Tiger337

He's the 5th starter if the season started tomorrow. I am hoping they acquire someone with a track record in the off-season. They need at least 7 capable starters anyway.

I might have tried it when I was younger, but the statistical revoultion is baseball had not started at that time. Later, I was already established and making good money and reasonably happy, so there was no reason to experiment a stat analyst job in another field. Plus, as I get older, I get the feeling that a job in sports probably isn't as fun as it seems. It's still a data job. You're just applying it to a different field. I don't know that it would actually feel like a "baseball job".

Any data point is somewhat useful, but I think you actually need a couple of years full time at a position before you can get any real confidence.

The Tigers had two of those unicorns at the same time. Too bad they let them go.

I just don't know how well the metrics work on a bunch of small sample sizes. I think you'd need several years of data on someone like that.

We can expect him to acquire some devils he knows from his Cubs days.

Skubal seems to be the ace. The concern with him is that he seems like an injury risk. Having him be Freddy Peralta (someone who is very good but always seems to be on the verge of an injury) is not the worst thing though.

We just need to know who to blame when they don't get the players we want. The media will probably decide that.

That's why it's pencil and not pen. He has earned a chance to show what he can do for another year (or as long as he keeps pitching well).

I thought they might keep him based on his age. His walk rate, while still not good, is adequate this year. It is hard to judge fielding of mult-position guys with small samples at every position, but defense was a problem for him in the past, He is playing mostly OF and 3B, so maybe that works for him like Vierling.

Sale also have over 100 wins. He may have been on the IL when you heard it.

Two expansion teams and four additional playoff teams coming soon.

Most likely true, because you can't usually find enough players under 25 to build a winning team. Most acquisitions from outside the organization are going to be over 25.

I was hit in the head with a clip board by a public school teacher because I couldn't (or wouldn't because I hated the guy) answer a question when called upon. This was junior high school. I was very quiet and all the teachers tried to embarrass me into talking more which of course made me talk less. The only one who left me alone was the math teacher.

Righ now it's Skubal, Mize, Manning, Olson. Hopefully, they add a dependable veteran to the mix to replace Rodriguez. Also, hopefully none of them break before the season starts.

I don't know if Olson is for real but I can't complain about the results and he is approaching 100 IP.

True, but the same can be said of any GM. There's always stuff that they know which fans don't know (a lot of it more obscure than who Hanifee is). Same goes for Al Avila and Randy Smith.

There's still a chance.

I think the owners are the ones who want their GMs to be like the Rays (winning on a low budget). Then they find out it's not so easy and they don't like it. That's what happened in Boston.

Remember when people were saying that the Tigers shouldn't trade Lange because has so many years of control left? That argument never works for relievers.

The Rays have to do it the way they do because have such a small budget. I am amazed that they do it so well. So far, no other team has been so successful on that kind of budget.

It also works! It's just hard to do and always has been. It should however be the ideal that teams try to achieve before falling back on mixing and matching.

That's not the right way to do it. They are living in the 20th Century.

Every Italian from New Jersey.

That's the thing with relievers. They become relievers because they don't have enough pitches to start. They can get away with that in short inning stints for a while, but they tend not to peak very long.