Tenacious D Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 (edited) May 13 seems a bit arbitrary, but we’ll take it. Edited July 11 by Tenacious D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 12 hours ago, chasfh said: Here's a lemonade possibility for you: maybe his poor numbers are evidence that he is working on things he hasn't mastered yet? Honestly, though, I don't have any insight into it either way, because I haven't been following him all that closely. That’s basically what the hope is for Manning and Torkelson. They’re working on those things, ain’t mastered them yet, but eventually (hopefully sooner than later) figure it out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 10 hours ago, casimir said: That’s basically what the hope is for Manning and Torkelson. They’re working on those things, ain’t mastered them yet, but eventually (hopefully sooner than later) figure it out The down side is just how long it’s taking. Especially Manning, who’s been here since age 18 in 2016. That’s eight years ago, he’s now 26, and I think we are past the point we can blame the COVID season, and he hasn’t thrown 90 innings at any level since 2021. We have to start wondering whether this is his peak, or even past it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveMaroth Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/07/top-50-trade-candidates-mlb-trade-deadline-2024.html Flaherty comes in at #1 Chafin and Skubal also make the list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyMarsh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 33 minutes ago, chasfh said: The down side is just how long it’s taking. Especially Manning, who’s been here since age 18 in 2016. That’s eight years ago, he’s now 26, and I think we are past the point we can blame the COVID season, and he hasn’t thrown 90 innings at any level since 2021. We have to start wondering whether this is his peak, or even past it. I've said before but Manning is who he is in my eyes and that's a back end starter if all goes well. The likelihood he "figures something out" or develops into something better is slim to none as far as I'm concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RatkoVarda Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 20 minutes ago, LongLiveMaroth said: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/07/top-50-trade-candidates-mlb-trade-deadline-2024.html Flaherty comes in at #1 Chafin and Skubal also make the list. Urshela as well; but not Kelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1776 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 The attached article is a great piece on the Flaherty/Kelly relationship and history written by Stavenhagen. Kelly has caught all but two if Flaherty’s start this year. Personally, I would hate to see Flaherty leave the Tigers. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5632592/2024/07/12/tigers-jack-flaherty-carson-kelly-success/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 34 minutes ago, LongLiveMaroth said: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/07/top-50-trade-candidates-mlb-trade-deadline-2024.html Flaherty comes in at #1 Chafin and Skubal also make the list. Chafin is way down the list and Skubal is a courtesy mention at #50 of 50. Chafin could sweeten a deal that Flaherty headlines. Remember that Greg Pappas guy who popped in here and said he’d offer that underwhelming Mayo+ package for Skubal? Mayo+ might be what it takes for them to get Flaherty, assuming they want to win a ring this year versus continuing to count the unhatched chickens while dreaming about the late 2020’s. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveMaroth Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 2 minutes ago, chasfh said: Chafin is way down the list and Skubal is a courtesy mention at #50 of 50. Chafin could sweeten a deal that Flaherty headlines. Remember that Greg Pappas guy who popped in here and said he’d offer that underwhelming Mayo+ package for Skubal? Mayo+ might be what it takes for them to get Flaherty, assuming they want to win a ring this year versus continuing to count the unhatched chickens while dreaming about the late 2020’s. Agreed, Flaherty if healthy should bring back a top 100 prospect+ some. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1776 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 Additionally, there have been two signings this year that I was really happy to see at the time of the signings, not in hindsight. They were/are Carson and Kelly. They had a history in St. Louis, which Cody covers well in the above link. They’ve both struggled, failed, and learned. They’re not finished products, per se, but they are seasoned and experienced and still at a relatively reasonable age. Kelly is on a one year deal as is Flaherty. Why wouldn’t a team that is trying to be better not try to keep these guys around. I know it’s the money. But flipping players every year isn’t going to move the needle but so far. A rotation of Skubal, Flaherty, Olsen, Mize, and Montero would be solid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RatkoVarda Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 A rotation of Skubal, Jobe, Flaherty, Olsen could be great, with Mize/Montero/Manning and others for #5. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 14 minutes ago, LongLiveMaroth said: Agreed, Flaherty if healthy should bring back a top 100 prospect+ some. Yes, and an organization that's super deep in prospects is simply going to have to pay more than an organization with average depth would. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 12 minutes ago, 1776 said: But flipping players every year isn’t going to move the needle but so far. this. a point has to come where you are building for yourself and not everybody else. You win with players, not prospects. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenacious D Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: this. a point has to come where you are building for yourself and not everybody else. You win with players, not prospects. Generally, I agree, but if the Tigers want to sign a pitching lottery ticket every year, hoping they can fix them, I’m OK flipping them to accelerate the rebuild. When you’re ready to win, then you can try and hold them. I’m bullish about Lee, who we received for Lorenzen. Dude is only 21 and raking at AA. I suspect we’ll get better for Flaherty, if we move him. Might not be to the O’s, though, since they had him last year and he underwhelmed. Edited July 12 by Tenacious D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 44 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said: Urshela as well; but not Kelly Urshela will return almost nothing in any trade he headlines. Not only is Kelly not on the list, but catcher shows up on the list only at #24 and #25, the Rockies catchers. Maybe catchers don't generally draw a lot of attention at the deadlines because good teams might already tend to have their catcher situations figured out. You know which contender is surprisingly soft at catcher? The Orioles. Adley Rutschmann Is still on track for a 5 or 6 win season, but he's hitting only .235/.305/.365 at catcher, albeit with plus D, while he's raking .364/.412/.612 at DH. I don't know whether this means they will make any moves, but I did find this to be surprising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskanTigersFan Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said: this. a point has to come where you are building for yourself and not everybody else. You win with players, not prospects. Keep it simple. Look at it this way. In 5 years if we don't do anything, it looks like this: C - ?? 1B - Tork (?) 2B - Jung SS - (McGonigle) 3B - Keith LF - Carpenter(?) (Malloy?) CF - Clark RF - Greene SP 1 - Skubal SP 2- Jobe SP 3- Olsen SP 4 - Mize (?) SP 5 - ??? So you're banking on Tork, Jung, McGonigle, Malloy, Clark all hitting (pun intended)....... There's not much beyond that. I'm still not sold on Carpenter. The only true first division regulars we have on our roster is Greene and Skubal. Maybe you can throw Olsen in there but even then he's realistically a #4 starter on a good staff..... We need more depth..... If we don't keep stocking up we will literally just sputter our wheels. I love rookies probably more than anyone. But to hope that essentially 7 of our fielders will all pan out as rookies.......... That's probably not happening folks. I am pretty sure Flaherty's a gonner. Hopefully we can get a prospect back in the 20-40 range and a toss in prospect for him. If Skubal gets traded, your looking at at least two top 20 prospects (if not 3) plus another B level or two prospects..... Now's the time to trade him. Skubal to the Orioles wins them the WS this year (on paper) and should net us 2-3 prospects on Clark's level..... There's 0 Reason to keep Skubal of the O's come calling with a good offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1776 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 11 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said: A rotation of Skubal, Jobe, Flaherty, Olsen could be great, with Mize/Montero/Manning and others for #5. I would be shopping Manning, Tork, and Dingler. Probably off season moves unless one of these guys light a fire out of nowhere. See what return is out there at least. You can move minor leaguers for prospects as well. I’d keep Kelly if he’s interested in staying for the reasons I cited above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 Minor leaguers don't return prospects in trade. They return lottery tickets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KL2 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 18 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: this. a point has to come where you are building for yourself and not everybody else. You win with players, not prospects. Flaherty isn't a building block unless he agrees to a four year deal tomorrow. You flip those guys for help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 9 minutes ago, KL2 said: Flaherty isn't a building block unless he agrees to a four year deal tomorrow. You flip those guys for help. exactly. but if you won't spend money on players who perform you also never get anywhere. The two things do go hand in hand. It goes back to a more basic premise, which is that I am pretty well convinced that in the end, all trades are a wash in terms of total roster value. You occasionally pick a team's pocket, but you occasionally get yours picking in the end as well. Trades work for a team when they have value at positions they can't use - i.e. once they have already built a system that has some value to shift around. A team like the Tigers is just going to be giving away value to get similar value and it won't get them anywhere long term - unless their actual objective is just to keep payroll down forever - a la the A's Edited July 12 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1776 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 30 minutes ago, KL2 said: Flaherty isn't a building block unless he agrees to a four year deal tomorrow. You flip those guys for help. For the most part I agree. However, organizations do find trading partners to fulfill needs at every level. I imagine most organizations have good players that have no upward mobility due to a more senior player/salary blocking them. Think Baez in Detroit. My preference is to keep Flaherty. Edited July 12 by 1776 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 49 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: this. a point has to come where you are building for yourself and not everybody else. You win with players, not prospects. You also win with both pitchers and hitters, and not just pitchers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 8 minutes ago, chasfh said: You also win with both pitchers and hitters, and not just pitchers. True, but OTOH, the current pipeline doesn't have much promising pitching in it past Jobe unless we still believe in Manning and Madden. And we are seeing how fast normal attrition chews up pitching depth. After Jobe i'd take our three most promising guys as the hitters: Clark, McGonigle and Lee. That said, if they move a pitcher for a hitter I'd be OK with that as long as it's a real hitters and not a lotto ticket. One thing that may soften the deadline market is that the Dodgers, Phillies and Brewers might not be feeling much pressure to be active. We could help that by beating the Dodgers a few times! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said: I've said before but Manning is who he is in my eyes and that's a back end starter if all goes well. The likelihood he "figures something out" or develops into something better is slim to none as far as I'm concerned. Robert Suarez, Padres current closer. Debuted at age 31. 31, 2022 WHIP: 1.05 32, 2023 WHIP: 0.90 33, 2024 WHIP: 0.87 I would prefer Manning get a shot as a reliever to see if shorter stints and "cutting loose" frees something up with him, or helps him "figure something out". He might totally flop as a reliever... I'm just sayin'... And he's already debuted as a starter so I'm not sayin' we need to wait until he's 31 before he does something positive. What I AM saying is that it's "never too late" to figure it out. He just cannot get any mechanical consistency as a starter though... or is missing one key pitch that he does NOT have, like a key "put-away" pitch... And therefore, I'm of the firm belief that he should be tried as a reliever because (A) In one-inning stints a pitcher can fir away with everything he's got because he's not saving anything for multiple innings. (B) What does Manning look like if he "cuts loose"? (C) A reliever only needs two effective pitches to dominate (if they're good pitches that is...), not 3 or 4 or 5 or so, like a starter... At least he might have a chance. I don't want to write him off as a total loss at this point until the Org has done everything it can to figure out if they can extract any value out of him. And if he pulls an Andrew Miller and can run a stat-line of (Miller ages 27-35 (reliever only, before that he was a failure as a starter), 2012-20 seasons): 570 Inn's, 0.93 WHIP, 13.8 K's/9, 2.8 BB's/9 for a 5-1 K-BB ratio... I certainly would be pleased with that. Just my 2 cents... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 hour ago, RatkoVarda said: A rotation of Skubal, Jobe, Flaherty, Olson could be great, with Mize/Montero/Manning and others for #5. Two thumbs UP. And we still have Maeda to kick around next year... So it's really Mize/ Maeda/ Manning/ Montero and let's just see what hashes out of that next year... At least through Spring Training to make certain Jobe is ready for this jump - he may not be just yet - or at least as cover for any injuries... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.