Kickstarter to get Joe Nathan out of Detroit
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:18 PM ^
Tiger fans cannot have nice things.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:19 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:19 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:21 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:22 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:39 PM ^
September 24th, 2014 at 4:28 AM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:21 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:19 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:21 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:22 PM ^
Yet, if Price didn't explode, you'd cheer for Ausmus making the right call and not bringing in Nathan.
How about we put the blame on the players actually doing the playing.
Price gave up 3 runs. Not Nathan, not Ausmus.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:24 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:28 PM ^
The point is, it isn't like a obvious wrong decision before the fact. It was a fine decision. You can easily argue either way. The players didn't come through.
Most "major" decisions made by managers are "damned if you do, damned if you don't," but there are arguements to be made for either way.
Rarely is a decision completely wrong even before the players prove it to be wrong. So bitching about those decisions is dumb. It's like bitching about picking the wrong lotto numbers. Picking one number isn't any better than picking another, but only one can be right.
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:12 PM ^
So what? Like in the rest of life, you're judged by the outcome of your decisions. That's kinda what they pay you for. Successful managers are able to discern which decision is better despite what may look like a debatable situation to the general public.
Also, though I was recently guilty of this myself, the use of the word "bitching" conveys a sexist immaturity that should be beyond intelligent posters like you. He wasn't "bitching." He was criticizing. Using that word doesn't make you sound any more intelligent or reinforce your point. It just makes you sound like a middle-schooler.
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:17 PM ^
right, but, like in poker, you should not judge a person's decision based on what happened, only on what was likely to happen. If you pay 50% of the pot chasing 4 outs to the river, you were wrong whether you hit one of the 4 outs or not. You are not a genius if your 2 pair becomes a full house, you are dumb because your two pair was not likely to improve.
September 24th, 2014 at 1:19 AM ^
If we assume that there is 50% chance of either outcome being successful, then yes, one can't fault Ausmus. You're just question begging.
September 24th, 2014 at 12:26 AM ^
You can make the right decision and have the wrong outcome.
David Price is more likely to get 3 outs than Joe Nathan is. If you played that scenario a bunch of times, based on their respective seasons, it is pretty reasonable to expect that David Price would succeed more times than Joe Nathan.
Price didn't get those 3 outs tonight. It's baseball. It happens.
September 24th, 2014 at 11:05 AM ^
I make the point that with DPrice's innings thrown over the course of his career. As well as the amount of innings this year (very durable yet high workloads: see JV) that in the ninth inning the probablities are pretty similar that both may or may not get 3 outs? At that point in the game i do not have complete confidence that either will get us out of the inning with the victory without increased blood flow due to higher heart rate!
Go Tigers!
Go Blue!
September 24th, 2014 at 1:51 AM ^
Wow. I've never come across someone bitching about the use of the word/term "bitching (about)". I however, applaud the proper usage of "begs the question" (I think it was proper).
September 24th, 2014 at 9:46 AM ^
I've heard people complain about the term, but mostly because of the sexism part of it.
September 24th, 2014 at 8:09 AM ^
Oh FFS, is "bitching" setting off alarms at the PC police station now too?
September 24th, 2014 at 9:56 AM ^
I don't think it's too much to ask that people try to use mature language that isn't widely offensive.
September 24th, 2014 at 10:09 AM ^
I have yet to meet anyone who was offended by "bitching"(until today apparently). At some point we need to stop inventing things to worry about.
September 24th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
Of course you are free to use whatever kind of language you please. I do find it unsettling that so often in the media, on the internet, and in real life, people are very strongly opposed to the so-called "PC police." I feel like that energy would be better spent taking a second to consider how others feel. On the other hand, you can probably say my time would be better spent not trying to make America more wimpy or something.
September 24th, 2014 at 11:40 AM ^
It's really more about not using your energy to invent intent where none exists and frankly, getting hurt by the term bitching probably means you're looking for things to get hurt by. There's a big leap from the term bitching(which is fairly gender neutral whatever the origins) to saying some thing along the lines of<Note to idiots: this is illustrative only> "Crying like a woman about it". Assuming that leap is intended is where the frustration lies with the "PC Police".
September 24th, 2014 at 1:32 PM ^
There's a line somewhere between me taking a second to consider how others feel, and having to maintain a long mental list of things to never say and walking on eggshells trying not to say them. People are strongly opposed to the PC Police because the wrong words, harmlessly meant, will get them painted as ignorant in the best case and racist scum in the worst. Considering how others feel" should also apply to the very, very tiny minority when they want to tell the vast majority how to speak.
Cam Newton meant absolutely nothing by saying his O-line would have to deal with Donkey Kong Suh (Ndamukong, Donkey Kong, he's a really big strong guy, get it?) but he got called out for it all the same. I don't like the idea of a tiny minority being able to claim offended victimhood and get their wishes placed above the habits of millions, who must then muzzle their speech for the temporary feelings (and nothing more than that) of the very few. There's no right, and it's utterly impossible, to go through life completely unoffended.
September 24th, 2014 at 10:07 AM ^
Are we really going to be language policing "bitching" now?
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:24 PM ^
September 24th, 2014 at 10:09 AM ^
I agree mostly that the blame should be on those that throw, field and or hit. I believer over time Ausmus will prove to be a very goog hire. However, we as Tiger fans as well as media are analyzing this team based on how Leyland would have managed. Ausmus has rolled the dice too many times at the wrong times and not rolled the dice enough in others (IMO). 95 pitches through the 8th, a 3-0 lead and dominating usually gets you a start to the 9th if not a longer leash even with a few hits.
Amoung other factors that could be discussed, is the fact that DPrice's innings are a reall concern right now. Even, in light of how durable he is. I feel Ausmus could have used that factor to bring in Soria or Nathan. They both get paid to be in those situations. WIth the wave of complete games probably at its lowest rate in MLB history a complete game is NOT expected! I am thankful that we pulled it out after Nathan pitched out of a jam and we won! Very few teams/managers play/manage up to expectations, which is why there is only one winner
I put MGoBenders tag up there because i thought this might happen. Not sure why when i click reply right under the comment i want to reply to that my comment does not line up with it?
Go Tigers!
Go Blue!
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:24 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:45 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:33 PM ^
Money quotes:
Over the past five baseball seasons, from 2010–2014, the Tigers have blown just 71 games. That’s an average of only 14 blown saves per season. No team has fewer blown saves than the Tigers in that span. The league median is 89 blown saves over that five year period.
The blown save accounts for every time that a team has the lead in or after the seventh inning, the bullpen is summoned, and they lose the lead.
http://www.blessyouboys.com/2014/9/18/6353425/how-good-have-tigers-bull…
NOTE: Valverde's dominance in 2010-11 set an extremely HIGH bar for Tiger fans...as did the complete owning of the Tigers by Nathan in a Twins/Rangers uniform.
September 24th, 2014 at 12:22 AM ^
Blown saves are not a good way to evaluate a bullpen.
The author even says IN THE ARTICLE that the Tigers bullpen sucks.
September 24th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
the author maybe (I think he is) correct. However, because he says that the Tigers bullpen sucks does not counter very well actual data! Most of the time data proves very well the story trying to be told or explained. There are I am sure exceptions to this rule, overall however the data does not lie. Our eye test says that the Tigers bullpen over the last several years has been terrible because of the lower percentage of opportunities that they have and dont get 1,2,3 in a row.
Conversely, I would also say that for elite teams our bullpen is below expectations and therefor supports the argument made in the article.
Go Tigers!
Go Blue!
September 24th, 2014 at 11:41 AM ^
September 24th, 2014 at 10:13 AM ^
Bullpens are notoriously difficult to manage from year to year, as the reliever market is VERY tricky. Pitchers are weird and somewhat inconsistent from year to year. The problem is that the high visibility of their mistakes makes it hard to ride any sort of variability as the GM has to be shown to "Do Something" So it turns out that the guys brought in don't do what someone hoped and the guys who got shipped out turn in great seasons.
It's not like Dombrowski isn't trying, but I think the fact that the Tigers farm system is basically a desert at the moment limits what he can do.
September 24th, 2014 at 3:02 PM ^
has fewer innings pitched compared to starting pitchers. Not enough sample size which allows for the higher variance from year to year. SP has at least 200 IP which gives you enough sample size where you can reasonably expect a lower range of variance.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:43 PM ^
Ausmus was in a no-win situation there, the closer isn't a viable option and Price had been cruising all night and even in the 9th inning he was getting ahead of every batter. You can be captain hindsight all you want but I sure as hell would rather have my starter at 110 pitches on the mound in the 9th than Joe Nathan.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:48 PM ^
was a great pitch. Konerko was way out in front of it. But a good old player was wiley enough to give it a half swing and knock in two runs. . .
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:24 PM ^
just one hard hit ball in the 9th on a bad pitch. all the others were softly hit on low and away pitches. that said, i would have brought in soria after the second hit.
i would definitely use price over nathan in that situation. why ausmus doesn't give soria the closer job now is beyond belief to me.
September 24th, 2014 at 11:54 AM ^
Ausmus is in a Win or Lose situation. Which requires that he be at the top of his game that he was hired for! He has to make decisions and live with the glory or the infamy of a failed decision. Price was cruising and I dont mind the minset to pitch him in the ninth. When DPrice gives up the first two hits (IMO) his day should be over. Help DPrice preserve the chance for a win instead of the chance that he may get a no decision or even the loss.
Even then I can still understand Asmus' mindset to let DPrice finish. Yet my discussion point is pitch count is now in the 100s and everybody in baseball knows how many innings DPrice has thrown over the last five or six years, including this years big workload. It is obvious his velocity was down and tired mechanics was costing his bite on off speed pitches. Nathan gets paid to come in and close! DPrice does not get paid to throw complete games! They are nice perks just not safe bets this late in the season when signs point to trouble!
Go TIgers!
Go Blue!
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:21 PM ^
Price was magnificent until the 9th.
then it all goes to shit.
I for one will be call sports talk radio to complain loudly about stuff and things.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:24 PM ^
with how crappy our bullpen is, hard to question erring on the side of the starter.
oye, this is painful tiger team. so talented. so flawed.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:25 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:26 PM ^
How fucking fitting that the Tigers gack it away against the Sox, in late innings, with a lead, while the overachieving Royals handle their business. The Royals could hardly be a farm team for the Tigers.
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:31 PM ^
Sheesh. I stand by my rant re the Royals though.
September 23rd, 2014 at 11:23 PM ^
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:27 PM ^
Miggy with the clutch hit!
(I love that man)
September 23rd, 2014 at 10:27 PM ^