What's wrong with the tigers

"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.


5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to think
that bolstering the offense would produce wins.








Here is my list of weaknesses:
>
> 1. V. thin at starting pitching (a strength in 2006).
> 2. Poor to very poor defense at RF, 1st, SS (no range), 3rd, and
> sometimes LF.
> 3. Weak relief, admittedly due mostly to injuries.
> 4. Hitters generally with poor OBP.
> 5. Poor team speed.
> 6. Lots of inflexible long-term contracts that inhibit restructuring
> of the team.
>
> The strengths are some good relievers on the shelf (Fernando Rodney
> and Joel Zumaya), some good to v. good hitters (Carlos Guillen,
> Magglio Ordonez, and Placido Polanco) and v. good defense at CF and C.
>
> If one looks at the better managed organizations, we see an growing
> emphasis on OBP, defense, especially defensive range, and reserves to
> deal with injuries, especially to starting pitching. Of the
> well-manged organizations, I'd list Boston, AZ, Oakland, Atlanta, and
> Twins, perhaps one or two more. Detroit has enough money to compete
> with all of these organizations --- borderline with Boston.
>
> Who to blame? Don't know. I think Zumaya was overused in 2006, but who
> can say if that contributed to his injury. Middle relievers have a
> high injury rate. The manager gives too little attention to OBP. The
> GM put a high premium, NYY style, to winning now, leading to the
> inflexible contracts. He underestimated how poor Renteria had become
> in terms of range (never trade with Atlanta <g>). And bad luck.
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
<billkawalec DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:

>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>
>
>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to think
>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.

That was a bad gamble, and they lost.




- Scott Smith: scott.smith DeleteThis @iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

"S. Smith" <scott.smith.DeleteThis@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
> <billkawalec.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>
>>
>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>think
>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>
> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.



no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.






>
>
>
>
> - Scott Smith: scott.smith.DeleteThis@iphouse.com
> MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
>
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"S. Smith" <scott.smith.RemoveThis@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>> <billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>
>>>
>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>think
>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>
>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>
>
>
>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.


Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
as bad as it has been.

Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to once
again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or gamble)
just isn't working.




- Scott Smith: scott.smith.RemoveThis@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82 RemoveThis @4ax.com>, Scott Smith says...
>
>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawalec RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith RemoveThis @iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>> <billkawalec RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>think
>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>
>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>
>>
>>
>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>
>
>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>as bad as it has been.
>
>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to once
>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or gamble)
>just isn't working.

Seems to have started working now. He He

Runs Per Season:
31' Yankees (1,067)
99' Indians (1,009)
2008 Tigers (213)

Dave
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

On 21 May 2008 17:14:31 -0700, snapp44 <snapp44_member.TakeThisOut@newsguy.com> wrote:

>In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>, Scott Smith says...
>>
>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawalec.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith.TakeThisOut@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>> <billkawalec.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>>think
>>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>>
>>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>>
>>
>>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>>as bad as it has been.
>>
>>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to once
>>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or gamble)
>>just isn't working.
>
>Seems to have started working now. He He

Once again, try to remember it's Seattle...the only American
League team with a record worse than the Tigers. And Seattle's
pitching is nearly as bad as the Tigers.



- Scott Smith: scott.smith.TakeThisOut@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

"snapp44" <snapp44_member RemoveThis @newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:g12dt7031c@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82 RemoveThis @4ax.com>, Scott Smith
> says...
>>
>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawalec RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith RemoveThis @iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>> <billkawalec RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>>think
>>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>>
>>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>>
>>
>>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>>as bad as it has been.
>>
>>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to once
>>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or gamble)
>>just isn't working.
>
> Seems to have started working now. He He


It worked against Texas pitching too. After 2-10, they went 15-5, then
crashed again, which will cause me to remain skeptical until I see a full
month of .667 baseball.





>
> Runs Per Season:
> 31' Yankees (1,067)
> 99' Indians (1,009)
> 2008 Tigers (213)
>
> Dave
>
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

In article <xuGdnf1mJulEn6jVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d DeleteThis @comcast.com>, Bill Kawalec says...
>
>
>"snapp44" <snapp44_member DeleteThis @newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:g12dt7031c@drn.newsguy.com...
>> In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82 DeleteThis @4ax.com>, Scott Smith
>> says...
>>>
>>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawalec DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith DeleteThis @iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>>> <billkawalec DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record. IMO,
>>>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>>>think
>>>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>>>
>>>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>>>
>>>
>>>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>>>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>>>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>>>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>>>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>>>as bad as it has been.
>>>
>>>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>>>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>>>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>>>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>>>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to once
>>>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or gamble)
>>>just isn't working.
>>
>> Seems to have started working now. He He
>
>
>It worked against Texas pitching too. After 2-10, they went 15-5, then
>crashed again, which will cause me to remain skeptical until I see a full
>month of .667 baseball.
>

I don't ever remember them being 17-15 this year, which means
I will continue to remain skeptical of anything you have to
say.

Runs Per Season:
31' Yankees (1,067)
99' Indians (1,009)
2008 Tigers (213)

Dave
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

"snapp44" <snapp44_member.RemoveThis@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:g13v6s0220k@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <xuGdnf1mJulEn6jVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d.RemoveThis@comcast.com>, Bill Kawalec
> says...
>>
>>
>>"snapp44" <snapp44_member.RemoveThis@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>news:g12dt7031c@drn.newsguy.com...
>>> In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, Scott Smith
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>><billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith.RemoveThis@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>>>> <billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record.
>>>>>>>IMO,
>>>>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>>>>think
>>>>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>>>>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>>>>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>>>>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>>>>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>>>>as bad as it has been.
>>>>
>>>>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>>>>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>>>>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>>>>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>>>>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to
>>>>once
>>>>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or
>>>>gamble)
>>>>just isn't working.
>>>
>>> Seems to have started working now. He He
>>
>>
>>It worked against Texas pitching too. After 2-10, they went 15-5, then
>>crashed again, which will cause me to remain skeptical until I see a full
>>month of .667 baseball.
>>
>
> I don't ever remember them being 17-15 this year, which means
> I will continue to remain skeptical of anything you have to
> say.


That's just being negative.
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

On Wed, 21 May 2008 15:34:42 -0400, McDuck
<wallyDELETEMEMcDuck RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:

>Well, apparently, it is not Verlander. Here is my list of weaknesses:
>
>1. V. thin at starting pitching (a strength in 2006).

This is no surprise. Look at how the second half of 2007 went. Not
too much different than the beginning of 2008. Willis was supposed to
shore up the starters. It hasn't happened (and may not). He's going
to the bullpen, so we'll have to wait and see how that turns out.
Meanwhile Verlander, Bonderman and Rogers are struggling. Rogers
turned in a good performance againt the Mariners and the usually
shakey bullpen gave up no runs. But this has been rare so far this
season.

>2. Poor to very poor defense at RF, 1st, SS (no range), 3rd, and
>sometimes LF.

Ordonez and Rayburn have made 1 error each so far this season so your
poor defense at RF is all wrong. Renteria is as effective at short as
Guillen was but has made 4 errors and Santiago has made 1. Guillen
made 24 errors there last season and Santiago, Perez and Infante made
6 combined at SS last season. You don't mention Center where
Granderson has made 2 errors and Clete Thomas made 2 errors when he
played there. Much more of a problem than RF. LF has seen a plethora
of players since Jones was let lose. Jones made 1 error while there,
Thames and Sheffield none, Joyce 1. Cabrera has made 1 error at first
(Guillen made 2 before being moved to third) and is still learning the
position. Naturally there'll be some defensive fall of between having
Casey at first and Cabrera or Guillen. Both Cabrera and Guillen had 5
errors each at third. Only Inge (in 19 games - same as Guillen) had
none. I believe the errors at third and first will come down as those
players get accustomed to their new position. Growing pains that are
exacerbated by the losing.


>3. Weak relief, admittedly due mostly to injuries.

Losing Zumaya and Rodney was a huge blow to the weak relief corps and
with the starters getting knocked out of games early, this weakness
has been put into the spotlight.

>4. Hitters generally with poor OBP.

Not all, but most.

>5. Poor team speed.

Happens with a veteran team. Only Santiago and Inge have anything of
decent speed. But many teams are in the same boat, so I don't see
this as a reason for the number of loses the team has incurred.


>6. Lots of inflexible long-term contracts that inhibit restructuring
>of the team.
>

Lots? Willis and Cabrera have long term deals. Ordonez is signed
through 2009 with the next two years a club option. Sheffield has 1
year left on his contract. Rodriguez is in his option year. Guillen
is signed through 2011. This was a deal made this season. Renteria is
in the last year of his contract which the Tigers picked up from
Atlanta. The club has an option in 2009. Kenny Rogers is in his last
year. Bonderman is signed through 2010 as is Willis and Inge and
Robertson. Polanco is signed through 2009 as is Verlander. Granderson
actually has the longest contract of any Tiger having been signed
through 2013 with a club option in 2014. All the other players have
contracts only through this season. So your #6 is wrong.

>The strengths are some good relievers on the shelf (Fernando Rodney
>and Joel Zumaya), some good to v. good hitters (Carlos Guillen,
>Magglio Ordonez, and Placido Polanco) and v. good defense at CF and C.
>

That's a no brainer.

>If one looks at the better managed organizations, we see an growing
>emphasis on OBP, defense, especially defensive range, and reserves to
>deal with injuries, especially to starting pitching. Of the
>well-manged organizations, I'd list Boston, AZ, Oakland, Atlanta, and
>Twins, perhaps one or two more. Detroit has enough money to compete
>with all of these organizations --- borderline with Boston.
>

Well I'm not so sure about Boston. They are an aging team with only a
couple of young guys doing well. Arizona I'd agree with and Atlanta
is turning the corner after being down for a few years. Twins are
doing it with mirrors as they are basically a minor league team
playing in the majors and the Central happens to be weak so far this
season. Oakland is questionable as well. Besides, as the Yankess
have shown, money isn't everything.


>Who to blame? Don't know. I think Zumaya was overused in 2006, but who
>can say if that contributed to his injury. Middle relievers have a
>high injury rate. The manager gives too little attention to OBP. The
>GM put a high premium, NYY style, to winning now, leading to the
>inflexible contracts. He underestimated how poor Renteria had become
>in terms of range (never trade with Atlanta <g>). And bad luck.

Zumaya's overuse contributed to a box falling on his shoulder causing
his surgery? Wow, now that's some convoluted logic!

I also wonder how you know Leyland is ignoring OBP? You don't think
he talks to his team about getting on base, moving the runners along
being accountable? What do you think the closed club house meeting
was about a few days ago? You're trying to make some points that just
aren't there. The problems with the club are mainly with the players
themselves, not management although I do lay some of the pitching woes
at Chuck Hernandez's feet.

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"Golf is a game in which you yell 'fore',
shoot six and write down five."
-- Paul Harvey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers 

"snapp44" <snapp44_member.RemoveThis@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:g13v6s0220k@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <xuGdnf1mJulEn6jVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d.RemoveThis@comcast.com>, Bill Kawalec
> says...
>>
>>
>>"snapp44" <snapp44_member.RemoveThis@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>news:g12dt7031c@drn.newsguy.com...
>>> In article <ol89345uq8h8c8nqioehp25ks2bv9k4i82.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, Scott Smith
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:05:56 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>><billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"S. Smith" <scott.smith.RemoveThis@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:et09345icofugee4iapf7qmgtqjfuqgijp@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:10:53 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
>>>>>> <billkawalec.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"McDuck" <wallyDELETEMEMcDuck.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:hdt834doh7hj08fm3dtcjkngn6c5t0tvrq@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> Well, apparently, it is not Verlander.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>5.61 ERA in 10 starts. Doesn't help...
>>>>>>>Clearly, however, that doesn't solely account for an 18-27 record.
>>>>>>>IMO,
>>>>>>>based on '07 pitching performance, it was resonable for management to
>>>>>>>think
>>>>>>>that bolstering the offense would produce wins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was a bad gamble, and they lost.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>no it wasn't. the results defy all odds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Not really. The Tigers front office knew the pitching was suspect, but
>>>>they gambled that they could make up for it with power hitting offense,
>>>>rather than trying to address the pitching problems. That was a gamble
>>>>that didn't pay off. Several people, myself included, suspected that
>>>>might be a problem this season...but, even I didn't think it would be
>>>>as bad as it has been.
>>>>
>>>>Now the Tigers have locked in huge salaries for guys like Cabrera and
>>>>Willis for several years, and those are guys who can't really do much
>>>>to help with the issues they are having. So now they have less to spend
>>>>on any quality free agent pitchers. The Tigers may have to eventually
>>>>trade away some of that "power hitting" for some quality pitching to
>>>>once
>>>>again put things back into a normal balance. Their experiment (or
>>>>gamble)
>>>>just isn't working.
>>>
>>> Seems to have started working now. He He
>>
>>
>>It worked against Texas pitching too. After 2-10, they went 15-5, then
>>crashed again, which will cause me to remain skeptical until I see a full
>>month of .667 baseball.
>>
>
> I don't ever remember them being 17-15 this year, which means
> I will continue to remain skeptical of anything you have to
> say.


No, they weren't over .500 at any time, but there was a 5-15 stretch.Perhaps
I'll look it up later.







>
> Runs Per Season:
> 31' Yankees (1,067)
> 99' Indians (1,009)
> 2008 Tigers (213)
>
> Dave
>
 >> Stay informed about: What's wrong with the tigers