chasfh

It feels like nothing less than a campaign to remove women from all public spheres of power and influence and releagte to them to kitchen or bedroom where, I guess, they belong or something. Except for the "ugly" butch women. Who'd wanna marry those woofers anyway amirite. They can go to work in machine shops or as theater tech or baristas or driving cabs, or else maybe expatriate to Paris where they can write impenetrable plays and smoke opium.

I assumed he was talking either free agent or trade.

There’s a plan for second base and the rotation after this year.

Yes, they all suck, aren’t full-timers, or are past their sell-by dates. Only Solano was not sub-replacement last year, and he’s 37 and played mostly third base. Committing a year to a guy just because we’ve heard of him is a high risk, because when they inevitably wash out, then what next? And then, what about next year? Like Harris’s strategy or not, it is one that is trying to since a problem for the next few years, not for a single year only to start back at square one all over again.

Correct, every one of those options is available to them. The question is which option do they go for first. Obviously, it's Option A, because they made a deal specifically to make that option happen. If that goes tits up, which option is up next depends on where we are vis a vis the Tork problem.

I think it depends on your circumstances. If you're young, making mid-five figures, and up to your eyeballs in typical young person debt, then hell yes, take the money. If you at or near retirement age and you already have 10 Ms in the bank, then why not take the coin flip?

I don't know why people think Torres is a poor hitter. He's a 112 OPS+ lifetime hitter and still only 28. He has slashed .283/.377/.623 with five bombs in 61 plate trips at Comerica. Why do people think he's weak?

Honestly, I think the only two options the Tigers are considering anymore are Bregman (hopefully only for a year), or Jace Jung now. I don't think Harris is trolling the wires for a third option. But hey, could be wrong ...

Also, as for getting a Sean Casey/Carlos Santana-type for first base, I know people hate it when they are asked this, but, who might you have in mind? Sean Casey is retired, and Carlos Santana wasn't coming here. I would have liked Christian Walker but apparently that wasn't going to work for one or the other parties, and same probably went for Pete Alonso. Justin Turner? Anthony Rizzo? Mark Canha? Who's a fit? Then what about 2026?

Yeah, I wish Colt had a good glove at second and Tork was jacking bombs and making plays on the regular at first again, but neither are the case, so what're you gonna do? If you're presented with a choice between an established big league hitter with a weak glove at second and a promising hitter with an unknown glove at first, versus the promising hitter with a weak glove at second and running back a guy washing out of the majors with both his bat and his glove at first, which one you gonna take? Neither is the bulletproof obvious choice, but speaking only for myself, I'd take option A over Option B. OK, so what about Option C: Promising hitter with a weak glove at second and promising hitter with unknown glove at first? That's a bit closer in choice, but I think I would still take Option A over that, especially since every win really counts for us this year. That's just me, though. YMMV, as the kids of 2007 would say.

By the way, wouldn’t all Trump have to do to get red hats to run away screaming from Social Security and Medicare is to start calling them “Socialist Security” and “Mediscare”?

Sure, Bregman would be the best third baseman we could plug in this year. No argument from me on that. The question is, is he the best third baseman we can plug in for 2026, 2027, 2028, 2029, and 2030 as well? And are the third base options we have in house for the next six years all demonstrably worse than what Bregman could bring us for the next six years? Is Jace Jung done here? As for second base, Gleyber Torres, despite his glove, has enough of a track record with the bat that he is projected to deliver three wins this year. Will that not be good enough? Would you rather have the guy without the glove or the track record remain at second and the guy who is playing himself out of the big leagues stay at first?

OK, nycsouthpaw, technical semantic point: people do not have to extend tolerance to those they agree with or are simpatico with. Tolerance is for people you don’t agree with, i.e., you don’t like them or what they stand for, but you tolerate them. If you’re on board with someone else, no toleration is needed—you extend warmth and embrace them.

If by “WTF is wrong with these idiots” you mean how can they be so stupid, I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. I think they know exactly what they’re trying to accomplish and how to get there.

Can’t get back to the golden era of the gilded age with albatrosses like Socialist Security and Mediscare hanging around our necks, can we?

I don’t mind the idea of being the team that gives him to most money. That part doesn’t bother me even a little. My issue is the idea of signing him to a six-year deal just so we can win this year. That’s what an organization would do out of desperation. I don’t think Harris is a desperate man. If we were to get Bregman, I would guess the terms would look similar to Flaherty and Alonso. I also totally get people’s concern about the potential of his effect on the clubhouse. I would guess that’s a consideration of our brain trust, too.

Wait until they start going after “woke” white people for not being racist enough.

We are next. Book that.

If it’s a guarantee you’re looking for, following a baseball team is not for you. 😉

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but yes, I remember you were very adamant at the time that this ruling was constitutional and desirable.

I don’t think anybody believes that our chances of being in the playoffs is gonna nose-dive in the next 2 to 3 years. Except possibly you? Do you? Either way, I would bet money that Scott Harris is not going to sacrifice three or four or five years from now in order to win this year. He is not Dave Dombrowski, and speaking only for myself, thank God for that.

Thank you, Citizens United.

There doesn't appear to be any "aim" involved. They are apparently carpet bombing the entire federal government.

The ... ahem ... $64 question is, do we want to affect the decisions the 2028, '29, and '30 Tigers will have to make by seeking three or four marginal wins for 2025? Would it be a reasonable move for Scott Harris to completely go for broke and make 2028-2030 the future PBO's problem?