2023 MLB Playoffs

[Tiger337]

I also do not care about ratings at all.  If anything, I like to see bad ratings since I don't like how the sport has evolved in order to attract casual fans.  

Edited October 27, 2023 by Tiger337

[1984Echoes]

7 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

Why would they trade Kim?  He’s cost-effective for them.  They will want to move contracts.

I'm going back to my Tatis-love.

If they're dumping contracts...

He's the guy I want.

[Tenacious D]

5 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I'm going back to my Tatis-love.

If they're dumping contracts...

He's the guy I want.

Agree—I prefer Sosa, but too risky on a one year contract.

[SoCalTiger]

4 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

I'm going back to my Tatis-love.

If they're dumping contracts...

He's the guy I want.

Only if they take Baez as part of the salary adjustment.  Something good plus Baez for Tatis . Skubal and Baez ? Thats 240 million saved for SD. Tatis is 340 million   through 2034 and suspended once and I think his arm is hurt limiting him to the outfield. It's a BIG step for Detroit.

[casimir]

14 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

Why would they trade Kim?  He’s cost-effective for them.  They will want to move contracts.

Why have the acquired more IFs than are on the IF?  Why have they spent into oblivion and gotten not much out of it?  It ain't exactly a well run organization.

I get what you mean, and if they're going to move salary, they probably need to look at Machado/Boegarts/Tatis.  But if they can't, they may need to look to move other smaller contracts to accomplish it.

[casimir]

2 hours ago, SoCalTiger said:

Only if they take Baez as part of the salary adjustment.  Something good plus Baez for Tatis . Skubal and Baez ? Thats 240 million saved for SD. Tatis is 340 million   through 2034 and suspended once and I think his arm is hurt limiting him to the outfield. It's a BIG step for Detroit.

That's interesting idea, moving Baez to the Padres.  But I wouldn't move Skubal in this kind of deal.

[Biff Mayhem]

9 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I also do not care about ratings at all.  If anything, I like to see bad ratings since I don't like how the sport has evolved in order to attract casual fans.  

Harumph.

[casimir]

9 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I also do not care about ratings at all.  If anything, I like to see bad ratings since I don't like how the sport has evolved in order to attract casual fans.  

What would you change?

[Tenacious D]

No team will take on Baez, unless we eat enough of his salary to get it closer to $6-8M per year. Especially the Padres, who want to shed payroll and already have plenty of guys who play Javy’s positions.

[chasfh]

10 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I also do not care about ratings at all.  If anything, I like to see bad ratings since I don't like how the sport has evolved in order to attract casual fans.  

The problem with that implied hypothesis is that if the ratings drop, networks will do even more crazy things on telecasts in a vain bid to capture the young ‘uns. 

[chasfh]

Speaking of broadcasts, I was borderline offended when during the NLCS, a pitcher struck out a guy to end a tense inning, came off the mound all animated and yelling, and one of the announcers blurted out something like, “YEAH! GO ON, BIG FELLA!” I doubt it was Brian Anderson—it was probably Jeff Francoeur. But regardless, appearing to pick sides and cheerlead on a national telecast, even an ex-player analyst in an exciting moment, is just such a bad look.

Edited October 27, 2023 by chasfh

[1984Echoes]

4 hours ago, SoCalTiger said:

Only if they take Baez as part of the salary adjustment.  Something good plus Baez for Tatis . Skubal and Baez ? Thats 240 million saved for SD. Tatis is 340 million   through 2034 and suspended once and I think his arm is hurt limiting him to the outfield. It's a BIG step for Detroit.

Intriguing idea! I'm all for it.

2 hours ago, casimir said:

That's interesting idea, moving Baez to the Padres.  But I wouldn't move Skubal in this kind of deal.

58 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

No team will take on Baez, unless we eat enough of his salary to get it closer to $6-8M per year. Especially the Padres, who want to shed payroll and already have plenty of guys who play Javy’s positions.

 

Two important points.

Chris Ilitch could prove his bona fides by approving this trade, including spending a few bucks on Baez's salary reduction.

But I'll propose a crazy alternative: We'll take on BOTH Tatis & Machado's contract, and send them back Baez (Bogaerts could play 3B). Plus lots of young prospects. The only stick-in-the-mud is that: Doesn't Baez still have no-trade control over where he plays?

Yeah, Skubal not included maybe from both ends (we're trying to get into a competitive window so, no Skubal; and they want young, cost-controllable, cheap... even if they are going to try and still stay competitive). 

Which leads to: prospects. Jobe should be an untouchable; but in a deal like this, I don't see how we can do that. I think there is NO possibility in talking them into taking quantity (Madden/ Smith/ Flores/ Hurter) over quality (Jobe). So, just sayin'... It means we keep a lower starter prospect (Madden), but have to give up...?

Jobe? Plus Malloy? And 1 of Keith or Jung? Plus some other pitching and position prospects? I'd also, rather give Lange up than prospect Tyler Mattison (I'm hoping this dude is Hader 2.0 so, yeah: here's Lange instead...). What else?

Tatis contract doesn't bother me (he's only 24), but Machado's does. But I'd be 100% willing to chance Machado's contract and hope Harris also would take this "calculated risk" (and Ilitch approve the money commitment).

Just spit-ballin' here...

[1984Echoes]

2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

...  Doesn't Baez still have no-trade control over where he plays?

...

Oops, I was thinking of Eduardo. Although the same question would still apply.

Also...

Getting both Machado and Tatis is (99.999%) a pipe dream.

What if it were Tatis and Bogaerts for Baez and lots of prospects?

Just asking...

[oblong]

22 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Speaking of broadcasts, I was borderline offended when during the NLCS, a pitcher struck out a guy to end a tense inning, came off the mound all animated and yelling, and one of the announcers blurted out something like, “YEAH! GO ON, BIG FELLA!” I doubt it was Brian Anderson—it was probably Jeff Francoeur. But regardless, appearing to pick sides and cheerlead on a national telecast, even an ex-player analyst in an exciting moment, is just such a bad look.

That's the "crazy thing" you are referring to in the post prior.

Have you seen PBA lately?  Like the bowling thing?   

Gimmicks to draw viewers doesn't work.  A 23 year old isn't going to suddenly watch a baseball game because of something due to the broadcast or delivery.   

There's a definite line that exists where viewing habits changed permanently.  I'd say those 40 and over... the era before On Demand and later DVR, then streaming, became prevalent.  Until then you watched what was on.  You were spoon fed.  Yes you had 100 channels but it was mostly crap and your TV viewing was based on the same 10 channels. You had the 3-4 local channels, TNT, TBS, ESPN and some others depending on your tastes.  That was when A&E and Discovery showed quality programs.  Pre reality TV.  If you were of viewing age in that environment then you still watch TV the old way.  After that, the viewer is in total control.  They won't watch a 3 hour game unless they are an absolute die hard of the team, like college football fans are.  Otherwise they just see a recap video on Tik Tok or just see references to the game's key moments.  The younger people are not perceptive to being a captive audience like that.  This isn't a criticism, just reality.

Last week I asked my son what network the Michigan game was on, he said NBC.  My mother in law was there and said "Oh, channel 4..."  My son had no idea what that was.  He doesnt think of channels that way.  Fox 2 isn't Channel 2, NBC isn't Channel 4, or ABC channel 7.   To him it's 232 or just the tablet icon on the guide when he clicks "Sports" and that's the game listed.. it could be on Telemundo and he wouldn't know the difference.  It just says Michigan.

 

[gehringer_2]

16 minutes ago, oblong said:

Last week I asked my son what network the Michigan game was on, he said NBC.  My mother in law was there and said "Oh, channel 4..."  My son had no idea what that was.  He doesnt think of channels that way.  Fox 2 isn't Channel 2, NBC isn't Channel 4, or ABC channel 7.   To him it's 232 or just the tablet icon on the guide when he clicks "Sports" and that's the game listed.. it could be on Telemundo and he wouldn't know the difference.  It just says Michigan.

I have no idea what "channels" are anymore either. My 'guide' shows me sources in alphabetical order, not by channel number, so I never even see them. But the 'Captive' aspect is the key I think. As much baseball and hockey as I watch, I still don't watch that many games live from the beginning. > 50% of the time I start the beginning of a recording about an hour after the game started which gets me to the end of the game just about in real time. So that's basically just over one hour to watch a baseball or hockey game instead of 2 or 2.5. When I do watch a whole ball game in real time anymore I get kind of stir crazy......

I know it's just a matter of time before they find away to stop me from doing it this way*, but I'm enjoying it while I can.

*we can see the seeds of the future with some commercials being streamed right into the game already.

Edited October 27, 2023 by gehringer_2

[Edman85]

2 hours ago, Biff Mayhem said:

Harumph.

[oblong]

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I have no idea what "channels" are anymore either. My 'guide' shows me sources in alphabetical order, not by channel number, so I never even see them. But the 'Captive' aspect is the key I think. As much baseball and hockey as I watch, I still don't watch that many games live from the beginning. > 50% of the time I start the beginning of a recording about an hour after the game started which gets me to the end of the game just about in real time. So that's basically just over one hour to watch a baseball or hockey game instead of 2 or 2.5. When I do watch a whole ball game in real time anymore I get kind of stir crazy......

I know it's just a matter of time before they find away to stop me from doing it this way*, but I'm enjoying it while I can.

*we can see the seeds of the future with some commercials being streamed right into the game already.

The first Red Wings game seemed very intrusive with the ads.... Having them is one thing but digitally changing them during play is distracting, which I guess is the point obviously.  It's sensory overload trying to follow the puck and players then other things are blinking and flashing.  

When I do sit and watch a game I'm usually playing a game on my tablet or browing my phone.

[Edman85]

Wait... if the Padres are trying to shed some salary, why are they taking on Javy Baez? They, of all teams, aren't in position to take on dead money.

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

The problem with that implied hypothesis is that if the ratings drop, networks will do even more crazy things on telecasts in a vain bid to capture the young ‘uns. 

Mini home run derby instead of extra innings?  

[RatkoVarda]

SD expects to contend for WS next year with 200M+ payroll; so they won't be dumping salary without getting current ML players who can contribute

[Tenacious D]

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Mini home run derby instead of extra innings?  

Somehow whiffle balls need to come into play

[chasfh]

12 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Mini home run derby instead of extra innings?  

I bet if networks could make that happen they would have by now!

[Edman85]

Also, I really don't want anything to do with Tatis. Fine player, we think, but that long term deal comes with significant risk, when you have a player who was popped for PED's, injured himself with reckless off field behavior, has had other incidents... It seems like somebody who could flame out pretty quickly and leave the team under contract holding the bag.

[RatkoVarda]

Tatis would instantly and easily be the Tigers best player, and he represents a level of player they have not had for years and years and may not have unless Tork, Greene, Keith or Clark can get that done. I highly doubt he is obtainable, but adding him would be a fantastic move, and probably worth the risk.

[1984Echoes]

2 hours ago, Edman85 said:

Wait... if the Padres are trying to shed some salary, why are they taking on Javy Baez? They, of all teams, aren't in position to take on dead money.

We would be taking on a MUCH larger amount of salary than they'd be taking back; also, Ilitch could send an additional $40 mill (just using a round number) to further reduce their costs.