chasfh

Lol Reese Olson: “Olson joined the Tigers’ rotation in 2023 and has been a fixture ever since.” Yeah, a fixture on the injured list.

And that may be the calculation Harris is making right now.

Like the few prospects we got for Verlander and J.D. Martinez?

Which nine guys would you have starting in the same position every night, and which four guys would you keep on the bench?

Or at least a patch that says “Hon”.

It’s hilarious how Basallo, the Orioles’ catcher, is being so lippy with the umpire. What is he hoping to accomplish with that?

And the chances of all four of them returning to 100% or better of pre-injury condition is almost zilch.

Did McStinky think there were two out already? Looks like it to me.

RA9-WAR is very good for describing what happened with pitchers, since it is results-oriented and doesn’t factor out BABIP or LOB. When I do backward-looking pitcher analysis, I typically use RA9-WAR instead of WAR.

WAR can be useful for projecting future production since it tends to be process-oriented, whereas results can be skewed by luck, and sometimes a lot.

I just think that’s a lot less likely in this prospect-hugging era.

FEIW, I don’t think Biden was clinically senile at the end.

By “this” I mean the distraction, not the bombshell.

Granted.

Harris was the cipher of a vice president that every modern VP outside of Cheney has been. Even J.D. Couch****er is a big zero as far as that goes, no matter how loud he becomes or how many news cycles he hijacks. There is almost nothing in their vice presidency a candidate can point to and say that makes them qualified to be president, and Harris was no exception.

This might be it.

I was thinking about what the cost to the person would be, and while I agree with everything you say here, I also believe that no major media organization would hire a loose cannon like that, so any person who does this would have to have the strength of their convictions that they could carve out a living in the self-publishing space (e.g., podcast, Substack).

Last I looked, Republicans still have a majority in both houses even after the primaries.

I know a high percentage of people here are on board right now with selling Skubal, some of them believing so irrespective of how we do going forward. I have been opposed to this, and as a separate idea, I don’t think Harris and ilitch are going to sell, mainly because I don’t think that by the time late July rolls around, our record and prospects will be so bad that we will be forced in a sell-or-else situation. I think we’d have to have a W-L that’s far lower than it is even today, and playing in the most winnable division after having gotten most of the guys on the list back, we simply won’t be both this bad and this unlucky. That said, i would be open to selling if we do find ourselves in a situation that we don’t recover and we are something like .350 on the season on July whatever-teenth. The question becomes, who do you sell, and what do you hope to get back for them? You named six guys, and five of them were hurt this year (three on the list right now), and the sixth guy is in his late 60s. When I contemplate the possible return, the word “haul” does not show up anywhere in the results. If we want any possibility of a “haul” we would have to probably sell Riley high, plus Tork and Colt for potential and controllability, at minimum. Skubal, of course, but he will not return what everyone hopes, especially if he doesn’t come back Cy Young hard for at least a month. I don’t see how anyone else gets us anything else besides lottery tickets and throw-ins.

I acknowledge I probably misunderstood you, as had I thought you were suggesting that “bad” free agent contracts (my quote marks, and open to personal interpretation) would stop if all the teams would just stop signing such players, which would require collusion; unless (again, as I misthought) you were suggesting each of the 30 teams could just decide on their own to stop signing such players by zeitgeist and the “bad” free agents contracts would just stop, which we both know would never happen. That would leave the question, knowing there will be some teams who will sign such “bad” contracts even as most teams never would, can a team who never does so compete just as effectively over the long term as teams who do sign such contracts? The first example that might fly into mind could be the Brewers, who seemingly win the NLC every year without a stratospheric payroll, but even they can’t be considered a team that never indulges in “bad” contracts, since they did sign Yelich to a 9/215 that has never looked really good since, and won’t for the next 2-2/3 seasons.

Lilacs are the best. Favorite smell on earth.

A third of the way into the season and the Tigers are now a sub-.400 team. I don’t think even tiger2022 saw that one coming. 😉

They’re an organization that built a division favorite but that still has to field a team when a lot of their good guys get injured.

And all they got was two months of Jack Flaherty so I think we got the better end of that little deal.