500 possibility slipping away!

"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
news:qvd334ds3tai3f0uh9055n8b3pi4e4koq8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:38:48 -0500, S. Smith <scott.smith DeleteThis @iphouse.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:52:21 -0400, "John Poutre"
>><mehatespam DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Brian" <sportsdadmi DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:zuWdndD0hfVs47HVnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone out there really believe this club will get to 500? It is
>>>> looking like a long frustrating 100+ loss season.
>>>> One has to wonder who Illitch will hold accountable?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Up until the last couple of days, I would have thought your comments were
>>>just the doom and gloom of a fan that easily gives up on a team. But to
>>>be
>>>honest, I am now starting to worry. I think you have to clearly look at
>>>Verlander and Bonderman. Their numbers seem to scream so injury that
>>>they
>>>are hush about.
>>
>>Don't forget about Rogers, he has been pretty shitty this season,
>>too. And it's not injuries that are effecting these guys. The Tigers
>>pitching needs a revamp from top to bottom, IMO.
>>
>>Not sure what the deal is with the hitting slumps, though. Old age?
>>
>
> The real strength of the tigers for the next few years was the good
> pitching draftees. It was also the reserve in case of failures. But
> the prospects are mostly gone for position players and Willis, who is
> ineffective (and many predicted as much). remeber, when Dombrowski
> arrived, the minors were v. thin. He added some quality players, but
> the minors are still thin, and now the brightest prospects are gone.
>
> Perhaps the Deals were good one, perhaps not. So far, the tigers have
> not gotten value, but I've not looked to see how the guys they gave up
> have done.
>
> Trading prospects is always a risk. I did not think trading for Miguel
> Cabrera was a big risk, but so far, it has been.


Really??? So, leading the team in HRs, 24 RBI through a quarter of the
season, and a a BA at .270 and improving is a liability???





So, I'd think
> Dombrowski has to be in a bit of trouble, much like Cashman for NYY
> for the opposite reason (holding onto prospects who underperformed and
> not getting the top guy --- Santana).

"Sir Creep" <sircreep DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:13ce9b98-87f0-47b3-b0a7-a9f1c1f26f18@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On May 15, 4:18 pm, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawa... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> "John Poutre" <mehates... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > Now, I don't think you can blame Dombrowski for this.
>
> No, I sure can't. We all expected big things. How is it they make mediocre
> pitchers look like Josh Beckett?


Hold on BK Lounge....you got a mouse in your pocket? What 'WE ALL'
expected was a tenacious hitting squad and a mediocre staff that
wouldn't be hurt terribly by giving up 4.75 runs/game. What we got is
a pile of cricket wickets who are unable to make up for said mediocre
pitching. Verlander has been the sole TRUE disappointment....WE ALL
never said this staff was going to mow down the opposing
hitters...maybe YOU did, or YOU thought it....but unless you cut/paste
commentary from any one of us saying otherwise, I beg to differ. As I
said to someone else who flippantly used that phrase on another
thread, do NOT put words in our mouths.



*************************
And you wonder why I complain about people reading skills?!?!? WHERE in the
hell did you see ME blame the pitching?!?!?! Let me QUOTE you what I wrote,
DIRECTLY above your ""response."":
We all expected big things. How is it they make mediocre
> pitchers look like Josh Beckett?



GET IT???





SCreep