchise is a winner but if it isn't they aren't going to choose to play there for any significant length of time unless they are heavily compesitated.

One thing we know is if Goff does well Morton will get credit, if he doesn't Goff will get blamed.

Yeah the thing about h/r splits is that in general players tend to hit better at home regardless of their home park.