response 1 of 116:

Aug 28 19:09 UTC 2003

After their 9-7 loss to the Indians last night (Wed Aug 27), the Tigers are
now 33-98.  They need to win 10 out of their last 31 games to avoid the
anti-record.  That is ~.333 winning clip which they haven't performed at all
season.

P.S. The watch could extend beyond when summer agora gets rolled.

response 3 of 116:

Aug 29 00:37 UTC 2003

(Kevin should be aware of the 1899 Cleveland Spiders, who set the record
for major league baseball futility by finishing with a record of 20 wins,
134 losses.  of note is that Cy Young once played for the franchise; he
won more games during the 1899 season than the Spiders did.)

(why were the Spiders so bad that year?  their owner bought the St. Louis
franchise and sent all the talent there, figuring that he'd make more
money in STL than CLE.  thus, the Spiders were forced to make-do with
minor leaguers and journeymen.  it's entirely possible that the Spiders
would have been even worse the following year, had they not fallen victim
to league contractions that cut the number of teams from 12 to 8.)

(it's true that the 1962 Mets were probably the worst baseball team in the
modern era, and they were part of an era of embarrassment that lasted at
least four years.  however, it's the Spiders that own the "worst major
league baseball record of all time."  the Tigers aren't going to break it
this season.) 

response 5 of 116:

Aug 29 14:17 UTC 2003

The Tigers lost last night (Thu Aug 28) at Cleveland, 8-3.  Their record is
now 33-99, and will of course be losing 100+ games, the sign of "stench" in
a team / organization.  What's worse, is that there is an exceptionally high
probability that they are about to set a new "record" for being the first team
to lose 100 games before September.  :-(

response 7 of 116:

Aug 29 16:04 UTC 2003

(actually, the 1962 Mets lost their 100th game on August 29th, en route
to closing off their season with just one win in 41 games.  the Tigers
aren't even going to be the quickest to 100 losses:  the 1916 Philadelphia
A's only needed 130 games to reach the 100-loss mark.  alas, with the
shorter season, they didn't reach it until September 6th.)

response 9 of 116:

Aug 29 17:17 UTC 2003

The "first to lose 100 before Sept." notion came from WJR.  They might 
have been referring to the American League...

response 11 of 116:

Aug 30 19:26 UTC 2003

Last night (Fri Aug 29) the Tigers doubled up the Chisox 8-4 at the COPA,
moving their record to 34-99, 9 wins away from "safety".

response 13 of 116:

Aug 31 03:24 UTC 2003

(so the Tigers lost their 100th game tonight, making them the earliest AL
team to 100 losses ever.  they're also the second team to lose 100 games
before September, joining the aforementioned 1962 New York Mets.)

(on the plus side, I've noticed that the local sportscasters don't even
bother with asking the Tigers why they lose after each game.  in fact, I
remember one newscast where the sports guy really talked them up, focusing
on the home runs and double plays before closing with "but they lost 
anyway.")

response 15 of 116:

Sep 1 03:01 UTC 2003

This item is #184 in the Summer 2003 Agora, and #124 in sports.

response 17 of 116:

Sep 2 04:12 UTC 2003

The Tigers lost twice again this holiday weekend, 8-4 Sunday to the Chisox,
7-4 today to the Tribe (both at the COPA).  With their now 34-102 record, the
Freep says that they will join the Philly A's as the only teams to have
clinched last place in their division as early as Sept. 1.  Based on their
record so far this season, I don't see how they can achieve 9-19...

response 19 of 116:

Sep 2 04:54 UTC 2003

Dunno - we've been thinking for years that it couldn't get any worse!  :-)

response 21 of 116:

Sep 2 15:58 UTC 2003

The Tigers have to play 28 games in September.  As far as I know, none 
are postponements which won't be made up.

Their remaining games are against:
Sep 2-4 Cleveland (next worst team in the AL Central)
Sep 5-7 at Toronto (68-69; middle of the pack and out of contention
                    in the AL East)
Sep 9-11 at New York (best record in the AL)
Sep 12-14 Kansas City (still contending for the division)
Sep 16-18 Toronto
Sep 19-21 at Minnesota (still contending for the division)
Sep 22-24 at Kansas City
Sep 25-28 Minnesota

So most of the teams we'll be playing have a reason to want to play 
well.  The Tigers don't really care, and haven't for a long time, aside 
from a few guys like Dmitri Young and Bobby Higginson, who don't like 
to quit, and some of the young guys who can play for next year or even 
hope to get traded.

In my estimation, the Tigers are likely to win maybe 2-3 more games 
this year.  Three wins leaves them with a record of 37-125.  I consider 
the 120 loss season to be pretty well clinched at this point.

I *hate* the idea of the Tigers having these records for horrid 
baseball.  My earliest memories of baseball are Al Kaline, Norm Cash 
and Mickey Lolich winning the 1968 World Series.  I'm afraid my son's 
are going to be of this year.

response 23 of 116:

Sep 3 02:08 UTC 2003

The Tigers need better players.  They don't have them inside the 
system, for sure, with maybe one or two exceptions, so if they're to 
improve for next year, they need to bring in good free agents.

They've dumped (or certainly will dump) $17 million in salaries this 
year; Damion Easley, Dean Palmer, Shane Halter and Craig Paquette.  
The hope would come from the possibility that Mike Ilitch will use 
some of that money to improve the ball club.

$17 million could bring a fair amount of improvement.  Look a year 
down the road, dump Bobby Higginson's $12 million salary, and a total 
of $29 million could bring a *lot* of improvement.  Baseball salaries 
are depressed right now.  You don't need to pay $25 million per year 
(Alex Rodriguez money) to bring in a star.

Even so, it might be a vain hope.  Ilitch invested a ton of his own 
money to build Comerica Park, and his investment has not paid off in 
attendance.  He's losing money, but doesn't say how much he's losing.

The reason for the lack of attendance is lack of a quality ball team.  
This team was, I believe, 2nd in total wins for the first 90 years of 
it's existence.  Detroiters are used to winning, or were 15 years 
ago.  And they *support* their winning baseball teams.  The 1984-87 
Tigers set records for attendance in baseball.

When he bought the Red Wings, Ilitch didn't start paying for salary 
until they showed signs of becoming a good team.  Obviously the Tigers 
are not showing such signs.

Still, the hope exists that he'll get some better players.  Ilitch is 
a former Tiger minor league ballplayer, and the belief exists that he 
loves baseball more than hockey.  Also, he might be getting 
embarrassed enough to do something.  Baseball is not hockey; he's not 
going to bring in surprise foreign player as he did in hockey and turn 
the franchise into a world-beater.

I think we'll see maybe a 70 win team next year.  It'll seem like a 
huge improvement; it'll *be* a huge improvement.  But 70 win teams are 
still in last place in baseball.

I'm looking ahead to 2006.  Building a baseball team takes time.  We 
could be watching a 90 game winner by then.  Or not; so far Ilitch has 
not achieved a winner in Detroit and so there's really no reason to 
assume he ever will.