Game 69 Tigers vs. indians June 16, 2019

[kalinecountry]

https://totallytigers.wordpress.com/2019/06/16/how-long-can-it-go/
HOW LOW CAN IT GO?
Totally Tigers

 

[turok]

"We don't deserve anything"


Well I disagree, b/c even if someone isn't a baseball fan, he or she is still indirectly supporting the team or teams within their region, by subscribing to satellite/cable teevee, as well as purchasing or leasing products and/or services being advertised, since the costs are passed onto consumers.


Those who attend games and buy souvenirs/jerseys/toys from MLB teams who do spend $$$ might have the most deserving reason, since they are also supporting the cheapskate franchises b/c of MLB's practice of revenue-sharing.

 

[turok]

So what came first? Payroll or winning?

Winning came first....payroll much, much later, just ask Curt Flood.


Too easy.

 

[tomdalton22]

You should root for the Yankees.

Having acquired the home run leader in the league, adding those home runs to the other Yankee bats, it?s impossible that they could lose another game this season going forward.

Or you could root for the Dodgers.

The Dodgers are good.

LA is cool.

But it?s different from New York - ya gotta have a cool car.

I'm not rooting for any specific team to win...just the Tigers to lose.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I'm not rooting for any specific team to win...just the Tigers to lose.

Then you are rooting for a specific team to win; it?s just that the team that you specifically root for changes.

You root specifically for the team the Tigers play to win every game the Tigers play.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I'm not rooting for any specific team to win...just the Tigers to lose.

Yet I bet you still root for the Lions to win. I don't get why someone would want a team they root for to lose. I could understand not watching for a time but rooting for them to lose? You remember Matt Anderson? 1st round picks, even drafted 1, don't guarantee anything.

 

[tomdalton22]

Yet I bet you still root for the Lions to win. I don't get why someone would want a team they root for to lose. I could understand not watching for a time but rooting for them to lose? You remember Matt Anderson? 1st round picks, even drafted 1, don't guarantee anything.

Honestly, I really don't care if the Lions win or lose. I follow them because they are the "local" team but I'm not really a Lions fan. I actually find it funny when they suck.

The Tigers are the only professional team that I am a fan of.

 

[Rebbiv]

1992-2011 Successful MLB Players picked with first 5 picks:

College Positional players = 76.0%

High School Positional players = 53.8%

College Pitchers = 44.4%

High School Pitchers = 38.5%

Total = 54.0%

33-51 Positional = 64.7%

21-49 Pitchers = 42.9%



DET Picks 1992-2011 (1st round, top pick)

College Positional 0-1 0%

High School Position 1-3 33.3%

College Pitchers 4-12 33.3% (Weaver, Verlander, A. Miller, Porcello)

High School Pitcher 0-2 0.0%

Verlander, Anderson, Sleeth and Munson were the only top 5 picks in those 20 years. 3 were pichers, where 49% are generally pitchers. Of the 18 1st round picks, only 4 were positional. Now, with positional players having a higher success rate and DET drafting pitchers (except this last year), any wonder why we suck at drafting.

 

[tomdalton22]

1992-2011 Successful MLB Players picked with first 5 picks:

College Positional players = 76.0%

High School Positional players = 53.8%

College Pitchers = 44.4%

High School Pitchers = 38.5%

Total = 54.0%

33-51 Positional = 64.7%

21-49 Pitchers = 42.9%



DET Picks 1992-2011 (1st round, top pick)

College Positional 0-1 0%

High School Position 1-3 33.3%

College Pitchers 4-12 33.3% (Weaver, Verlander, A. Miller, Porcello)

High School Pitcher 0-2 0.0%

Verlander, Anderson, Sleeth and Munson were the only top 5 picks in those 20 years. 3 were pichers, where 49% are generally pitchers. Of the 18 1st round picks, only 4 were positional. Now, with positional players having a higher success rate and DET drafting pitchers (except this last year), any wonder why we suck at drafting.

I think it would be better context if you used all first round picks (vs. only top 5 picks) since you are comparing all of the Tigers first round picks.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I think it would be better context if you used all first round picks (vs. only top 5 picks) since you are comparing all of the Tigers first round picks.

I think he's using it because we'll be picking 5 or earlier and we just picked top 5 recent..

 

[tomdalton22]

I think he's using it because we'll be picking 5 or earlier and we just picked top 5 recent..

yup...I get that. I was just thinking if you are going to compare all Tigers' 1st round pick success rates that you should compare them to all first round picks. My guess is that top 5 picks have a significantly higher success rate than mid or late round picks

 

[Rebbiv]

yup...I get that. I was just thinking if you are going to compare all Tigers' 1st round pick success rates that you should compare them to all first round picks. My guess is that top 5 picks have a significantly higher success rate than mid or late round picks

They do. The higher you pick, the better odds they turn into a successful major leaguer. Additionally, college are better than High Schoolers (early in the draft) and positional fair better than pitchers.


And drafting "college" relief pitchers is a low success rate. Tigers have drafted both Matt Anderson and Ryan Perry in the first round.


More soon.

 

[kalinecountry]

https://totallytigers.wordpress.com/2019/06/17/gardy-has-himself-to-blame/
GARDY HAS HIMSELF TO BLAME,
Totally Tigers

 

[Rebbiv]

Draft 1992-2011 (Top 30 Picks) with Positive MLB WAR

College Position = 85 of 130, 65.4%

College Pitchers = 103 of 191, 53.9%

High School Position = 81 of 155, 52.3%

High School Pitcher = 55 of 123, 44.7%


TOTAL = 324 of 599, 54.1%

College = 188 of 321, 58.6%

High School = 136 of 278, 48.9%

Positional = 166 of 285, 58.2%

Pitcher = 158 of 314, 50.3%


1992-2011 Successful (5 WAR or greater) MLB Players picked with first 5 picks:

College Positional players = 76.0%

High School Positional players = 53.8%

College Pitchers = 44.4%

High School Pitchers = 38.5%

Total = 54.0%

33-51 Positional = 64.7%

21-49 Pitchers = 42.9%

 

[Mitchrapp]

With all that information why even draft a HS player.

 

[gotime909]

With all that information why even draft a HS player.

Teams love upside

 

[Mitchrapp]

Teams love upside

Don't college kids have upside?

 

[Rebbiv]

There are odds in everything. High risk, high reward. Or go with a "sure" thing. Analysis says it is Okay draft a High School player, just not in the first round, or within the first 10 picks. Certainly riskier with High School pitchers. There are some teams who never take a High Schooler with their first pick. Some won't take a pitcher.



Of note, DET has been extremely poor at drafting. If you remove their picks and a few other dysfunctional teams' picks, you actually see a higher, more pronounced success rate.


Analyzing draft and draft results are still part of analytics and what successful teams are doing.

 

[Mitchrapp]

There are odds in everything. High risk, high reward. Or go with a "sure" thing. Analysis says it is Okay draft a High School player, just not in the first round, or within the first 10 picks. Certainly riskier with High School pitchers. There are some teams who never take a High Schooler with their first pick. Some won't take a pitcher.



Of note, DET has been extremely poor at drafting. If you remove their picks and a few other dysfunctional teams' picks, you actually see a higher, more pronounced success rate.


Analyzing draft and draft results are still part of analytics and what successful teams are doing.

I get that which is why I said why do it. If you have a much higher success rate that what's the point of not drafting a college kid. Especially those top 5 picks. College kids have upside as well. Is there any evidence a successful HS kid is a better player than a successful college kid?

 

[Rebbiv]

I get that which is why I said why do it. If you have a much higher success rate that what's the point of not drafting a college kid. Especially those top 5 picks. College kids have upside as well. Is there any evidence a successful HS kid is a better player than a successful college kid?

As far as those that make it to MLB, college players have a slight, and I mean slight, longer MLB career over a High School player.



And I have posted before. If I was in the organization making decisions, I would not draft a High Schooler in the first 3 rounds. They get "slot" money that I would rather give to a more "sure" thing. I also would draft position players over pitchers.