How to build a franchise (Detroit)

[Rex Argos]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2006/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=2631335

Here's a great link from Jerry Crasnick (ESPN) on Detroit's approach to team-building.

[traderumor]

The same type of articles were written last year about the White Sox, who failed to make the playoffs this year. Making a run in one year is not nearly as impressive as what the Yankees, A's, Cardinals, Braves and Astros have done year after year in the 21st century, with some extending for over a decade of success. The one year wonders seem positioned to become the next model franchise, then next thing you know, they cannot even gain a wildcard birth the following year.

[M2]

The same type of articles were written last year about the White Sox, who failed to make the playoffs this year. Making a run in one year is not nearly as impressive as what the Yankees, A's, Cardinals, Braves and Astros have done year after year in the 21st century, with some extending for over a decade of success. The one year wonders seem positioned to become the next model franchise, then next thing you know, they cannot even gain a wildcard birth the following year.

Exactly.

Though I love the notion of the Tigers having Velander and Miller to anchor the rotation for the better part of a decade. My guess is the problem Detroit will encounter will be scoring runs on a consistent basis. In that way, they're kind of Angelesque.

[Rex Argos]

I think with a good, young rotation they could be around for awhile. Verlander, Zumaya, Bonderman, and others look likely to have bright careers in front of them. Of course, we were saying the same thing about Wood and Prior not too long ago.

It seems that hitting is the commodity that can be replaced, you can mix and match. Many times it seems that you can catch lightning in a bottle with hitters that have career years.

So, the question is...will they be the Braves of the 90's, or the Angels of the recent past?

[westofyou]

On the heels of 12 straight losing seasons, it's a little early to be claiming sustained success.

That's almost Depression Era Browns and Phillies bad as far as continued losing.



Detroit Tigers
----------------------------------
YEAR PLACE W L PCT GB
1994 5th 53 62 .461 18
1995 4th 60 84 .417 26
1996 5th 53 109 .327 39
1997 3rd 79 83 .488 19
1998 5th 65 97 .401 24
1999 3rd 69 92 .429 27.5
2000 3rd 79 83 .488 16
2001 4th 66 96 .407 25
2002 5th 55 106 .342 39
2003 5th 43 119 .265 47
2004 4th 72 90 .444 20
2005 4th 71 91 .438 28

[RedsManRick]

On the heels of 12 straight losing seasons, it's a little early to be claiming sustained success.

That's almost Depression Era Browns and Phillies bad as far as continued losing.



Detroit Tigers
----------------------------------
YEAR PLACE W L PCT GB
1994 5th 53 62 .461 18
1995 4th 60 84 .417 26
1996 5th 53 109 .327 39
1997 3rd 79 83 .488 19
1998 5th 65 97 .401 24
1999 3rd 69 92 .429 27.5
2000 3rd 79 83 .488 16
2001 4th 66 96 .407 25
2002 5th 55 106 .342 39
2003 5th 43 119 .265 47
2004 4th 72 90 .444 20
2005 4th 71 91 .438 28

And though they may have won the pennent, they still haven't won the divison title...

[traderumor]

I think with a good, young rotation they could be around for awhile. Verlander, Zumaya, Bonderman, and others look likely to have bright careers in front of them. Of course, we were saying the same thing about Wood and Prior not too long ago.

It seems that hitting is the commodity that can be replaced, you can mix and match. Many times it seems that you can catch lightning in a bottle with hitters that have career years.

So, the question is...will they be the Braves of the 90's, or the Angels of the recent past?The Tigers seem to resemble the 2005 White Sox. Manager given a lot of credit for motivation and pulling the right strings, very good rotation, hammer bullpen, and enough offense to get by. Of course, Ozzie is probably chewing on his crying towel at the thought of the Cardinals making the World Series when he is sitting at home.

[Falls City Beer]

Folks, the White Sox STILL won 90 games in the toughest division in all of MLB. If that's a one year wonder, keep the needle on the record.

There's just an assload of talent in the AL. Sometimes you're on the outside looking in. But winning 99 last year and 90 this year is the dictionary definition of staying successful.

And I have no doubt in my mind that the Cardinals would trade every last bit of the last six years for the White Sox' 2005.

[traderumor]

Folks, the White Sox STILL won 90 games in the toughest division in all of MLB. If that's a one year wonder, keep the needle on the record.

There's just an assload of talent in the AL. Sometimes you're on the outside looking in. But winning 99 last year and 90 this year is the dictionary definition of staying successful.

And I have no doubt in my mind that the Cardinals would trade every last bit of the last six years for the White Sox' 2005.

The comparison was made to teams that have been doing it for the entire decade.

[Falls City Beer]

The comparison was made to teams that have been doing it for the entire decade.

What I'm taking exception to is the notion that the White Sox are a one-year wonder. They are clearly a two-wonder so far, and working on more I'm sure. Whether it's sustainable or not is another question altogether.

[blumj]

Folks, the White Sox STILL won 90 games in the toughest division in all of MLB. If that's a one year wonder, keep the needle on the record.

Sure , but the interesting part is that they did that by adding offense, they allowed almost 150 more runs. The great pitching of the season before wasn't so great in '06, and with almost the same staff and not much in the way of major injuries.

[Johnny Footstool]

The same type of articles were written last year about the White Sox, who failed to make the playoffs this year. Making a run in one year is not nearly as impressive as what the Yankees, A's, Cardinals, Braves and Astros have done year after year in the 21st century, with some extending for over a decade of success. The one year wonders seem positioned to become the next model franchise, then next thing you know, they cannot even gain a wildcard birth the following year.


Yep, every year the same story is written with different names -- Angels, White Sox, now the Tigers.

It would be nice if the Reds' turn came up soon.

[Falls City Beer]

Sure , but the interesting part is that they did that by adding offense, they allowed almost 150 more runs. The great pitching of the season before wasn't so great in '06, and with almost the same staff and not much in the way of major injuries.

Yeah they adjusted. But great teams always do. I'm not saying that I know whether the White Sox will continue their successful run, I'm just saying that looking at longtime dynasties after the fact and comparing them to current teams is a little unfair, considering that those dynasties had to make the same adjustments over the years that the White Sox obviously made between 2005 and 2006. They surrendered 150 MORE runs, yet still they won 90 games--that says to me that their GM had some foresight and made some nice adjustments to pad that predicted spike in RA.

I have no idea if the White Sox success is sustainable, but they've sustained it over two years. And that's worth something.

[vaticanplum]

The White Sox's pitching staff also had a particularly bad year, far below what I would have expected of such a good staff -- they all seemed to happen on a bad year the same year. They've got the bulk of that pitching staff locked up for a few years and they have the money and talent to convince their two free agents to stay when the time does come around. I think that is a very solidly built team that has the potential to remain so for a few years minimum. I know that a lot of people don't agree with me but I think Kenny Williams is one of the better GMs out there right now.