gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 13 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said: I feel like this spring is gonna be the deciding time on Mize and Mannings future with the club. absolutely. Mize will probably get more slack because of the power arm, but if Manning shows up throwing 93 he's a goner. Quote
casimir Posted January 8 Posted January 8 15 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said: I don’t disagree with that either. Just saying most of what’s left isn’t better than our 5-7 rotation options, especially when you add in the possible cost. I feel like this spring is gonna be the deciding time on Mize and Mannings future with the club. I think Mize and Manning are on pretty short leashes. They might get spring training, and one might get spring. It’s hard to feel that either has a season long roster spot with the team at this point. Quote
monkeytargets39 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) I’m not sure Mize going all out in short inning relief has good enough swing and miss stuff to convert to effective reliever. He certainly wasn’t impressive enough in that role to make the ALDS roster. If he doesn’t put it together as a starter coming out of ST, I don’t know why you use a roster spot on him. So many other arms in our system—even guys like Guenther and Hanifee—have shown they can be highly effective situationally and fit as potential useful bullpen options. Edited January 8 by monkeytargets39 Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) tigers have so many arms that need long looks in ST there aren't going to be enough quality innings to go around. Edited January 8 by gehringer_2 Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 12 hours ago, 1776 said: Realistically, I don’t think the Tigers were interested in Verlander. The Giants got a one year deal which is exactly what you would want with Verlander at this point. I don’t think so either. He’s not emblematic of the direction this team is forging. I just threw out a possibility of a single year of JV not to trigger fan endorphins, but to possibly eat innings for a year for relative cheap. It’s the kind of long shot we might have taken had he been still available after camp were to break. I don’t think we’re seriously into either Bregman and Santander, either. I doubt we are in the market to forfeit our second pick (plus our third pick if we sign both) and half a million international bucks. I’m thinking based on the direction they’ve been going, one more draft will be considered crucial by them to firm up the firmament. Quote
4hzglory Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, chasfh said: I don’t think so either. He’s not emblematic of the direction this team is forging. I just threw out a possibility of a single year of JV not to trigger fan endorphins, but to possibly eat innings for a year for relative cheap. It’s the kind of long shot we might have taken had he been still available after camp were to break. I don’t think we’re seriously into either Bregman and Santander, either. I doubt we are in the market to forfeit our second pick (plus our third pick if we sign both) and half a million international bucks. I’m thinking based on the direction they’ve been going, one more draft will be considered crucial by them to firm up the firmament. I believe we actually would forfeit our 3rd pick (2nd round) and would not lose international money as we receive revenue sharing. Edited January 8 by 4hzglory Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 5 minutes ago, 4hzglory said: I believe we actually would forfeit our 3rd pick (2nd round) and would not lose international money as we receive revenue sharing. I don't know why I did not know we don't receive revenue sharing, but I did not. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 The more I think about the Giants' Verlander signing, the more I think, that's the exact kind of move a brand new general manager who's also a recently-retired ex-catcher would make. Quote
Tiger337 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 3 hours ago, chasfh said: I don’t think we’re seriously into either Bregman and Santander, either. I doubt we are in the market to forfeit our second pick (plus our third pick if we sign both) and half a million international bucks. I’m thinking based on the direction they’ve been going, one more draft will be considered crucial by them to firm up the firmament. What happens if they lose Skubal in two years and Greene becomes difficult to sign? Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: What happens if they lose Skubal in two years and Greene becomes difficult to sign? If they have't extended Skubal by now I think the odds are he's gone when his deal is up. It's just cooked into the current system. To me that's just a base assumption you have to accept Riley is a tough call, between his style of play, the injuries he's already had and the brutal way he torques his back on his swing I'm guessing they they still have a measure of 'wait and see' in any plans to extend him. Edited January 8 by gehringer_2 1 Quote
roarintiger1 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) It would've been interesting to see Justin Verlander in a closer's role. As a starter, I felt that he threw way too many pitches to be effective later in games. I personally think that he could've rivaled John Smoltz in success, but we'll never know. Edited January 8 by roarintiger1 Quote
Tiger337 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 25 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: If they have't extended Skubal by now I think the odds are he's gone when his deal is up. It's just cooked into the current system. To me that's just a base assumption you have to accept Riley is a tough call, between his style of play, the injuries he's already had and the brutal way he torques his back on his swing I'm guessing they they still have a measure of 'wait and see' in any plans to extend him. I agree on both points, I just don't think that waiting another year to make improvements externally is necessarily going to give them a better chance to win. Rignt now, they play in a relatively soft division and have the best pitcher in baseball. They are ready now. 4 Quote
Tenacious D Posted January 8 Posted January 8 2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: If they have't extended Skubal by now I think the odds are he's gone when his deal is up. It's just cooked into the current system. To me that's just a base assumption you have to accept Riley is a tough call, between his style of play, the injuries he's already had and the brutal way he torques his back on his swing I'm guessing they they still have a measure of 'wait and see' in any plans to extend him. I don’t think Skubal is necessarily gone, but odds of re-signing are low. He probably won’t sign an extension, regardless of how good the offer is. His role in the Union and guidance from Boras will likely prevent that. Quote
Sports_Freak Posted January 8 Posted January 8 1 hour ago, Tenacious D said: I don’t think Skubal is necessarily gone, but odds of re-signing are low. He probably won’t sign an extension, regardless of how good the offer is. His role in the Union and guidance from Boras will likely prevent that. Exactly. Boras doesn't mind taking a chance on an injury. It's not going to cost him as much as Skubal. It's really the only downside to holding off on an extension. If Skubal is injured, it will cost him millions of $$. Quote
HeyAbbott Posted January 8 Posted January 8 5 hours ago, chasfh said: I don't know why I did not know we don't receive revenue sharing, but I did not. As aside here , how much of revenue would the Tigers need to add to not receive revenue sharing? They would need an increase of attendence of roughly 750K to get to 15th place of 30. Assuming 120$ of marginal net revenue perhaps that equate to 90 million. I would assume the new RSN deal reduces revenue by 15 million, which would also need to be made up.Tacking in other variables, I would guess the Tigers are roughly 95 to 100 million shy of the median revenue ( not the average) of the typical MLB team at a minimum. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: Exactly. Boras doesn't mind taking a chance on an injury. It's not going to cost him as much as Skubal. It's really the only downside to holding off on an extension. If Skubal is injured, it will cost him millions of $$. By representing such a large portion of players, Boras is actually at least in a little bit of a conflict of interest in his representation of any individual player because his overall revenues depend far more on the whole market rising than that individual getting the best outcome for his particular situation. Edited January 8 by gehringer_2 Quote
oblong Posted January 8 Posted January 8 I'm pretty sure Skubal is aware of his own injury risk. He's not a dummy. Athletes at his level don't just sit around and listen to what their agent tells them while they drink champagne and bang hookers and do coke all day. The player makes the decisons, not the agent. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 5 hours ago, Tiger337 said: What happens if they lose Skubal in two years and Greene becomes difficult to sign? I bet we can keep Riley. Skubal, probably not so much. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 4 hours ago, Tiger337 said: I agree on both points, I just don't think that waiting another year to make improvements externally is necessarily going to give them a better chance to win. Rignt now, they play in a relatively soft division and have the best pitcher in baseball. They are ready now. They've already said they don't want to sign anyone who will block viable internal options, so we may have to accept that. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 1 hour ago, oblong said: I'm pretty sure Skubal is aware of his own injury risk. He's not a dummy. Athletes at his level don't just sit around and listen to what their agent tells them while they drink champagne and bang hookers and do coke all day. The player makes the decisons, not the agent. Now this is a terrible thing to say about high-level athletes. No way are they drinking champagne. 1 Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 15 minutes ago, chasfh said: They've already said they don't want to sign anyone who will block viable internal options, so we may have to accept that. One man's viable internal candidate is another man's sub-replacement bum 1 Quote
Tiger337 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 47 minutes ago, chasfh said: They've already said they don't want to sign anyone who will block viable internal options, so we may have to accept that. We don't know what the viable options are because we don't what the Tigers think abut the readiness of the options or what position they will ultimately play. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 25 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: We don't know what the viable options are because we don't what the Tigers think abut the readiness of the options or what position they will ultimately play. I would be somewhat surprised to see the Tigers sign Bregman at all, and even more surprised to see both him and them agree to a full six years here. Quote
Tiger337 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 6 minutes ago, chasfh said: I would be somewhat surprised to see the Tigers sign Bregman at all, and even more surprised to see both him and them agree to a full six years here. I do think they are seriously interested and would not be surprised if they signed him. Quote
chasfh Posted January 8 Posted January 8 7 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: I do think they are seriously interested and would not be surprised if they signed him. That would be pretty cool. Quote
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.