Tiger337

I am in the minority as I think most fans would agree with you. However, I just wouldn't see a team that played .500 ball for a 162 games as a real champion. Sure, I'd be entertained by the playoff run, but I would look back and know that they were a mediocre team that got lucky in the end. It would be a different feeling for me from 1984 when they were a great team from start to finish and unquestionably the best in baseball.

It would be a really weak division title and even if they somehow managed to win the World Series, that's not the way I want it to happen. When they win it all some day, I want it to be with a great memorable team.

It probably depends on your offense too, but it definitely makes sense in general.

Someone did a study of hockey goalies who were hot and cold and determined that inconsistency was preferable to consistency in the team's win total. Tango theorized that the same was true of pitchers. You figure a team is going to win most of the starts when a starting pitcher gives up 0 or 1 run, but giving up an average number of runs every game is not going to be as good especially if the team can't hit. Tango explained it as the difference between 1 run and 4 runs is bigger than the difference between 4 runs and 7 runs. You are going to lose most of the 4-7 run games, but your chances of winning goes up a lot when you go from 4 runs to 1 run. So, you want to get as many of those really low run games as you can even if you have games where you get pounded.

LOL, Baez. They set up the last two pitches about a foot outside.

True. I am thinking more of the organization's mantra of positional versatility in general. If your roster is set up so that you have multiple guys playing all over the place, it may help you with offensive platoons but you also might be sacrificing defense.

I believe it's hard to excel at multiple positions in the same season. It's nice to have positional versatility, but there may be such a thing as overusing it.

The 70s... Brian Downing.

I agree he should be at 2B nost often, but I really doubt what position he plays affects his OPS much if at all.

Well, if he doesn't make a decision in the next few weeks, then the decision would have been made for him!

I wouldn't be opposed to an extension, but prior to this year he had a history of injuries so I don't know that he is in great physical shape. You are always taking a chance with pitchers on multi-year deals, but it's a chance you can take if you anticipate contention over the course of the deal.

Yes, the play doesn't tell me anything about his skills. Cabrera can probably make one play like that if he gets lucky.

I don't know where he started at the beginning of the play, but based on the timing of the video and the fact that he was waiting for the ball at third base, I would guess that he was shaded very far towards the third base line to start the play. You really can't tell anything about his ability from one play.

I'd vote for a petrified dinosaur bone over Donald Trump. I don't like that Biden is so old, but all the other main candidates are so awful that there is no choice other than Biden. I am still hoping somebody reasonable and younger emerges.

It was never proven that Bagwell or Pudge took PEDs. Like you, I think the majority of players took PEDs in the era prior to stricter testing and penalties. So, I don't care about PED use so much during that period. Once they had strict penalties in place and players like Ramirez and Ortiz still got caught taking them, I can see where they might be judged more harshly. Ortiz got in because the media liked him. Ramirez didn't because they disliked him which of course is unfair.

Remember when Trump wrote a book?

I never understood why Pat Underwood started game 2. Was there a good reason for that or was it just Anderson trying to the smartest guy in the room?

There is no rule against your daughters (who also have zero home runs) playing in the majors

It's going to be 8 four team divisions and there will be 8 wild cards. Always remember that "Americans love brackets"

I liked him because I didn't notice him too much. He just blended in naturally. Dickerson doesn't need a lot of analysis in the background.

Adduci didn't like that either.

I remember at the end, he was being really critical of the organization. I was not sure whether he did that in response to the Verlander incident knowing that he was gone anyway or whether they dumped him for being critcial and used the Verlander incident as an excuse.

I think he was blackballed because he was critical of the Tigers organization. On another note...On two occasions, Fenech took my blog post and used it as his entire Free Press article. He gave me full credit, so I loved it but it was strange that he did that.

I haven't subscribed for a really long time. I thought Caputo was doing it for a while. Morosi was one of the Tigers best beat writers ever.