Jump to content

Hallas

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    2,632
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

386 Triple-A

About Hallas

  • Rank
    Plus Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Somewhere in the LA area
  • Homepage
    http://
  • Occupation
    software engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1,809 profile views
  1. I can't imagine that the O's would just let him leave to finish his degree without having an understanding a long time ago that he was going to get a chance to do this during the offseason. Maybe it was written into his contract?
  2. What behavior was unacceptable 20 years ago? Bat flipping? Brawls? Bunting to break up a no-hitter, against the shift?
  3. I prefer an age cutoff over following arcane "rookie" rules. Maybe a mix of the two would be ideal? How does this sound: Anyone under 25 and hasn't won the award before is eligible. For people 25+, current rules apply with the exception that players coming from KBO/NPB/other international top level leagues aren't eligible.
  4. Not really that sure if that affected his top speed significantly. I'd feel differently about a torn ACL or a history of hamstring injuries.
  5. While most guys on the top of the speed list are a hair faster in their mid-20s, their top speed doesn't seem to drastically decrease in the early 30s. Sterling Marte posted the second best average sprint speed of his career at age 31, and he is still able to post >30 fps this year at age 32. I am increasingly feeling like baseball performance degradation with age has more to do with the grind and the risk of injury, rather than an actual loss of skill. I suspect that a player like Barry Bonds could still hit Major League pitching at age 56, assuming his vision is still good. The problem is that he can't do it every day, and he certainly can't do it without risking injury at a much higher rate than a younger person. I've noticed similar things in in football, watching players like Darryl Green outrunning everyone at age 40. I think that's why golfers can play into their 40s - aside from being a lower impact sport, you can take weeks off without really hurting your competitive standing, so if you're not feeling great, you take a week off, play a round, hit a few range balls, rehab any nagging injuries, and go back to hitting the ball 400 yards next week.
  6. It's probably made a difference. I'd put that difference at around 10% of the reason, and 90% would be unexpected prospect development + some good luck. No one expected the 2012 Orioles to be any good either, and I don't think anyone thought Duquette brought in any kind of revolutionary scouting/development program in, even though he had a track record of doing those things. Sometimes you just get lucky. The Orioles have gotten lucky less than most, it feels like, so I guess things balance out.
  7. Logically I agree. My "legit hope" was more wishful thinking.
  8. Can you rehab lack of skill? BTW, did anyone have legit hope that Davis might have a comeback this year after mashing in ST version 1? I allowed myself to be fooled despite the fact that my eyes from last season told me he completely lost his bat speed.
  9. so i didn't even know you made a music reference, and i responded with a music reference of my own?
  10. 1: I don't think he was entirely healthy last season, and i think the long off-season benefited him. 2: he's had 10-15 game spurts with this level of performance in the past. 3: he probably benefits from park effects more than most.
  11. I don't think it's just the owners that feel that way. Do you really think pitchers like having to throw 2 full games worth of innings in a single night, and then have to play again the next day? Not only does it increase their injury risk, it puts the playing team at a disadvantage for the next game unless they're fortunate enough to have a day off. And going back to @DrungoHazewood's comment about lighting, if we're being nitpicky games from 90+ years ago had a hard stop at around 7-8pm depending on what time of year it was, and game start times were around 3pm, so not only were the games faster due to less dawdling, but there was a hard stop of around 4 hours before the game would have to be called and recorded as a draw. On 5/1/1920, this occurred when a 26 inning game was called after 3:50 (imagine playing 26 innings in 3:50, by the way) and a draw awarded to both teams, the Boston Braves and the Brooklyn Robins. (who the heck are the Brooklyn Robins, anyway...) So now you are letting games go on indefinitely because you can light the stadium as long as the power plant is running, AND you're adding about an hour of fluff in every game because, well, reasons. Yet no one wants to allow draws, despite the fact that they were more common back in the day because of a lack of lighting and a hard stop on playing time due to the sun setting. So we're left with "artificial" drama by putting a runner on 2nd to start the inning to get teams to score. Maybe there's a better solution, but given all the other issues causing game times to increase, and an overall mandate to try and shorten games as much as possible, I'm not really sure what that better solution is at the moment. And lets not forget that these rules don't exist in the playoffs. So you can have your 18 inning games in the playoffs, and since it's the playoffs, I'm sure fans won't stop watching.
  12. I get the sense that it affects baseball much more than football. Baseball had to run 2 different rulesets between half its teams for almost 50 years, because purists insisted that watching a .400 OPS hitter pretend to hit was good for the game, and doing a double-switch was the pinnacle of baseball strategery.
  13. I never really understood why football is allowed to change their rules as often as we change underwear, often resulting in major meta-shifts in the game (e.g. pass interference, illegal contact facilitating huge passing numbers compared to football before the turn of the century) yet every time baseball tries something comparatively small (such as wanting to get extra innings games done faster) it's met with huge backlash from people that want to appeal to the purity of baseball.
  14. "No baseball fan would hate a 5 hour game!" "I'm a baseball fan and I hate 5 hour games." "No TRUE baseball fan would hate a 5 hour game!"
×
×
  • Create New...