MLB Network's "Top 100"; and where they are.

[CMRivdogs]

Scott Harris was hired in September. We probably agree the front office and a lot of the organization needs overhauling. That seems to be his top priority anyway. Your favorite player (or your biggest gripe isn't going away unless he opts out at the end of the season)

What "big names" did you realistically expect to sign in the off-season? Who would you use for trade bait to get what you consider trade bait. And a few trade targets that Harris should have pursued, and do we know whether he did or not?
 

I'm get it you're not thrilled with the current team. I came into Tiger World full time with the 2001 club. DD didn't build the 2006-2012 teams over night....I'm willing to give Harris a couple of seasons.

 

[Jim Cowan]

I like the offseason.  A few people have mentioned that Haniger might have been a good fit, but there wasn't much enthusiasm for any of the other free agents.

Harris picked up a few guys that I think could be useful, and cleaned out some dead wood on the bench and in the office.  Good start, let's evaluate the new guys.

[Useful Idiot]

20 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

What "big names" did you realistically expect to sign in the off-season? Who would you use for trade bait to get what you consider trade bait. And a few trade targets that Harris should have pursued, and do we know whether he did or not?
 

I'm get it you're not thrilled with the current team. I came into Tiger World full time with the 2001 club. DD didn't build the 2006-2012 teams over night....I'm willing to give Harris a couple of seasons.

 

Again, I have no appetite for the usual parlor games you guys seem to derive so much amusement from. This thread is not about why players I might prefer  all "suk" in your collective opinions because they fall short of key benchmarks that you cherrypick to bolster your own argument in support of your own pet players. 

Those type of arguments might make sense for a team that is at 89 wins and we are debating how we might push them over the top....but frankly we are not even in that ball park.

What this thread IS about, is the goose egg.   Out of the top rated 100 players, we have NONE of them,  zip, nada....In my opinion that is as good an indictment as I need to say this team is not serious  about giving the fans something to be happy about.

So, after further contemplation fueled by your observation that I was not bringing anything to the table....I have come up with one high-leverage suggestion that I sincerely believe could change our predicament.

Give Harris a "Sheffie" award, and bring back Dave Dombrowski as chairman and CEO, with unfettered control over all team operations. Get Chris Ilitch completely out of the decision making process, and give him some token position such as treasurer, but make it clear he is subordinate to DD.

I believe if you do that, we can begin a climb back to respectability, and roster at least the mean number of "top 100" players.

 

Again, it's the "zero" that I find noteworthy here, and not whether you personally approve of which players I might choose...ya'll have proven too many times in the past that endeavor is fruitless.

[CMRivdogs]

You realize that at this point in DD's tenure (first full season) he named Louis Pujols as manager. The guy was famous for spending non game time in his office watching the Weather Channel.

Look at the Tigers 2002 starting lineup and you find such stellar players as Chris Truby, Wendell Magee, Randall Simon and Shane Halter. It took Trading Dave a couple of seasons to get to 2006-2012. Yet you're shitting on a guy who got here after the season ended. 

I'm also old enough to remember when fans used to accuse Mike Illitch of caring more for the Wings and Tigers and the same things your saying about Chris could have bern said about your fagher.

You sound like a bandwagon jumper who only remembers the few good years.

[Useful Idiot]

20 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

. DD didn't build the 2006-2012 teams over night....I'm willing to give Harris a couple of seasons.

 

FWIW, my feeling is that I've already given the Tigers organization 5 years while I've patiently watched them prioritize "cheap and controllable" over proven talent.  ( all the while claiming that doing so was a worthwhile sacrifice for our "future").

Replacing the old idiot with a new idiot is, (IMO)  just a trick to reset the clock of fan expectations, buying more time before spending any serious money.  A "stall", in other words.  

Sports IS entertainment, that we as fans are ultimately paying for the privilege.   How long you think  MGM or Universal Studios would stay in business without proven stars in the entertainment package? 

[CMRivdogs]

Maybe you should become a White Sox fan. That seems to suit you better

[Useful Idiot]

7 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

 

You sound like a bandwagon jumper who only remembers the few good years.

  Yep, I jumped on the Tigers Bandwagon in 1968...you busted me...lol!

My interest waned in the 90s with the Randy Smith and Ernie Harwell debacles..... but DD managed to rekindle my loyalty.

You can try and shame me all you want with suggestions that I am disloyal for being unwilling sing Kumbaya in support of these current clowns,..... but won't phase me.

[Useful Idiot]

3 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Maybe you should become a White Sox fan. That seems to suit you better

So clever, personal insults because you don't approve of my position.   

[Tiger337]

We misjudged you.  You're not a stupid kid.  You're an angy old man.  

[CMRivdogs]

3 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

So clever, personal insults because you don't approve of my position.   

Some of my best friends are White Sox fans. My son's first MLB game was at old Comiskey Park.

[gehringer_2]

20 hours ago, Useful Idiot said:

I don't know, gehringer_2...I felt A LOT better  back when we could look forward to Mr I bringing Miggys, and V-Marts,  and Prince Fielders to the roster each winter.

Ha - well for sure tastes vary - DD's 8 DH lineups drove me slight crazy. The Tigers need to be better but DD's style is not the answer to me. His MO isn't sustainable in a mid-teir market where the money isn't infinite, otherwise he is going to mortgage away your team's future like he did here. I think of his tenure here as a period like a crack addition. It was a high, but it came with costs.

I know I'm repeating myself but pro sports is all about owners lucking into hiring the right GM. Harris seems to be banking on being able to get some of the current players to do better while he puts his systems in place for finding new ones. As a general proposition that's an uphill battle, but I think he will end up being able to claim some apparent success, but not because anything he did worked on those current players, but just because some of them will regress back to their averages after having had sub average years last season. But we won't know if the player acquisition/development org he builds works for a while.

[Useful Idiot]

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

We misjudged you.  You're not a stupid kid.  You're an angy old man.  

You know what I think would be interesting?  If they would require breathylizer type interlocks be installed on computers, requiring internet message posters to "blow" before posting ....not so much as a barrier to participation, rather just to qualify the integrity of each contributor....list the number measured with each post.

That way when you get a particularly malicious response to a well meaning post, it could provide scope on what got you there. 

[CMRivdogs]

OK I admit being out of line with the White Sox snark. I should have said Cubs😉

[Useful Idiot]

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Ha - well for sure tastes vary - DD's 8 DH lineups drove me slight crazy.

The path this current outfit has pursued, has changed my  outlook in one particular way, compared to what I thought was worth prioritizing, in the DD era.

4 consecutive division titles was a lot of fun, despite the post season let downs that followed.

The regular season lasts 6 months, the playoffs only one.   In balance, I'll take regular season dominance over "luck of the moment" post season exploits.    

[Useful Idiot]

2 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

OK I admit being out of line with the White Sox snark. I should have said Cubs😉

One thing I feel worth mentioning.  I can be as "down in the mud" insulting as anyone. But I try to not be that person.  For one, I'm a relative outsider here, and whenever there is grief, the prevailing attitude is that the new comer is the cause.  So, I'm trying hard to NOT be that person. 

If you believe yourself to be getting the better of me in the "snark" department...it is only fitting that you realize that is because one of us isn't trying.  FWIW

[oblong]

21 hours ago, Useful Idiot said:

I don't know, gehringer_2...I felt A LOT better  back when we could look forward to Mr I bringing Miggys, and V-Marts,  and Prince Fielders to the roster each winter.   Even with the Fielder disappointment, he served  as evidence we were at least trying.

Saving money while looking for the next Ronny Rodriguez IS NOT WHY I WATCH THE GAME. 

I wouldn't want VMart or Prince on the team this year and Miggy will probably be a liability on the field so I'm not sure that makes the team better.

 

[Useful Idiot]

30 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

  You're an angy old man.  

More truth to that than you likely realize.   Back in 2018,  a five year rebuild offered an opportunity that I might again  see another winning Tigers team in my life time.   Pushing that forward another 5 years,  my ability to  stand witness becomes doubtful.

So yeah, I freely admit  there is some bitterness involved.

[Tiger337]

I also became a fan in '68.  

[CMRivdogs]

1 minute ago, Useful Idiot said:

More truth to that than you likely realize.   Back in 2018,  a five year rebuild offered an opportunity that I might again  see another winning Tigers team in my life time.   Pushing that forward another 5 years,  my ability to  stand witness becomes doubtful.

So yeah, I freely admit  there is some bitterness involved.

I honestly get where you're coming from. Especially since my Tiger fandom is relatively new. Still a Pirates fan from 1960 and '79. Both teams are nowhere near I would like them to be. At 70 with an ailment one doctor says is life defining I refuse to be bitter about baseball teams over I have no control.

It's moe fun to be sarcastic than thin skinned

[Useful Idiot]

26 minutes ago, oblong said:

I wouldn't want VMart or Prince on the team this year and Miggy will probably be a liability on the field so I'm not sure that makes the team better.

 

The point I had foremost in my mind is "headline talent".   When we had voids, we filled them with the top tier of what was available.  We can ruminate endlessly over the pitfalls of Prince and Victor, all players have a down side. But the point worth emphasis is, we went after the best that was available, year after year.

Made me believe we were at least serious about winning. I don't get that out of the present outfit.

Edited February 28, 2023 by Useful Idiot

[Tiger337]

31 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Ha - well for sure tastes vary - DD's 8 DH lineups drove me slight crazy. The Tigers need to be better but DD's style is not the answer to me. His MO isn't sustainable in a mid-teir market where the money isn't infinite, otherwise he is going to mortgage away your team's future like he did here. I think of his tenure here as a period like a crack addition. It was a high, but it came with costs.

I know I'm repeating myself but pro sports is all about owners lucking into hiring the right GM. Harris seems to be banking on being able to get some of the current players to do better while he puts his systems in place for finding new ones. As a general proposition that's an uphill battle, but I think he will end up being able to claim some apparent success, but not because anything he did worked on those current players, but just because some of them will regress back to their averages after having had sub average years last season. But we won't know if the player acquisition/development org he builds works for a while.

I loved the Cabrera trade and could not believe they were able to pull it off.  I was hoping they would build around him with young players, but it never happened.  It was still a fun team because they were good, but it had an artificial feel to it and you knew they wouldn't be any good without the bloated payroll. 

[Useful Idiot]

2 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

 

It's moe fun to be sarcastic than thin skinned

Again, as the relative "outsider",  any serious grief would surely be blamed on me. So, that is the "jacket" that I'm trying to not wear.

It's easy to "blame the troll" whenever there is dissension. But frequently the truth is the most serious trolls are deeply embedded within a forums base membership.  "Inhouse trolls" is what I call them.

[Useful Idiot]

I had my share of misgivings about DD, as well. In 2006 when we went through the trade deadline and picked up Sean Casey, with the explanation that with DaMeat coming off the DL, that was "as good as" acquiring another  top player. That seemed pretty obvious to me to be a con  job.  They were shining the fans on.

And to a large degree, I feel the current outfit's infatuation with "the future" is just more shine-ola.  If the fans are gullible enough to buy it?   etc

Tying this last thought into the base premise of this thread, what evidence might there be that the organization is NOT BS'ing the fans with some spiel?

How far does having ZERO of the games top 100 players on our roster go, towards proving a will to win?

The ZERO, IMO,  pretty much supports the idea we are being stooged

[oblong]

17 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

The point I had foremost in my mind is "headline talent".   When we had voids, we filled them with the top tier of what was available.  We can ruminate over the pitfalls of Prince and Victor, all players have a down side. But we went after the best that was available, year after year.

Made me believe we were at least serious about winning. I don't get that out of the present outfit.

Going after the best year after year meant obtaining slow one dimensional players that prevented the team from keeping their younger talent.

Who should they have acquired last off season?  

Prior to last year they got Baez.... how'd that turn out?

 

[Useful Idiot]

7 minutes ago, oblong said:

Going after the best year after year meant obtaining slow one dimensional players that prevented the team from keeping their younger talent.

Who should they have acquired last off season?  

Prior to last year they got Baez.... how'd that turn out?

 

Well, he lead the Tigers in homers, I'll give him that (<-----------intended sarcasm)

I don't hate the man, but I felt it was a mistake settling on the lower priced spread when we signed him, and his performance last season did nothing to convince me that I was wrong.  Hows that for diplomacy? 

 

Hey, I'm prejudiced, I'll admit as much. I just have no use for former Cubbie shortstops to become Tigers.