2021-22 Tigers Hot Stove League

[RatkoVarda]

no idea if this goes anywhere but nice to see

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/tigers-interested-in-jon-gray.html

[1776]

I won’t believe Avila has signed anyone of significance until after the ink dries. 
I see DeSclafani as a possible Jordan Zimmerman 2.0. He had a great year for SF and was huge in their success. I don’t believe he can come close to replicating 2021. That’s just my opinion. 
Jon Gray is a much more interesting conversation. 

[RandyMarsh]

2 minutes ago, 1776 said:

I won’t believe Avila has signed anyone of significance until after the ink dries. 
I see DeSclafani as a possible Jordan Zimmerman 2.0. He had a great year for SF and was huge in their success. I don’t believe he can come close to replicating 2021. That’s just my opinion. 
Jon Gray is a much more interesting conversation. 

Agreed,I much prefer Gray or Rodriguez.

[casimir]

3 hours ago, chasfh said:

Of course we hope for both, but that just short-circuits the this-or-that question, so if you'd like to, tell us which of the two you'd prefer.

Isn't it as elementary as the more often a team is in the playoffs the more often they have a crack at the title?

[gehringer_2]

5 hours ago, KL2 said:

We've had this discussion before people like Tiger337 just want something fun to watch. Me -- the correct group-- wants championships because that's the goal. Nobody remembers the really good teams.

why do I care if anyone remembers the good teams or great teams? They aren't remembering me.

[gehringer_2]

Just now, casimir said:

Isn't it as elementary as the more often a team is in the playoffs the more often they have a crack at the title?

Yes, although the Braves had such an outlier experience that they managed to discredit the truth.

[RedTeamGo!]

32 minutes ago, 1776 said:

I won’t believe Avila has signed anyone of significance until after the ink dries. 
I see DeSclafani as a possible Jordan Zimmerman 2.0. He had a great year for SF and was huge in their success. I don’t believe he can come close to replicating 2021. That’s just my opinion. 
Jon Gray is a much more interesting conversation. 

Disco actually had a couple solid years for the Reds as well in 2015, 2016, and 2019. He was bad in 2018 and horrible in 2020, though. 2018 was coming off TJ and 2020 was, well, I cannot really hold 2020 stats against anyone. It was 9 games. 

I do not think Disco is as good as he was in SF last year, but I certainly think he is a solid MOR starter. 

I would rather have Gray as well, but he might cost quite a bit more. 

[chasfh]

36 minutes ago, casimir said:

Isn't it as elementary as the more often a team is in the playoffs the more often they have a crack at the title?

OK.

[Archie]

1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

Agreed,I much prefer Gray or Rodriguez.

I second that.  Apparently JV is still on the radar too.  About the only big name FA pitcher I haven't heard Tigers had an interest in is Max Sherzer.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Archie

[1984Echoes]

6 hours ago, sabretooth said:

... Let's take two kind of realistic examples of teams that mostly win (Model #1), and teams that mostly lose (Model #2):

- Model #1: team that wins 90-100 games for 7 out of 10 years, does so-so for two years, and has one bad season out of 10, and wins zero championships in 10 years is actually worse than

- Model #2: a team that loses 90-110 games every year for 7 years out of 10 years, then does so-so for two years, then in the 10th year, makes the playoffs and wins the championship.

...

There's a problem with your model here... you haven't talked about the SECOND 10 years:

- Model #1: team's stars age out or hit FA, and there's nothing left in the pipeline. Trying to maintain the "glory" of the past 10 years, this team signs some FA's to fill the gaps and try to continue winning like they did the past 10 years. But they don't. The FA's falter and the rest of the team is too old or just not good enough any more. In THESE 10 years: Model #1 team loses an average 87 games. A few seasons they get above .500 and threaten making the playoffs, but never quite get there. Their middling draft picks turn into average or less Major Leaguers, with several flopping out or just not making it at all to MLB. They go through 6 Manager changes in this decade trying to "find something", but never do. Their .463 winning percentage for the decade is admirable, as is their willingness to try to win... But it also becomes known in the team's lore as the "Lost Decade".

- Model #2: In this decade, Model #2 becomes... Model #1. Averaging 95 wins in this decade though, Model #2 also wins another two Championships and makes another WS, losing to the dreaded Colorado Rockies. The only black spot in the decade for Model #2.

[1984Echoes]

5 hours ago, casimir said:

I want to see another title.  I want to see a playoff contender year in and year out.  Ain't no reason to not hope for both....

This.

And by this, I mean playoff contender, NOT a middling 80 wins team every year that isn't good enough to make the playoffs. I mean a 90+ win team that makes the playoffs roughly 7 times out of 10 and just misses the other 3. With a championship or two tossed in there...

[1984Echoes]

4 hours ago, chasfh said:

Of course we hope for both, but that just short-circuits the this-or-that question, so if you'd like to, tell us which of the two you'd prefer.

I have a different short-cut, which is...

IF you have a good Draft & Develop team: It may be possible to avoid my "second 10 years" for Model #1 (no championships but good for the prior decade; second decade = also-ran never making the playoffs, but trying with FA's or other methods.) By having some talented players coming up IF the farm system is maintained (not having top 10 1st rounders coming up but other prospects that were developed...), another pathway is provided to build serious play contending teams.

But if a team is NOT good at drafting & developing, basically an empty farm system, then (A) IMO, there's no choice but to follow Model A in order to first repair the Farm System and then, hopefully, turn Model #2 into Model #1, or better... Including a Championship or two. But (B) An empty farm system means trying to maintain a playoff caliber team that no longer is playoff caliber, with nothing in the farm system to support being a playoff contender, is a fruitless and maddening exercise. With the most likely outcome a string of less than .500 teams, no years making the playoffs, and worse then losing 110 games each year for 5 years straight. Again, IMO.

To me, it ALL depends on the farm system... if a team maintains it, it opens up multiple pathways, not just one (lose 110 games for 5 years straight to get a good team...).

But if there's an empty farm system, I have no interest in trying to hunt 85 wins in a string of 75 win seasons.

No thank you.

[bobrob2004]

Another title?  How about a title? Because in order to see another title, you have to see at least one title first. 

[mtutiger]

Any two of Gray, Rodriguez, JV, DeSclafani, or Steven Matz would be fantastic... although I'm prepared to be disappointed lol

[1984Echoes]

1 minute ago, mtutiger said:

Any two of Gray, Rodriguez, JV, DeSclafani, or Steven Matz would be fantastic... although I'm prepared to be disappointed lol

Give me ONE top tier and...

I won't worry about who ends up at the back end (5th starter) of the rotation.

IE: Get me JV, and I'm happy.

[sabretooth]

4 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

There's a problem with your model here... you haven't talked about the SECOND 10 years:

- Model #1: team's stars age out or hit FA, and there's nothing left in the pipeline. Trying to maintain the "glory" of the past 10 years, this team signs some FA's to fill the gaps and try to continue winning like they did the past 10 years. But they don't. The FA's falter and the rest of the team is too old or just not good enough any more. In THESE 10 years: Model #1 team loses an average 87 games. A few seasons they get above .500 and threaten making the playoffs, but never quite get there. Their middling draft picks turn into average or less Major Leaguers, with several flopping out or just not making it at all to MLB. They go through 6 Manager changes in this decade trying to "find something", but never do. Their .463 winning percentage for the decade is admirable, as is their willingness to try to win... But it also becomes known in the team's lore as the "Lost Decade".

- Model #2: In this decade, Model #2 becomes... Model #1. Averaging 95 wins in this decade though, Model #2 also wins another two Championships and makes another WS, losing to the dreaded Colorado Rockies. The only black spot in the decade for Model #2.

Your "Model 1" is not a model, it's poor management and poor player development.  In a word, the Tigers under AA.

Any examples of your Model 2?

Edited November 12, 2021 by sabretooth

[sabretooth]

4 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

I have a different short-cut, which is...

IF you have a good Draft & Develop team: It may be possible to avoid my "second 10 years" for Model #1 (no championships but good for the prior decade; second decade = also-ran never making the playoffs, but trying with FA's or other methods.) By having some talented players coming up IF the farm system is maintained (not having top 10 1st rounders coming up but other prospects that were developed...), another pathway is provided to build serious play contending teams.

But if a team is NOT good at drafting & developing, basically an empty farm system, then (A) IMO, there's no choice but to follow Model A in order to first repair the Farm System and then, hopefully, turn Model #2 into Model #1, or better... Including a Championship or two. But (B) An empty farm system means trying to maintain a playoff caliber team that no longer is playoff caliber, with nothing in the farm system to support being a playoff contender, is a fruitless and maddening exercise. With the most likely outcome a string of less than .500 teams, no years making the playoffs, and worse then losing 110 games each year for 5 years straight. Again, IMO.

To me, it ALL depends on the farm system... if a team maintains it, it opens up multiple pathways, not just one (lose 110 games for 5 years straight to get a good team...).

But if there's an empty farm system, I have no interest in trying to hunt 85 wins in a string of 75 win seasons.

No thank you.

You've just described the Tigers under AA so far.

[sabretooth]

AA may yet get it right from a player development standpoint, time will tell. 

But so far they are not even close at this point at succeeding from their own development of talent. 

Skubal and Turnbull are the only guys that they have drafted and developed into decent major league starting players in the last 5 years who were not top-10 picks in the 1st round.  

[Stanley70]

Under nearly any model if the the organization drafts and develops well they can sustain winning and move from one core to another without going through a painful rebuild that takes 3-5 years.

Since the Tigers have been horrible at drafting and developing since Jim Campbell retired they have had to go through many multi year periods of suckage. Put a clown like  Randy Smith in charge of the rebuild and it can take 10.

[1984Echoes]

15 hours ago, sabretooth said:

AA may yet get it right from a player development standpoint, time will tell...

This is the key.

I see you also moved the goalposts since you realized Manning was not a top 5 1st rounder.

But he's still draft and develop since he was so raw coming out of HS...

[bobrob2004]

8 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

This is the key.

I see you also moved the goalposts since you realized Manning was not a top 5 1st rounder.

But he's still draft and develop since he was so raw coming out of HS...

Tyler Alexander was a 2nd round draft pick and I don't think we give enough credit to how well he has performed.  

[1984Echoes]

10 minutes ago, bobrob2004 said:

Tyler Alexander was a 2nd round draft pick and I don't think we give enough credit to how well he has performed.  

Bingo.

And Funkhauser was a 4th.

[KL2]

14 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Bingo.

And Funkhauser was a 4th.

not to mention no team has a bunch of sucess developing 9th round players. Saber is being unfair in his criticsm. It's not like the White Sox are out there hitting o 7th round picks year after year. 

[casimir]

3 hours ago, Stanley70 said:

Under nearly any model if the the organization drafts and develops well they can sustain winning and move from one core to another without going through a painful rebuild that takes 3-5 years.

Since the Tigers have been horrible at drafting and developing since Jim Campbell retired they have had to go through many multi year periods of suckage. Put a clown like  Randy Smith in charge of the rebuild and it can take 10.

Its kind of why St. Louis has been an annual playoff contender for the past two decades.

[Tiger337]

The Tigers are in on every shortstop and starting pitcher and they expect a signing frenzy before December 1.  Otherwise, they won't sign until February.  This should be fun.  

 

Quote

Jeff Passan of ESPN reports that Corey Seager and Marcus Semien are "increasingly likely" to sign before December 1.

December 1, of course, is when the CBA expires (technically midnight on December 2). Passan notes that teams have been telling free agents they can either sign this month or likely have to wait until February, when most expect a new CBA to finally be ironed out. He also writes that the starting pitching market "is expected to have multiple big-name pitchers get pre-lockout deals." Passan says that the Yankees are one club known to have shown interest in both Seager and Semien.

RELATED: 

Marcus Semien

, New York Yankees

SOURCE: ESPN.com

Nov 12, 2021, 9:44 AM ET

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Tiger337