The Detroit Tigers are just two wins away from the pennant. This post has nothing to do with that. But if you're looking for something to talk about beside how much you hate the Wolverine or Spartan fan you are watching the game with tonight, maybe a little onomastic information could, um, ease tensions.

What we're doing is name origin. For each playoff Tiger I tried to find multiple references to the same origin but I make no claims of certainty. Enjoy:

Starting Pitchers:

Justin Verlander "Justice from the Lime Tree"
Justinus is a Latin name that derives from "justus," which means what you think it means. As in after surviving through 2003, the Tigers received justice! "Ver" and "land" at first glance might seem to be simple: "ver" is Latin for green, land is land. But that's certainly not it because "land" is a Germanic word. So "person from the green lands" would be Greland, or Vernon. Verlander could be the anglicized version of Verlande, that reduced from "van der lende." The Dutch "van der" just means "from the." Linde means lime. It's a place name: from the lime tree. Or perhaps Lime Hill, which is in the Netherlands.

Doug Fister "Blackwater Baker"
Douglas is a Scots surname (Clan Douglas) from scots gaelic dubh glas, which translates to black/dark water/green. "Glas" is a bitch because gaels use it to mean anything from blue to green to gray and everything that is any of those colors. I guess "blue-green-gray" makes sense for Scotland since everything there is that color. Basically it's the color of water. Fister comes from Bavarian/Swiss Pfister, that from Latin pistor, meaning baker.

Max Scherzer "Great Trickster"
Maxwell is a placename meaning the well or stream of Max or Magnus. All of those "Max" names (Maximinius Maxim Maximus the Max) all come from the Latin "Max" which they used for "great" or "awesome" or "EEEEEEEE!" Scherzer is a German or Yiddish name that means jester. Better translates as fool to be honest, as in "fooled you!" Trickster, deceiver, artist of deception.

Rick Porcello "Piglet of Power"
Samara calls him "Fred Fred" Because his name is Frederick (Fred) Alfred (Fred) Porcello III. There's several first names at play here from different origins. "Rick" comes from German reich (you recognize that) and means "power," whether it's found in "Richard" (Power-Brave) or "Frederick" (Peace-Power). Alfred is completely different ("elf" ie supernatural being, and "raed" meaning well counseled or wise.) Porcello is easy: it's a diminutive of Italian "porco" (pig), so it's a little porco, or piglet.

Brad Penny "The Cheapest Pasture"
Bradley comes from Old English brad (broad) and ley meaning clearing or pasture. Broad pasture. A penny is the oldest unit of coinage in Germanic societies (including England); and was basically the price of rent for the cheapest apartment or smallest parcel of land, so someone named "Penny" was a tenant who paid a rent of one penny. A rough translation may be "signed for the minimum." Someone named "Shilling" is worth 12 times the amount.

More after the jump

Continue reading this post »

(With apologies to Adam Sandler)

Passover is, our Exodus strategy,
Instead of fish in April, we get no bread for a week.
So if you feel like the only kid in town, without an egg to paint,
Here's a list of baseball players who are Jewish, just like Pete Rose ain't....

Scott Schoeneweis puts charoset on his maror
So does Jason Marquis and Phillies G.M. Rube Amaro.
Guess who ate a Pascal lamb with Flip and Goody Rosen?
Sandy Koufax, Moe Drabowsky, and Saul Ro-govin!
 
Brad Ausmus is all-Jewish.
Harry Danning spoke Hebrew.
Put them together, what a fine looking Two!
We've got Barry Latman, and Brian Horwitz too,
Moe Berg spoke 10 languages, like Yiddish with Rod Carew!

Continue reading this post »

Hello again, Red.

It's Misopogon of MGoBlog. I hope you're still enjoying your welcome to the Big Ten, which is like the Big XII except there's twelve teams here instead of ten....er....yeah. Oh, and the referees aren't out there trying to screw you unless you are a.) trapped in a fairy world imagined by a Penn State fan, b) Illinois, or c.) a known Domer; in which case, a.) We can't help you; b.) Yes, but nobody really cares; or c.) Don't even talk:

.

This week EDSBS turned up a few old family portraits and did a "What's the SEC thinking?" rundown to go with it. Our SBNation blog promptly followed suit for the Big Ten When Men Were Men (and Ten Were Ten). With all these cute family photos going around, I figured I'd dig up your old one too.

Bunch of Looney Tunes if you ask me....

Continue reading this post »

The Tigers are .500 at Game 126...where do I remember this from? Oh yes, 10 years ago.

Of course, we took very different paths to get there.

See Chart:

All told, if I had to pick 63-63 seasons at Game 126, I'd go with the one with likeable players, lots of injuries, and lots of rookies over Damion, Deivi, Tony the Tiger and Juan-don't-he-go-fuck-himself Gone.

Strange that the outcomes are so similar between these two seasons. So let's have a quick reunion tour...

Continue reading this post »

I did a little MLB roster searching for trades this morning and thought I would share. This isn't a definitive list. Basically, I took WAR values of players I thought the Tigers might be able to pick up in trade, and the difference they would make for the rest of the season. Unfortunately, the biggest difference I found was not even 3 games, which is about the difference that we should have right now simply if umpire calls and what physically occurred in baseball games would align.

Here are some players that might be tradeable and their WAR Value difference over what we got from current players this season. I didn't count guys that there's no way teams will trade (e.g. Cleveland isn't letting go of their young catcher). But I did include guys who are unlikely to be traded, or guys unlikely for the Tigers to be able to acquire/afford if I thought there was a chance their teams might be interested. I know there are young relievers out there, like Evan Meek , Chris Perez, or Drew Storen, who have sick stuff and who play for organizations who hate talent and want to get rid of it, and therefore various fanbases who feel justified in referring to themselves as "Nation"s believe they can trade for them, but for our purposes:

Except Evan Meek, because yes, Pittsburgh is that dumb.

Also, I counted Toronto as potential sellers, even though they're playing .500 ball, because their record is unsustainable given their pitching staff, their financial situation is not strong, and they're 9 games back in a division that probably includes the three best teams in baseball. However, I counted Oakland because they're always willing to trade MLB players for prospects, by nature of being the A's. (Mr. Beane: Connie Mack would be very proud).

The projected WAR values are calculated for 81games for position players, 70 games for catchers, 100 innings for starters, and 35 innings for relievers. From these I subtracted the projected WAR values of current Tigers for the rest of the season at the following values:

Armando Galarraga as 5th starter: 1.0
Alex Avila as starting Catcher: 0.1
Carlos Guillen at 2B, spelled 20 percent of the time by Worth: 0.6
Santiago at SS, spelled 25 percent of the time by Worth: 1.2
Relief: 0.0

The bullpen was toughest to calculate, since the loss of Zumaya hasn't had time to affect the standings yet. So I went simple, figuring that without picking up a reliever, the pen is shifted around and a replacement-level player (probably Perry) will inherit some of those innings, with the rest spread among the pen. In other words: 35 innings of replacement pitching.

Also, for shortstop, I regressed the Santiago/Worth battery, since Ramon's stats this year are very out-of-whack with his career.

Okay, no more ado: here's some trade possibilities, and how many more games I believe the Tigers would win this year if we got them:

Continue reading this post »

(Uh, wow...... you guys really gotta see this....  - JJ) 

Oh hey there Red, I just wanted to personally wish Nebraska and its (by reputation) fantastic fans to one hell of a conference...

 = Nebraska...

(press play and sing along)

Continue reading this post »

The following are thoughts I put in a letter to Lynn Henning (as an aside to a different discussion entirely). It's the best organization of my case for Selig to reverse last night's call and award the perfect game to Armando. Enjoy (or fisk -- whichever you prefer):

Thank you, Lynn, for responding.

I would like to get back into this tomorrow or over the weekend but today I have my sights set on convincing Bud Selig that justice is best served by reversing last night's call and rewarding Armando the perfect game.

...That the best thing for baseball would be for Joyce to walk out to the plate of Comerica Park this afternoon with a clear conscience because his league had his back, and wouldn't let one very badly timed mistake haunt his entire career.

...That the best thing for baseball would be to recognize what occurred on the field as the ultimate arbiter of its history.

...That the best thing for baseball would be to not deprive itself of an important moment by magnifying a small and acknowledged flaw in the game beyond the minutae it has always been treated as.

...That the best thing for baseball would be to stand behind the words of its official when he admits he made a mistake.

...That any precedent for overturning calls set by this action would not provide a "slippery slope" so much as set an exemplary (and almost impossibly high) standard for when and how an on-field call may be overturned. (e.g. response to Yankees fans arguing balls and strikes = "was it a blatantly obvious mistake that the opposing team will not contend and the umpire who made the call then apologized for and said it was the worst call of his career, and did it overturn a once-per-decade event?")

...That rewarding Armando Galarraga a perfect game is not only the right thing to do, but the right thing to do, business-wise, justice-wise for the game of baseball.

This is pretty much the most entertaining thing I've read Tigers-related lately. Awesome post! -- Kurt

From the guy who brought you the Tigers' All-Suck Team of the Aughts, comes a post that is much happier, much fall-off-your-chair-ier, and took a lot less work.

Dale S. beat me to it, but since my response is longer, more comprehensive, and has much better jokes, I am posting this as a separate FanPost.

What follows is not a list of the Greatest Tigers since 1901, but the greatest names of Tigers since 1901. I split them up by periods: Early Years, Golden Age, War & Post-War, Post-Modern, Sparky & Randy, and 21st Century. Each period has 8 position players and 8 pitchers, plus some honorable mentions, for a total of well over a hundred great names plucked from Tiger history (or more precisely, BaseballReference.com). At the end, I suggest an all-time team, but this is certainly up for debate.

Qualities of a "Great" Name:

• Funny
• Hard to spell
• Hard to pronounce
• Near to taboos
• Apropos
• Fun to say

I tried to find a balance of all.

Rules: 16 players per era, 8 hitters and 8 pitchers. One player per each position, but outfielders are interchangeable. Pitchers are not designated as relievers or starters.

Players whose careers spanned multiple eras will be considered in the era during which they made their greatest Tiger contributions, with the tiebreaker going to the best season. Also, there's no DH.

Disclaimer: Before commenters have at me, yes, this list is TOTALLY biased by my own cultural and linguistic background. If you're not a native English speaker or you're from a country other than the United States, then  some of these names won't sound so strange to you. On the other hand, if you happen to hail from a country where Yats Firpo "Baby Doll" Schiappacasse-Poffenberger de la Cruz is a common name, then I implore you, please let me come live in your country because that is awesome.

That's it for intro. All the cool stuff after the jump:

Continue reading this post »

Yesterday, a BYB reader named Winter created a Fanpost (unfortunately) titled "How the Tigers fail as a franchise." The post itself basically boiled down to:

1. "The Tigers tend to post losing records in the 2nd half."
2. "The last time the Tigers went to Minnesota, they got swept"
3. "There's about a whole team's worth of salary that's useless"

Hence the Tigers won't win the AL Central.

Among topics discussed were Brandon Inge versus Ryan Zimmerman: which would you want as your starting 3rd baseman,1 and the state of the Tigers' franchise in general. But there was also some flaming due to the tenor of the original post, so I thought I'd try to address these issues directly. I'll go in reverse:

There's a Whole Lot of Salary Going Down

This almost can't be overstated (though some are trying):

• Jeremy Bonderman- $12.5 million
• Dontrelle Willis- $10 million
• Nate Robertson- $7 million
• Carlos Guillen- $10 million
• Magglio Ordonez- $18.97 million
• Gary Sheffield - $14 million

What you are looking at is this year's salaries of players whose values, in wins above replacement, to the Tigers have been, well, less than.

What you are not looking at is $72,470,000 down the drain. Allow me to explain:

First and foremost, you are ALWAYS going to have incongruities like this if you assess salaries on a year-to-year basis. Salaries are made by contract, long-term. For example, Brandon Inge was given a 4-year deal worth $24 million after 2006. He has been paid $11.1 million of that for 2007-08. That means there is another $13 million worth of winning contributions that he owes us over the next two years to make good the contract. So if he plays like a $13 million a year player this year, he could take 2010 off and his contract would be justified.

The way to gauge this is Wins Above Replacement, a brilliant statistic which, at the end of the season, will tell you how many wins the team got by playing Player X over "replacement," i.e. bringing up a AAA player (or Chris Truby) to fill the position.

Based on his WAR scale against league salaries, Brandon projects to $13.7 million this year, according to FanGraphs. I think that's a bit inflated,2 but it's what we have. On the same scale, he was worth $5.7 million last year, and $7.3 million in 2007. Considering we're 75 games into the season, that means he has already justified $6.3 million for this year. So in the 2nd half of this season, and over 2010, Inge would have to give us just $4.66 million. If he played solid defense, and hit .190, that would justify the contract.

The reason that looks so inflated is because you have to get more than the actual value out of your players, because they will get injured, or they will slump, or others will slump. A team that ends the season with 162 games from every position player and gets 32 starts from each starter is unheard of.

The question is, then, are you getting enough back out of your overperformers like Inge to cover the injuries, etc.

In the Tigers' case, the value of their hitters this year, in total, is $51.30 million, including contributions of $13.7 million from Inge, $12.2 million from BigMig, and $11.40 million from Grandy. From the pitching staff, the Tigers are getting $39.6 million in wins, including a staggering $15.9 million from Verlander and $14 million from Edwin Jackson. All told, the Tigers roster justifies a roster, by current performance, of $90.90 million. That's hardly the $115 million payroll they have now. But it's not as dire as you think.

It also includes losses from Carlos Guillen (a very small sample who is predicted to be positive once he comes back), Dane Sardinha, and Matt Treanor, plus our pitchers' hitting in national league parks. All of these numbers will depreciate as the season progresses, since the pitchers won't hit anymore, Guillen will come back, Ryan will replace Sardinha and Treanors' negatives, etc. All told, that's $10 million of wins over the season, or $5.2 million over the remaining games.

If you're really going to judge Dombrowski, you have to consider all of his contracts, over all of his years. That means you have to count Magglio's $36 million-worth 2007 season. It means you have to count Guillen's $22 million play in 2006. You have to count the consistent $10-million-worth years he has gotten from Granderson and Polanco. Etc.

To judge him on only this year, it's clear that we are (i.e. Ilitch is) not getting full value for the $115 million. But all told, we can say, as fans, that this team is worth $95.5 million for us to go see. That's a good team; that's the kind of team that goes to the playoffs. That's exactly the level of team we want around here. As for the rest, well, we should just thank Mike Ilitch for the difference.

The Twin City Killings

There are the bests of times, and there are the worst of times. And the worst of times, more often than not, seem to always happen in the Metrodome, which is the biggest home field advantage in MLB. The Twins have been a problem for AL Central teams pretty much since they built that place. They're also the masters of Moneyball economics. If you followed the [2] reference above when discussing Inge (or if you go there now)2 you will have seen that salaries scale exponentially. If your goal, then, is to maximize team value per actual salary you don't become involved with high-end free agents -- you play around in the area under the curve:

The blue line is the WAR-$ value, i.e., what a player should be making based off of his performance, if everything was fair. It begins at zero, since a player at replacement value is worth $0 in wins. The red line is actual player salaries. It begins higher than zero, since the league has a minimum salary, but that until you start getting into the upper half of the league, salaries remain at or near the minimum.

The yellow area is where the Twins and A's, et al. like to play. Players in that category typically make around $1 to $3 million per year, but will generally have a playing value much higher than that, say between $3 and $5 million. Many of them are young, on their entry-level or early arbitration contracts. If value's your game, you play in the yelllow. The Twins do this, and lo and behold, for a $65 million payroll, they get a team with a total winning value of around $82 million, which is a team in contention. However, they seldom win it all, since a team typically needs to compete at a level between $100 million and $150 million to be world champions.

The way these teams function is to have a constant overflow of MLB-ready prospects, which raises the franchise's level of replacement player. So if one $2 million guy dips to below-replacement production, they have plenty of $450K guys in AAA ready to jump in with over-replacement value. The downside is you almost never have a team that is a runaway favorite, and early in the season, when all the big clubs have their monsters healthy, you can get beaten out of contention.

It's a great way to compete, but not a great plan to win championships. This is because your ultimate strategy for toppling the clubs worth $100 million and more is that you are much less affected by injury than they are. Over a long season, injury will strike randomly, and when it strikes one of your divisional rival's top guys, that's a huge performance hit they take. If it works, you get into the playoffs, where you now put your faith in the luck of a hot streak in a few odd series. On the other hand, at this point you are facing the teams that are most likely a) monsters, and b) relatively healthy. The odds are now stacked heavily against you.

Note that the marquee players are the ones you overpay for. If you plotted the Yankee and Red Sox contracts on here, you'd see a lot of them over the blue line (meaning they're overpaid for the actual value of their perforance). Sometimes, though, they too are above. A-Rod in 2007, for example, was paid an astounding $25 million for his services, but he also turned in a performance worth $39.2 million in wins. He was, for all intents and purposes, more valuable than the Marlins.

So if your goal is simply winning, the best strategy would be to say "cost be damned," because there is a direct correlation between how much a player is worth in the open market, and the value he will return to your team in wins.

The Tigers are a combination of these strategies. A lot of this team is all over the yellow area of typical overperformance (Edwin Jackson, Gerald Laird, Marcus Thames, Armando Galarraga, Ramon Santiago, Adam Everett, Rick Porcello, Zach Miner).

But the meat and potatoes of this team is built on guys just past the point where the blue and red lines reconnect: guys worth about $6 to $7 million, who are getting paid $6 to $7 million. This looks awesome when one of those guys (Inge, Granderson) is on a tear, and stupid when one of those guys (Robertson) is nigh useless, and, strangely, nobody comments when they quietly perform at their expected level (Polanco).

The last third of this team was built high above that, in the region of guys who were All-Stars at least once in their career, or are expected to be All-Stars in the future, and can command about $10 to $14 million (but are, on average, worth about $9 to $10 million). Verlander is one. So is Magglio. And Guillen. And Willis. And Bonderman. And Cabrera.

What's happened to the Tigers this year is there's a HUUUUGE discrepency in that top group between guys who are performing at that ultra-high salary value, and guys who are not.

But I would postulate that this is part of Dombrowski's strategy. The majority of the team is made up of guys who can get you $80 million in wins for $70 million, typical for, say, Atlanta, or Toronto, or the L.A. teams. Then you take a few fliers on the tippy-top guys. They're the ones meant to get you over the top. They'll never all be there. But if you have five out of this seven -- Verlander, Cabrera, Bonderman, Willis, Guillen, Ordonez, Sheffield -- performing at level, you have a ballclub competing at $130 million for one that costs $115 million. It's big-guy strategy, mixed with little guy strategy.

This year, it's paying off, even with the bad luck of getting next to nothing from five of those seven, because Edwin Jackson and Brandon Inge are playing at an All-Star level in their stead. It's a difference of $10 million in WAR-$, which also happens to be the difference between the Tigers and the Twins this year.

Detroit Gets Cooler in August

In the Jim Leyland years, they say, the All-Star break is our drop-off point. Even in 2006, we had a significant drop-off in the latter half, to go with more noticeable ones in 2007 and 2008. Don't forget, though, that this happened, too, in 2004 and 2005 (in 2003 we were so bad a "dropoff" was nigh impossible, since we were generally playing at replacment level to begin with). I think it's a Dombrowski thing, not a Leyland thing.

The reason for it is our strategy of building the team on All-Stars and solid players in the expected performance range of $6 million plus. These kinds of guys are very difficult to replace. You don't just plug a guy into left field, or shortstop, or 3rd/1st base, or whatever Guillen's position is this year. You lose Guillen for a season, you lose a guy who can give you $9 to $10 million in WAR-$. And since we tend to re-sign our super-talents like Bonderman and Verlander and Granderson and (likely) Jackson and Porcello, we don't get to fill up on other teams' top-end prospects. But this is baseball, and you're going to have random attrition every year. Attrition hurts a team built like this way more than a team built like, say, the Twins. This means, as injuries take their toll, unless these teams have another means of replacing high-end players (such as the Yankees and Red Sox trading for other teams' superstars at the trade deadline), a team built on this model will decline, to varying degrees, every season.

Teams that are built to compete at the same level all year are those that have an abundance of MLB-ready talent in the minors. You need more than what even a very good drafting team like the Tigers can dig up in order to have this kind of replaceability.

The Twins had a guy like Verlander -- better even -- in Johan Santana, but they turned him into prospects. One was Carlos Gomez, who gave them a solid centerfielder in 2008 who this year lost his spot to a 1st round draft pick of theirs, Denard Span, who has been brilliant. They also got two pitchers. All told, this makes them a worse team today. But Gomez gave them value over replacement (Span) last year, and now still gives value over replacement while Span shines. And the two pitchers in the deal will likely do the same, for the next five to six years or so.

The thing to note above all with this franchise, then, is how well they can replace a broken piece. Not always, of course -- a hit to Joe Mauer earlier this year had a very noticeable effect, as did a dink on Morneau in 2006, and the loss of Liriano in 2007. But when Punto isn't doing, there's always a Brendan Harris to jump up. If Delmon Young is having a rough year, there's a Jason Kubel to jump in. This is why the Twins seem to compete so well in the 2nd half each year. As the injury train rolls over us, we could lose a Polanco (as we did in late '06) and end up with Ramon Santiago, who, God love him, is a big drop-off. This year we lost Guillen, who has become Anderson/Raburn/Thomas/Larish/Thames/Ramirez/Kelly -- all guys a bit better than replacement level, but none have the pedigrees of Delmon Young, Jason Kubel, Denard Span and Carlos Gomez.

Our wins, then, have to come early, before the wrecking ball of injuries tears us apart. Or we could get really lucky, getting some star play out of guys expected to be back-of-the-rotation starters or platoon outfielders. It happens. But statistics would tell you it's more unlikely than likely.

Conclusions

So there's our problems, in a (supersized) nutshell.3

The pessimistic among us can take all of this and say "we're going to lose the Central." Well, we could. Keep in mind that the Twins, though deeper in AAA than we are, don't have the upside potential we have if, say, Willis gets it together, or Bonderman comes back with his sick sick sick slider, or Magglio's reverse-Sampson brings with it a great renewal, or Guillen comes to bat again. With all of that talent on the bench, you could see it as wasted potential, or you could see it as an astounding amount of potential. It could be either, so why bother making a fuss?

Dombrowski has built us a team that is worthy of rooting for. They have outstanding players -- once in a lifetime players like Cabrera and Verlander whose visages will one day be in Cooperstown, and guys you love to watch like Inge and Granderson and Polanco who make the game so enjoyable, and the sloppiest-but-somehow-usually-gets-it-donniest bullpen ever known to man- (and cow) kind. The Tigers are in first place. That means that the Twins and the Sox (the other garbage in our division isn't even worth mentioning this year) don't just have to be better than us, but have to be 4 to 5 games better than us.

And after watching this team struggle and bounce and will their way to a 7-game winning streak in June, spending the entire time at the top of the AL Central, I think we have a manager who can squeeze the most out of Detroit's baseball club, even if that most, at times, leaves you gasping.

And finally, it's baseball, people, the greatest game ever devised by man, in which anything really can (and does) happen,4 even -- though I know you doubt me -- the 1st place team in July finishing there in October.

Here, have a Terry Cashman break. You read all of that. You deserve it:

Fin.

1. MLB 3rd Basemen in Wins Above Replacement (WAR):

1. Evan Longoria: 3.8
2. Ryan Zimmerman: 3.2
3. Brandon Inge: 3.0
4. David Wright: 2.9
...
12. Alex Rodriguez: 1.4

They are almost exactly the same value. Both are ahead of David Wright, though I expect this will change once David grows a mustache.

2. FanGraphs gets their number by taking all MLB salaries and dividing 'em up based on that player's WAR rating for that year. There are several problems with this.

• WAR is cumulative, so if, say, Alex Rodriguez spends a month of a young season on the DL, his WAR numbers, while reflective of his actual contribution to the team, will not be very reflective of his expected contribution. And when we talk about "who's the best..." it's expectation we're judging on, not actual contribution.
• While I think everyone would consider a "fair" scaling of salaries to be a straight line, salaries actually scale exponentially. So while a guy like Don Kelly may be worth $1 million for his play, you can usually find a Don Kelly level of contribution for $450,000. However, guys who consistently produce $10 million-plus level like Miguel Cabrera go for much more than that.

3. If you actually can print this out and fit in in a nutshell, I want to see.

4. Except the Cubs winning the World Series.

One month ago:

• You were running your heat, not air conditioning
• Willis didn't have a win with the Tigers, and you thought he might never. Meanwhile, you were ready to bet a sparkling pony avatar on whether Armando Galarraga was the real deal.
• Miguel Cabrera and Magglio were swingin at every 1st pitch; MC was hitting 'em all over the ballpark, MO was hitting 'em to the 2nd baseman.
• Edwin Jackson had a brilliant start  against the Yankees, was still throwing 98 mph into the 6th inning, but had thrown so many pitches he was yanked. That was at 8:05 p.m., with the score 0-0. They didn't sing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" until 9:03 p.m., when the score was 10-0 New York.
• Justin?!? Verlander?!?

Today:

• Bet that AC sounded weird last night, huh?
• Dontrelle Willis is 1-0, 3.27 ERA, in 2 starts with Detroit. AG since May: 1-3, 10.90 ERA, .329 BA against in 4 starts. See avatar at right.
• Miguel Cabrera and Magglio are swinging at every 1st pitch; MC is hitting 'em all over the ballpark, MO is dribbling 'em past the 2nd baseman, or was until we finally found out what's been eating at him is his wife and beloved is facing a dangerous surgery, and he left for a week with the thoughts and prayers of 4 million behind him.
• Edwin Jackson had a brilliant start  against the Rangers, was still throwing 97 mph into the 7th inning, but had thrown tons of pitches. However, the bullpen had been shaky of late, so he was sent out again in the 8th and allowed Texas to tie it before getting himself out of the jam. The Tigers ground out a 2-out run to give Fernando and his "just a bit low fastball" the razor-thin margin he needed to finish the sweep.
• Justin. Verlander.

It's deep into May now. And while we may still have some things to complain about, I like May a whole heck of a lot more than April.

Coming in June:

• THE SLIDER OF SOLACE: Armando's non-sinking slider is replaced with the triumphant return of Detroit's famous secret agent: Bondo, Jeremy Bondo.
• HAPPY EVERETT AND THE SWITCH-HITTING PRINCE: How do you want your six spot served? Use Santiago, win. Use Adam Everett, win. Right now, if Jim Leyland told me he planned to use Neifi Perez at short, I'd expect Neifi to go 2-for-3 with a walk and 2 ribbies.*
• FAST & THE FURIOUS (and the GOLDEN OLDIE, AND THE MUSCLE, AND THE SCRAPPY, AND THE...): Who's in left? By mid-June all of the following could be available for the Tigers: Thames, Guillen, Raburn, Thomas, Ramirez, Anderson. Not to mention Brent Clevlen tends to have hot Junes.

*Actually, no, I wouldn't.

-Misopogon, reminding you if you criticize someone, first walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away, and you have their shoes!

[Editor's Note: Promoted from the FanPosts, for the sake of discussion.  More people are posting, which is great.  I want to put more of these on the front page.]

Want to get Magglio to stop grounding into as many Double Plays? Put a left-handed hitter in front of him.

The thinking behind batting Maggs 3rd is that he's supposed to be a high batting average guy. The double play rate, however, is caused by several factors.

1) Granderson and Polanco are good at getting on base;

2) Polanco isn't very fast;

3) Magglio isn't very fast, and

4) He's not plate-side protected.

Maggs is 3rd in a 4-man right-handed bloc in the lineup. Guillen is the only breakup point, and being a switch-hitter who's slightly better from the right side, he doesn't count insofar as affecting opponents' late-game bullpen strategies. There isn't a man on the roster except Granderson (unless Larish picks up) who would necessitate a switch to the lefty specialist.

If I'm an opposing pitching coach, all things being equal, I move up a right-handed starter to pitch, and then late in the game I use a groundballing right-handed reliever for the meat of our lineup, then bring in a power pitcher for the bottom of the order, and mop up the lefties.

I don't want to give fuel to the "we need a left-handed Marcus Thames" crowd, because so does everybody, which is why we can't get one. But I really think we need a left-handed bat between Mags and Cabrera to keep opponents' pitchers off balance. Breaking stuff is more effective if it breaks away from the batter. Sinkers and Splitters have an action which converts to top spin (and thus lift and power) if hit by an opposite bat, so even if the batter hits the top of the ball, it's got a weird action that either turns it into a foul ball or a stopper/chopper, which isn't what you want for double plays. When they're spinning away, rather than towards, the bat, it reduces power.

Continue reading this post »