I don't know. This article seems a little bit like hopping on the bandwagon and praising their approach after it's safe to do so. Blogs similar to this one with similar outlooks all pretty much viewed the Tigers' approach with contempt for a few reasons. They wasted Jeremy Bonderman's service clock. The Ivan Rodriguez, Magglio Ordonez, Todd Jones, and Troy Percival signings were universally ridiculed. Kenny Rogers was a warm weather pitcher who could never survive the cold of Detroit and the AL Central, plus he was an aging hothead. Add to that mediocre starters like Nate Robertson, Mike Maroth, and Jeremy Bonderman who had yet to put together a "wow" season, and read a lot of pessimissm. And nobody was predicting Chris Shelton and Brandon Inge would have the kind of power they have.

Was Justin Verlander ever the question mark people are making him out to be? Not as much as I remember it. Even when you go back and look at the 2004 MLB draft site the accolades are there.

As for the accolades for the drafting, I believe (I am not certain) Greg Smith, the guy who drafted Zumaya and Verlander, was responsible for scores upon scores of awful, awful draft picks. Eric Munson, Jay Sborz, Kenny Baugh, Scott Moore, Kyle Sleeth, Eric Beattie, etc. I think he was fired after he signed Verlander and replaced by a guy from the Red Sox. So, the drafting acumen I am not yet sold on - does it really take a wizard to take Cameron Maybin when he falls to you impossibly low? I think not.

And of course, there's Carlos Guillen. Time after time after time we've all been lectured about how Carlos Guillen can't hit. It doesn't matter that Guillen *does* hit. PECOTA says Carlos Guillen can't hit. What PECOTA says is more important than the numbers at the end of the year. It's all just a magical fluke, and if we wait 5 years eventually PECOTA may be right.

It's nice to see the Tigers get acknowledged, but you can almost hear the grinding as blogs across the country change gears on the Tigers.

I agree that Detroit doesn't have a history of draft success. However, give credit for developing Verlander. For example, in a 6/2/2004 article in BaseballProspectus.com's premium content, Boyd Nation commented on Verlander's rising college ERA and pitcher abuse points "if your local GM drafts him, think about moving." Maybe this is the payback for Baugh and Sleeth, but the Tigers drafted Verlander despite workload concerns and mechanical problems and were able to fix things (so far).

I didn't really hear that side of the Verlander debate. For whatever reason most of what I read/heard at the time focused on Verlander's superior stuff over the other pitchers.

I'm not taking anything away from the Tigers for developing Verlander, just pointing out that scouting director when Verlander was drafted was demoted for years of bad picks... the odds are if you draft high enough, enough years some of your first rounders have to pan out.

Good point, Michael. I remember when Verlander was considered a bad, bad pick by many.

I am a White Sox fan for sure but I like what's happening with the Tigers.

I actually went to Comerica in August last year. The place was dead but I thought the park was real nice. I love the history of this great franchise and I am glad that they are good again.

I want the race to ebe close - with the Sox winning ofcourse. But, this team has a lot of talent and I don't expect them to fade too much. They might win the wild card. I'm impressed.

I hope this doesn't come off as mean-spirited...it's not intended that way.

The tone of this column struck me as very peculiar. You begin by talking about how skeptical you are of the Tigers and about how you're not being taken in by their hot start...and then proceed to praise them for the rest of the article.

This statement stuck out to me: "While I'm far from convinced this is the season the Tigers snap their losing streak, I do see good things happening."

So you envision the Tigers finishing with a losing record? Or at least view it as fairly likely? At this point the Tigers would have to win at a .400 clip to finish below .500, which is significantly worse than they did in 2005. I suspect this may be either a misstatement or a misinterpretation...hopefully so.

I'm somewhat skeptical...this roster surely doesn't look like the best one in baseball. The pitching has been better than it has any right to be (and it looks like Maroth could be seriously injured now). But they've clearly made a lot of progress, both for the short and long term.

As for the Verlander pick, David Chadd picked Verlander, and Dombrowski gets credit for Chadd. The Verlander pick was a very unpopular one nationally. Verlander faced dicey competition in college and was far from dominant. BP and BA both liked Niemann a lot more, and Phil Humber was also more highly thought of. Whoops. Personally, I wanted to draft Chris Nelson. Good thing I'm not doing the drafting.

The rest of the players are an odd patchwork sort of mix, and it doesn't seem like any kind of formula for building a team.

Aside to APiNG: Verlander seemed to draw more and more skeptics the closer the draft came. Perhaps you read more of the early stuff on him...by the time the draft rolled around it was thought that he could've slipped into the double digits if Detroit didn't pick him IIRC.

Just making the playoffs would be a nice snap to the string of Tigers losing seasons. And guess how many teams in the last decade have missed the playoffs with a winning percentage of at least .700 this late in the season? One. The 2002 Red Sox were over .700 for the last time on June 6th before tanking the rest of the way.

I don't remember the exact statistic, but there was one for Chris Shelton that said, taking all the players who have x amount of home run in y number of games as Shelton did, none of them have hit fewer than 39 home runs. Shelton had 10 home runs in 92 ABs in April, 1 home run in 72 ABs in May. I'm skeptical he gets to 39 despite what the records say.

I won't give the long version but I will say from someone who rode the bus down Fort Street to Tiger Stadium to get a 50 cent bleacher seat, hot dog and peanuts, to the year of the tiger in 68, the fade in 72 to the Amazing Oakland A's and the roar in 84, nobody knew where most of those guys came from or why they ended up in Detroit either. I am not saying that the Tigers are the team in 2006 to beat but it is a far cry from where they were and a quick turnaround from 100 losses per year expectations. I only hope that this turnaround is not the acceptable endpoint but a great beginning to a return to the post season playoffs for Detroit. Time always will tell but Ernie and Al are smiling again.