2023-24 Detroit Tigers Offseason Thread

[1984Echoes]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I’ve been thinking more lately that there must be a market inefficiency in terms of multi-inning relievers, guys who can work out of the front of the bullpen for 2-3 innings at a time and not necessarily be a contender for a starting role. So, if a pitcher has to come out in the third or fourth inning, a team could slot in a guy (or even two) to get them to the end of the game and save the back of the pen, versus having to cycle six one-inning guys, including their closer and #1 setup, to get them to the end of the game because that’s all they have available.

We were discussing this earlier...

Specifically because it looks like he Tigers are going to end up with quite a few of them. Faedo, Holton, Brieske, Wentz, Alexander (before he left). May have more than that too, counting AAA... "Failed starters" or "middle-relievers" or "good-only-1-time-thru-the-batting-order" guys... whatever we want to call them...

I'd rather have 5 starters go 5 innings (or if it's a tandem to keep innings low then Mize/Manning can alternate 5 inning starts and 4 inning "closes")...

And 3 or 4 middle relievers that can go 2-3 innings, and have those guys get us to the 8th/ 9th inning 1-inning-guys rather than go through 4 or 5 relievers every single game. That drops it to 2 relievers often, 3 relievers occasionally, and more than that infrequently.

[oblong]

How strong is the lure to be the boss of baseball operations vs. the intellection satisfaction of doing things the right way as you see it?  What I'm getting at is would Harris have taken the job unless he felt Chris Ilitch will do the right at the right time? Of coruse he could have lied to him.

My sense is this feeling that he's meek I see from the usual Twitter folks is simply because Harris won't do something just to do it for marketing and big bang appeal you get in the off season. It will have to be the right move.  With the money coming off the books this year and the young talent coming up this is the time to see what they are made of.  Don't waste 2-3 years that the big FA signing gives you the performance if we find out these players aren't that good.  Then we are stuck with him in the later years of the deal while they once again regroup.

2024 is when we evaluate the fruits of the losing of 2018-2022.  Maybe Avila left us something. 

[Edman85]

Pecota = not too high on the Tigers bats.

[1984Echoes]

6 minutes ago, oblong said:

....

2024 is when we evaluate the fruits of the losing of 2018-2022.  Maybe Avila left us something. 

Well he definitely left us with a lot of decent players/ prospects... But we don't know where those guys get us or if Harris can fix the holes/ get better talent/ develop them better/ etc... to build us into an actual contender.

[oblong]

I'm not sure yet they are decent.  Half the ones I hear about havne't cracked MLB yet. You don't fill in talent with FA signings until you are certain they are servicable MLB players.  At a high level I see a few good pitchers with injury issues and a bunch of utilility guys and Greene and Tork.  I'm not bashing them.  Just not yet sold on most of them.

[Toddwert]

12 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Pecota = not too high on the Tigers bats.

not surprise there is a lot of hopes and prayers with the position players

[KL2]

2 hours ago, Edman85 said:

Pecota = not too high on the Tigers bats.

We were 13 games better than Pecota thought last year....

[Tiger337]

5 minutes ago, KL2 said:

We were 13 games better than Pecota thought last year....

Because of the bats or because of the pitching?

There is still no system that accurately predicts pitching from year to year.  

[SoCalTiger]

Japan uses a six man rotation FWIW. Maybe they know something we don’t.  In any case MLB is headed that way and needs to allow 14 man pitching staffs and 27 man rosters. MLB needs to protect pitchers, especially starters,  like the NFL does quarterbacks.  All games are promoted as Starter v Starter so it’s vital to keep them healthy. 

[Tiger337]

5 minutes ago, SoCalTiger said:

Japan uses a six man rotation FWIW. Maybe they know something we don’t.  In any case MLB is headed that way and needs to allow 14 man pitching staffs and 27 man rosters. MLB needs to protect pitchers, especially starters,  like the NFL does quarterbacks.  All games are promoted as Starter v Starter so it’s vital to keep them healthy. 

They've been trying to protect them, but they keep getting hurt.  I think it's more that modern pitchers throw too hard than too much.  

[mtutiger]

2 hours ago, oblong said:

I'm not sure yet they are decent.  Half the ones I hear about havne't cracked MLB yet. You don't fill in talent with FA signings until you are certain they are servicable MLB players.  At a high level I see a few good pitchers with injury issues and a bunch of utilility guys and Greene and Tork.  I'm not bashing them.  Just not yet sold on most of them.

A lot of why "playoffs" is in our vocabulary with this team comes down to the division they play in. If they were in any other division, they'd be at least a year out. With where they play now, with the signings that they have made, you can squint and see it. But it's going to require a number of things to go right, even if they are in better shape than in years past, there aren't enough "sure bets" on this roster. I'm guessing the projection systems are catching that.

Even on the division point, I do think that Minnesota's moratorium on spending money this offseason doesn't, in and of itself, mean they shouldn't be the favorite to win the division still. They still have a good amount of talent on that roster.

Edited December 18, 2023 by mtutiger

[casimir]

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

They've been trying to protect them, but they keep getting hurt.  I think it's more that modern pitchers throw too hard than too much.  

My worthless opinion is that there's too much throwing hard rather than art of pitching on the mound.

[mtutiger]

3 hours ago, oblong said:

How strong is the lure to be the boss of baseball operations vs. the intellection satisfaction of doing things the right way as you see it?  What I'm getting at is would Harris have taken the job unless he felt Chris Ilitch will do the right at the right time? Of coruse he could have lied to him.

Granted Harris hasn't said a ton to the media since starting, but every indication seems to be that the decisions are coming from him...

Chris Ilitch gets a ton of criticism, but he's not a hands-on owner (in a sport that has quite a few of them)... so one could see why the gig was desirable for someone like Harris.

[Tenacious D]

56 minutes ago, KL2 said:

We were 13 games better than Pecota thought last year....

Pecota sounds like a ****.

[casimir]

3 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Pecota sounds like a ****.

Showed the stirrups, wasn't afraid to get dirty.  Classic end of the bench do it all end of the bench infielder.

Shane Halter had Pecota's poster in his childhood room.

[Longgone]

5 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think part of the reluctance is that for all the science being applied, teams still don't know enough about recovery cycles to know what is safe to do, probably because no-one wants to take the risk and maybe do it wrong, which is probably the only way the data ever eventually emerges. They know the five day cycle, they think they know that if they keep a guy to 20 pitches or so he can go 2 days out of 3 or maybe the occasional 3 out of 4 (though I have my doubt about this given that reliever wastage rates seem to be worse than starters!). But they just don't have any confidence to say "we can bring a guy back after 3 days if he throws 50" or whatever the case may be - or even how he should train on the differing cycles.

They know a great deal about recovery cycles, four days rest is generally optimal, but may vary with some individuals, with peak strength occurring on the fifth day after muscle failure and recovery. Muscle failure is variable. Extra rest is counter productive, as the muscle will begin to lose strength after peak. 

The every fifth day cycle for starting pitchers is based on results, not convention.

[Tiger337]

22 minutes ago, Longgone said:

They know a great deal about recovery cycles, four days rest is generally optimal, but may vary with some individuals, with peak strength occurring on the fifth day after muscle failure and recovery. Muscle failure is variable. Extra rest is counter productive, as the muscle will begin to lose strength after peak. 

The every fifth day cycle for starting pitchers is based on results, not convention.

Is it optimal because they have been conditioned to do that for years or because there is something about the human genetic make-up that makes four days optimal?  

[Longgone]

8 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Is it optimal because they have been conditioned to do that for years or because there is something about the human genetic make-up that makes four days optimal?  

The latter

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Longgone said:

The latter

The question is where is the overall trade-off sweet spot between giving up a little in recovery optimization and using more relievers, which is definitely moving into sub-optimal territory.

[Longgone]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

The question is where is the overall trade-off sweet spot between giving up a little in recovery optimization and using more relievers, which is definitely moving into sub-optimal territory.

I agree, with starters you can safely assume they've reached muscle failure and need full recovery. With relievers, there are so many more variables.

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, SoCalTiger said:

Japan uses a six man rotation FWIW. Maybe they know something we don’t.  In any case MLB is headed that way and needs to allow 14 man pitching staffs and 27 man rosters. MLB needs to protect pitchers, especially starters,  like the NFL does quarterbacks.  All games are promoted as Starter v Starter so it’s vital to keep them healthy. 

20 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

They've been trying to protect them, but they keep getting hurt.  I think it's more that modern pitchers throw too hard than too much.  

If Baseball were serious about protecting pitchers, they would deaden the ball to significantly reduce homers, which would reduce the need (or incentive, if you prefer) to try to throw every pitch with maximum effort and movement in order to miss the bats of all nine guys in the order who can take them out of the park.

There’s no incentive for Baseball to do that, though, because the home run is their #1 marketing tool, and there is practically an endless supply of fungible pitchers they can run out there.

Edited December 19, 2023 by chasfh

[chasfh]

18 hours ago, Longgone said:

The latter

The research I have seen on this is from 20 or so years ago, before hurlers started trying to throw the ball through the wall on every pitch. I wonder what new research based on today’s conditions and incentives would yield? To your point, if it’s all about the physiology, there should not be any difference.

[RatkoVarda]

second year of the $50M pre-arb pool money was paid out. Balt and Det lead with 7 players each. Skubal ($408,478) Greene ($364,464) Rogers ($364,212) Carpenter ($327,659) Foley ($280,922) Holton ($268,895) Vierling ($257,176). Last year, all earned some version of ML minimum 720 to 740K.

Edited December 19, 2023 by RatkoVarda
second year, not first

[Tenacious D]

Are those dollar amounts the increase they will receive?

[Tiger337]

37 minutes ago, chasfh said:

The research I have seen on this is from 20 or so years ago, before hurlers started trying to throw the ball through the wall on every pitch. I wonder what new research based on today’s conditions and incentives would yield? To your point, if it’s all about the physiology, there should not be any difference.

During the Deadball era, pitchers were capable of excelling with three days rest so it seems that style of play is as important as physiology.  In more modern times, it is possible that there are some pitchers who might do better on five or more days rest even if the standard four days is optimal for most.  It doesn't have to be one size fits all if a team is willing to be creative.