2024 - 2025 Detroit Tigers Offseason

[Motor City Sonics]

1 minute ago, romad1 said:

I think its only useful information as a marker of the lust for our guy out in other fan-bases.   Tork is a great MLB the Show player.   I assume the Giants organization has not been lobotomized.   

The New York Jets would be all over that. 

[monkeytargets39]

Torkelson for Jon Dowd seems fair

Edited Thursday at 02:31 PM by monkeytargets39

[Longgone]

13 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/chicago-cubs/news/cubs-make-100-million-alex-bregman-decision-after-harsh-astros-comments/8f2858b8328f60e8a72be1f5

The Sporting News and Sports Illustrated have sadly become AI driven clickbait 

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

Giants bsky is talking about Torkelson trade.  Not sure if this is real. 

This seems weak saucy

What the hell is the World News Times?

In any event, it would not be super shocking to see Harris leverage whatever relationship he might have with Buster to make a deal happen.

 

[RatkoVarda]

1 hour ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Sure, Bregman's better, but his he $25 million dollars a year better?

Tigers are at a place where the marginal value of wins is very high. Difference between a 84 wins and a 87 wins may mean Wild Card vs. no playoffs. Bregman, or any impact addition, would mean less if they were looking at 65 or 95 wins.

[chasfh]

7 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

Tigers are at a place where the marginal value of wins is very high. Difference between a 84 wins and a 87 wins may mean Wild Card vs. no playoffs. Bregman, or any impact addition, would mean less if they were looking at 65 or 95 wins.

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?

[1776]

30 minutes ago, chasfh said:

What the hell is the World News Times?

In any event, it would not be super shocking to see Harris leverage whatever relationship he might have with Buster to make a deal happen.

 

This one is interesting. The Giants only prospect in the Top 100 listing is Bryce Eldridge at #24. He just turned 20 years of age and is a first baseman. He was a two way player a year ago but has committed to first baseman for his bat. He ended the season at AAA last season. There was talk of him starting at AA this year because of his accelerated progress last year up the ladder. There is also talk that he could break camp with the Giants. Eldridge bats from the left. 
The Torkelson talk could be legit but it doesn’t add up in my mind. 
FWIW, the Giants do have a need for an upgrade at first base but I think they can cover that in-house until Eldridge arrives.  Interesting nonetheless. 

[alex]

45 minutes ago, chasfh said:

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?

I think all teams of mid-size payroll+ are going to have 25-40 mil of payroll 'lost' in players per say. Right now we have Javy (though he could still be decent - we at least hope). They added Cobb & Flaherty on 1 yr deals pretty much. In '28 those deals, in addition to Javy's, will not be there. Who will we have on the roster then as 'lost' pay per say. It is not a question of 'if' - just who.

Is Bregman, say at 20 or 25 mil to be one of them ? If not there will be someone else if not a couple others at least - if we are/remain a mid range salary club.

Again I say Front load the deal as you suggested earlier. If not have Plan B & C in the wings. The Tigers are good 'now'. We have Skubal, we signed Torres, Flaherty, Cobb, etc. obviously the FO is trying to move forward this year. That and of course building the farm system which is IMHO the most important thing, and they are doing just that. Kudos big time for that.

FWIW, even Jose Iglesias might help as a 'Plan C'. I know many here would frown on that, say give it to the youngsters. We will have plenty of time for that and are doing just that. Not every position has to be filled with someone under 25, especially since we are a potential playoff team. All good teams have veterans. We could use a decent RH bat who plays well in the INF (3B) regardless if it is a player who is blocked who is young or a vet.

Edited Thursday at 04:38 PM by alex

[RatkoVarda]

Harris can punt this to the trade deadline as well. He can get 3b, or any bat or an addition elsewhere (flamethrower?) if they need it; he certainly will have the prospects.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

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?

indeed. In the best of all possible worlds, you would always manage your team for most wins over infinite time - IOW never sacrifice two wins next year for one win this year. But I suppose in the real world if you know  - for instance because you know your are going to lose critical FA's - that your probability to make the playoff is going to nose drive a year or two out, then it's a fair question whether you go for the one game in the current year because being two games worse in the following year doesn't matter. The problem is that in today's market, you aren't making those decision on a this year/next year basis, you are really making them on a this year vs the following 5-7 years, and putting yourself in a hole for that long almost never works well for any but the richest teams.

Edited Thursday at 04:59 PM by gehringer_2

[KL2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

What the hell is the World News Times?

In any event, it would not be super shocking to see Harris leverage whatever relationship he might have with Buster to make a deal happen.

 

AI made 'news' that shouldn't be read or trusted

[Motor City Sonics]

2 hours ago, Longgone said:

The Sporting News and Sports Illustrated have sadly become AI driven clickbait 

I don't understand all these working-class folks thinking AI is some great thing.    It's great if you're a billionaire, but for the rest of us it's the end of your career.    It's scary. 

[romad1]

8 minutes ago, KL2 said:

AI made 'news' that shouldn't be read or trusted

I think its the sports section for the Epoch Times and is not AI but rather guided by the wisdom of the Falun Gong and the original scriptures of the KJ bible

[monkeytargets39]

Bregman signing with the Tigers for 10 years 350 million.  Torkelson traded to the Rockies for Kris Bryant

Source:

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

indeed. In the best of all possible worlds, you would always manage your team for most wins over infinite time - IOW never sacrifice two wins next year for one win this year. But I suppose in the real world if you know  - for instance because you know your are going to lose critical FA's - that your probability to make the playoff is going to nose drive a year or two out, then it's a fair question whether you go for the one game in the current year because being two games worse in the following year doesn't matter. The problem is that in today's market, you aren't making those decision on a this year/next year basis, you are really making them on a this year vs the following 5-7 years, and putting yourself in a hole for that long almost never works well for any but the richest teams.

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.

Edited Thursday at 06:25 PM by chasfh

[Tiger337]

54 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I don't understand all these working-class folks thinking AI is some great thing.    It's great if you're a billionaire, but for the rest of us it's the end of your career.    It's scary. 

As Gehringer pointed out in another thread, AI is garbage in garbage out.  It is is only as good as the people programming it and it will certainly be programmed for the benefit of the wealthy.  

[Tiger337]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

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?

 

For better or for worse, I suspect what we think now about 3 years out will be quite a bit different than what actually happens,  I like the odds, but there is a great deal of uncertainty.  

[chasfh]

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

For better or for worse, I suspect what we think now about 3 years out will be quite a bit different than what actually happens,  I like the odds, but there is a great deal of uncertainty.  

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

[romad1]

18 minutes ago, chasfh said:

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

I feel like you've unleashed a truth here. 

My desired guarantee:   I want to be able to turn on Jason Benetti and whichever athlete-turned analyst and be able to see a 60-40 odds of a win on a given night.   I want them to win enough that they make the playoffs and defeat the Yankees (better that they lose than we win).  Then I want to see them have a puncher's chance against the Dodgers or whichever NL team got lucky and beat the Dodgers. 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

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?

not speaking about the Tigers in particular - just the general issue about how any GM has to approach the decision of how much future liability to take on for the sake of a short term boost. 

And I think an irony that the conventional take would be that teams are more likely to take that big risk when they are already good - a sure playoff team, and want to increase their chances of winning a series, when it's probably a more rational approach to take the risk to get into the playoffs. The number of wins needed to get to the playoffs probably easier to predict your chances for than your chance of winning a series once you get the playoffs. Short series are just so close to random.

[Arlington]

2 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I don't understand all these working-class folks thinking AI is some great thing.    It's great if you're a billionaire, but for the rest of us it's the end of your career.    It's scary. 

Chatgpt's response  ""AI isn’t just for billionaires—it’s a tool, like the internet or electricity. If it’s ‘the end of your career,’ maybe the problem isn’t AI but the people in charge. Should we ban calculators too because they replaced the abacus?"

[Dan Gilmore]

With Bregman being the final big FA out there and Spring Training almost here, the media needs to induce clicks somehow.

I know Boras is seen as a master in getting great contracts, but I kind of like the wait ‘em out thing the Tigers seem to be doing. I don’t think Bregman is either a huge get or a huge risk (without knowing term/$). i do think he’d improve the team, but if it doesn’t work out, that’s okay too.

[Motor City Sonics]

Everyone around here today

 

[Cruzer1]

Eff Bregman. I'd like to see what a healthy Jace Jung can do.

[Shelton]

Just sign Bregman. Jung ain’t it.