Rebbiv said:

We cannot be buyers, plain and simple, especially in 3rd place.

Click to expand...

I know...but Mr. I has one foot in the grave...if he feels there is a slight chance that they can even compete for the wildcard he will instruct them to be buyers.

tomdalton22 said:

I know...but Mr. I has one foot in the grave...if he feels there is a slight chance that they can even compete for the wildcard he will instruct them to be buyers.

Click to expand...

Exactly - future seasons be damned! If we are within reasonable striking distance, we'll be buying. If we aren't (say we are 10 games out), we'll flip some of the unsigned guys (Price, Cespedes, etc.) for pieces that can help next year. We aren't going into a full blown rebuild in the near-term. Mr. I is gonna keep spending and is banking on his locked up stars to give us at least a couple more legitimate shots at the World Series.

tomdalton22 said:

I know...but Mr. I has one foot in the grave...if he feels there is a slight chance that they can even compete for the wildcard he will instruct them to be buyers.

Click to expand...

And that will doom this team for 10 years or more.

It has been 31 years since their last World Series

Drought of winning World Series (Appearances since)

CHC 1908-Present (7 1910, 1918, 1929, 1932, 1935, 1938, 1945)
CLE 1948-Present (3 1954, 1995, 1997)
TEX 1961-Present (2 2010, 2011)
HOU 1962-Present (1 2005)
WSN 1969-Present (0)
MIL 1969-Present (1 1982)
SDP 1969-Present (2 1984, 1998)
SEA 1977-Present (0)
PIT 1980-Present (0)
BAL 1984-Present (0)
DET 1985-Present (2 2006, 2012)
KCR 1986-Present (1 2014)
NYM 1987-Present (1 2000)
LAD 1989-Present (0)
OAK 1990-Present (1 1990)
CIN 1991-Present (0)
MIN 1992-Present (0)
COL 1993-Present (1 2007)
TOR 1994-Present (0)
ATL 1996-Present (2 1996, 1999)
TBR 1998-Present (1 2008)
ARZ 2002-Present (0)
LAA 2003-Present (0)
MIA 2004-Present (0)
CHW 2006-Present (0)
PHI 2009-Present (1 2009)
NYY 2010-Present (0)
STL 2012-Present (1 2013)
BOS 2014-Present (0)
SFG Present

There are 10 teams that have not won a World Series since the Tigers won it last. Of those 10 teams, they have been to the World Series 6 times since 1984, while DET has been there twice.

11 of the 30 teams have not been to a World Series in the last 20 years. It is hard to get to the World Series and even harder to win it.

kingofdetroit57 said:

Exactly - future seasons be damned! If we are within reasonable striking distance, we'll be buying. If we aren't (say we are 10 games out), we'll flip some of the unsigned guys (Price, Cespedes, etc.) for pieces that can help next year. We aren't going into a full blown rebuild in the near-term. Mr. I is gonna keep spending and is banking on his locked up stars to give us at least a couple more legitimate shots at the World Series.

Click to expand...

What exactly is a "legitimate shot" at winning a World Series?

All the spending has done nothing for it. We actually came the closest after a rebuilding period (2006). Now if you wanted to say a shot at winning the Central Division, that I could maybe understand....even though it's not looking good for that even.

This team is a mess, which cant be fixed with a couple of deadline trades. the only smart thing to do is be sellers and hope we can work our way back in a few years.

Thumb said:

What exactly is a "legitimate shot" at winning a World Series?

All the spending has done nothing for it. We actually came the closest after a rebuilding period (2006). Now if you wanted to say a shot at winning the Central Division, that I could maybe understand....even though it's not looking good for that even.

This team is a mess, which cant be fixed with a couple of deadline trades. the only smart thing to do is be sellers and hope we can work our way back in a few years.

Click to expand...

Exactly. With the right moves, we could remain competitive for the next few years and be back pounding on the door in 3-5 years. Otherwise, it would ruin this team's long term forecast by constantly "buying" and falling short.

The window has closed, but you don't have to move out of the house.

Thumb said:

What exactly is a "legitimate shot" at winning a World Series?

All the spending has done nothing for it. We actually came the closest after a rebuilding period (2006). Now if you wanted to say a shot at winning the Central Division, that I could maybe understand....even though it's not looking good for that even.

This team is a mess, which cant be fixed with a couple of deadline trades. the only smart thing to do is be sellers and hope we can work our way back in a few years.

Click to expand...

A legitimate shot is having Miggy signed and in his prime, at least one ace (formerly JV, then Scherzer, and currently Price), then having some other shiny pieces like Victor, Iggy, Cespedes, Soria, Kinsler, and so on. You can always build around that core and make a run. Most of us worry about when the core disappears though. That will happen at some point (3-5yrs?) w/o some level of rebuild and/or consistently solid drafting though.

kingofdetroit57 said:

A legitimate shot is having Miggy signed and in his prime, at least one ace (formerly JV, then Scherzer, and currently Price), then having some other shiny pieces like Victor, Iggy, Cespedes, Soria, Kinsler, and so on. You can always build around that core and make a run. Most of us worry about when the core disappears though. That will happen at some point (3-5yrs?) w/o some level of rebuild and/or consistently solid drafting though.

Click to expand...

The Tigers lost $20.7 Mil last year and are expected to exceed that amount this year. They have lost money in 5 of the last 7 seasons (-$90.1 Mil in those 7 years), soon to be 6 of the last 8, due to "because Illitch will do anything to win" theory. DD has traded away virtually every prospect that meant anything the last two years and this year's draft was another of the same, i.e. picks no one else would draft as high as the Tigers. Last year's top pick, Derek Hill, is almost a complete bust.

It takes 3-5 years for drafted players to be able to make any contributions at the big league level. Longer for High Schoolers. Hich Schoolers are also the most volatile picks, as they tend to fail more often than 2-4 year college players.

Top 75 picks by DET

2009 = 1 HS (Turner) and 1 4YR (both traded)
2010 = 1 HS (Castellanos) and 2 4YR (both have been traded away)
2011 = 0
2012 = 0
2013 = 3 4YR (top 2 were traded away)
2014 = 1 HS (Derek Hill) and 1 4YR

So, in the 6 drafts, Detroit has had 10 picks in the top 75. Of those 10 picks, they have traded away 6 of them. Aside from the two players from 2014, they still have Castellanos (possibly a bust?) and Ziomek (too old for the league he plays in).

The top pick in 2015 is a High Schooler, Beau Burrows.

Again, the cupboard is bare and their recent drafts suck. You get most of your better MLB players from the top 60-75 picks. Occasionally, a team drafts a Mike Piazza in the 62nd round and gets lucky (currently MLB only has 40 rounds).

They cannot spend more money and "fix" the mess. At $172.7 Mil payroll is already $9 Mil more than last year. They are on track to lose $30 Mil this year, more if they miss the playoffs. Adding another high priced player means that go further in the hole.

By not turning a profit, they do not have the money to invest into player development, like most of the other teams do.


We are all Tiger fans and want them to win the World Series. Heck, I wished they have won more than they have. But I have lived through the lean years and I would rather not do that again at the sake of a slight possibility. This team needs serious help.

You are operating under the premise that they are indeed losing money. Despite what's out there in the media from time to time, I don't believe that assertion for a second. The reason I don't is because teams aren't forced to open their books, and because other factors like licensing, media deals, profit sharing, etc. are typically not accounted for. They may be losing money on operating income alone, but they are making money hand over fist when things are viewed as a whole.

Even if you choose to believe that the Tigers lost money in a given year, or even the last 3-5, you should be able to take a step back and see all of the years where they made money and the value appreciation of the team/brand/empire during the invested period. Forbes puts the current value at $1.125B. Ilitch paid $82M for the team in '92. That's a 13.7x appreciation in 23yrs of ownership! He's probably made even more on his investment in the Red Wings. Likewise for the brick and mortar ATM called Motor City Casino, and on his $5 pizzas.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/detroit-tigers/

kingofdetroit57 said:

You are operating under the premise that they are indeed losing money. Despite what's out there in the media from time to time, I don't believe that assertion for a second. The reason I don't is because teams aren't forced to open their books, and because other factors like licensing, media deals, profit sharing, etc. are typically not accounted for. They may be losing money on operating income alone, but they are making money hand over fist when things are viewed as a whole.

Even if you choose to believe that the Tigers lost money in a given year, or even the last 3-5, you should be able to take a step back and see all of the years where they made money and the value appreciation of the team/brand/empire during the invested period. Forbes puts the current value at $1.125B. Ilitch paid $82M for the team in '92. That's a 13.7x appreciation in 23yrs of ownership! He's probably made even more on his investment in the Red Wings. Likewise for the brick and mortar ATM called Motor City Casino, and on his $5 pizzas.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/detroit-tigers/

Click to expand...

There is no way Illitch is making money on the Tigers the last few years. If he is, it isn't much, which means he doesn't have what other owners have and reinvesting it back into player development. The main point of my contention. We need player development and there is nothing there, both players and infrastructure.

Let's use a restaurant analogy. If Illitch bought a restaurant for $85,000, which is now worth $1.1 Mil and he has lost $100,000 over the last 5 years and probably will lose another $20,000 this year, it doesn't matter what the value is. The kitchen is a complete mess and he needs to upgrade the oven. The tables and chairs have seen better days. All while he is paying top dollar for his cooks and wait staff, some of whom are threatening to quit if they don't get more money.


Again, does it really matter that his franchise has increased in value? You still have to address the infrastructure. You still have to have less expensive staff to offset the top dollar chefs and wait staff. And you still need to maintain your clientele, or you will lose money until you cut costs or improve your appeal.

Most other MLB franchises do indeed make money. And I mean make money. The owners don't pocket all the profits. They re-invest back into the team. One of the costs is player development. The lack of dollars spent by the organization on player development is really stark compared to other teams.

Let's not complicate things by talking apples and oranges. The Detroit Tigers are a separate business to anything else Illitch owns. He CANNOT transfer money from the Red Wings to the Tigers. Or vice versa. Each business has to stand on its own. He can pocket certain profits, which must be declared to the IRS. He also has to report any infusion of his own money to the Tigers, via the FTC.

The Federal Trade Commission and the Internal Revenue Service are examples of governmental agencies that the Detroit Tigers have to make fillings. The Freedom of Information Act says that I can request the information that the Detroit Tigers file. Certain information, i.e. Social Security numbers, can be redacted.

Bottom line, your whole premise is on weak ground. While I like the debate, I think you misunderstand the issues involved, as do most fans.

Mitchrapp said:

I'm not sure what will happen but you can gain 6 games without sweeping KC. There are other ways.

Click to expand...

Losing to bad teams is not one of them. BTW 7 back in the lose column now. losing ground !

lonesometiger said:

Losing to bad teams is not one of them. BTW 7 back in the lose column now. losing ground !

Click to expand...

It happens.

Thumb said:

Honestly I'm not sure we should be looking for upgrades at all right now. If we make trades we should trade for young players, not necessarily players to step in and play right now. And we should not trade any prospects at all, if anything we should dangle Price, Kinsler, and maybe Cespedes or Davis and hope for a decent return in cheap, young, promising players.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. This team could compete for another 5 years or be destroyed after price and cespedes leave. It should be a selling year. The Tigers can not continue to pay $15 million to free agents to patch holes.

Players allowed to walk by Detroit (meaning they were Free Agents and Detroit got nothing for them)

Placido Polanco

Fernado Rodney

Edgar Renteria

Ryan Raburn

Freddy Garcia

Gerald Laird (twice)

Aubrey Huff

Brandon Lyon

Johnny Damon

Jhonny Peralta

Delmon Young

Joaquin Benoit

Omar Infante

Brayan Pena

Jose Veras

Torii Hunter

Max Scherzer


12 of them are playing in MLB this year.

Need START WINNING!

At this point should KC go .500 (49-49) they will end up 87-75. Tigers would have to go54- 41 .568 Can be done but I do not see KC going .500. At there rate they will go 58-40=96-56. Tigers would have to go 63-32,.663 Now that can be done too. BUT

WINNING is REQUIRED!

maybe fire Ausmus ??? IDK just don't seem like this team wants to play for him.

"On Tuesday, an IT expert who worked with Major League Baseball in the years leading up to the Astros' discovery that they'd been hacked last year says MLB teams' commitment to IT and security varies wildly."

"It all depends on what they want to invest in and how paranoid they are," the IT expert said. "Most teams don't want to spend the money on IT. The Yankees and San Francisco have the best IT departments. Boston is pretty good. But when I went to see the Baltimore Orioles in 2012, they had one IT guy and he had [computer] servers I hadn't seen since 2000. I was like 'Whoa, dude, really?' It was the equivalent of chicken wire and duct tape."

"Even Detroit by their 2012 World Series had crap. And the Colorado Rockies? The last time they were in the World Series and the press couldn't get wireless in the press box, their IT guy said it was because the broadcast blimp overhead was jamming his space and eating up their bandwidth. That was how he tried to save face for building a bad network."


This article is in regard the the STL Cards being accused of having hacked into the Houston Astros' database. I haven't browsed ESPN in quite awhile but found this article interesting as it pertains to how teams crunch info and data to build their farm systems. I thought that the Oakland A's with their Moneyball might be one of the best, but wasn't very surprised to see this dude consider the Tigers as one of the worst, and likely IT hasn't got better in 2 1/2 years.

http://espn.go.com/espn/print?id=13106874

I keep hearing Aroldis Chapman's name coming up in Tigers trade rumors. He'd be a nice addition for us. If we could swing a trade with the Reds for any combo of Chapman, Frazier, and Cueto, we might have all we'd need to get it together and make a WS run this season and next. Cueto is a FA after this season, Frazier is signed through '16, and Chapman is arbitration eligible through '16. I'm wondering if Castellanos, Greene, Machado, Moya, and/or Dixon might get the Reds interested. I'm sure there are other pieces on the roster or in the minors that could be used/valued too.

kingofdetroit57 said:

I keep hearing Aroldis Chapman's name coming up in Tigers trade rumors. He'd be a nice addition for us. If we could swing a trade with the Reds for any combo of Chapman, Frazier, and Cueto, we might have all we'd need to get it together and make a WS run this season and next. Cueto is a FA after this season, Frazier is signed through '16, and Chapman is arbitration eligible through '16. I'm wondering if Castellanos, Greene, Machado, Moya, and/or Dixon might get the Reds interested. I'm sure there are other pieces on the roster or in the minors that could be used/valued too.

Click to expand...

That would be sweet.. Too bad Frazier bats right though but i would do it...

kingofdetroit57 said:

I keep hearing Aroldis Chapman's name coming up in Tigers trade rumors. He'd be a nice addition for us. If we could swing a trade with the Reds for any combo of Chapman, Frazier, and Cueto, we might have all we'd need to get it together and make a WS run this season and next. Cueto is a FA after this season, Frazier is signed through '16, and Chapman is arbitration eligible through '16. I'm wondering if Castellanos, Greene, Machado, Moya, and/or Dixon might get the Reds interested. I'm sure there are other pieces on the roster or in the minors that could be used/valued too.

Click to expand...

I don't think the Tigers have enough prospects to get 2 out of the 3 of those let alone all three!

hellifino said:

maybe fire Ausmus ??? IDK just don't seem like this team wants to play for him.

Click to expand...

That's too easy. Not a big fan of some of his managerial moves but the cast of players is on DD. And that goes with no backup plan in case of injuries.

Plus, (and I see it often) where it's suggested a team doesn't want to play for someone is ludicrous. If anything they play for a future paycheck, they always have a reason to play their best.