Jump to content

Number5

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    6,215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Number5

  1. Yeah, that doesn't make a lot of sense. Guaranteed a shot at a rotation spot, maybe.
  2. Angels? Looks like Tigers. Was there a big trade? Edit: Never mind. I see you said Tigers in the next post.
  3. How about Canadians? 😀 Seriously, stereotypes are just wrong.
  4. Just a reminder, this doesn't mean that the scheme wasn't being used for the other 7100 pitches. Remember, when employing the scheme, no bang was used for a fastball. Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that the scheme was in place for a considerable portion of the 7100 "no-bang" pitches.
  5. Not really. Roster limit would not change.
  6. How much do tickets cost? Maybe, in Japan, you don't have to take out a second mortgage to take your family to a ballgame.
  7. I wouldn't mind seeing them eliminate interleague play. That would create a more balanced schedule. The novelty has worn off, IMO, and there really is no reason to keep on playing interleague games.
  8. Good point. I'm guessing that you meant to say aren't. One thing to think about: with the new three-batter rule and the 15-day IL rule for pitchers, having someone in your rotation that can eat innings has even more significance.
  9. MLB desperately wants the Yankees in the World Series. God knows neither the Yankees nor MLB make enough money now, let's pull in more, more, more! Bring the World Series back to New York! Let's eliminate the rules that might give Tampa or other limited-budget teams any real chance of overcoming the rich teams' ability to spend huge money on their starting pitching and bullpens. If we let managers of poor teams situationally manage their bullpen the way that has always been the basic rules in baseball, they may continue to find ways to overcome their disadvantages. That is what the switch to the 15-day IL for pitchers and the three-batter rule accomplishes, IMO. Game times, you say? Hah!
  10. I'm pretty sure that this just means that it is more problematic, given the 15-day requirement for pitchers versus 10 days. MLB isn't going into the medical field, as I don't believe that they will be going behind teams' medical staffs and making any kind of determination as to what constitutes "minor." If teams want to IL a guy over something relatively "minor" they still can, but a pitcher must stay on the IL at least 15 days.
  11. There was a time that it wasn't all that uncommon for kickers to also play another position. The Colts' Lou Michaels was a defensive tackle. Paul Hornung was the Packers' place kicker for a while, in addition to being their starting halfback. George Blanda kicked and was the Raiders' backup quarterback. Otto Graham punted in addition to being a HOF QB. IIRC, Joe Don Looney was a backup RB and punted for the Colts for a season or two; and the Colts' Steve Myhra was a backup offensive lineman and linebacker in addition to his place-kicking duties - a three-way player. I believe the roster limits were less back then ( 40 active players IIRC), so I'm sure that was a big reason that players needed to be able to do more than just kick in many cases.
  12. I don't remember that. I remember him pulling a lot of foul line drives. Not that my memory is always accurate.
  13. With all the hard foul balls he hit, I bet Rick Dempsey would have been great at cricket. 😀
  14. Yeah, the original one with Fred MacMurray was much better.
  15. What was I supposed to do - call him for cheating better than me in front of the others?
  16. What if they asked him his role in the Astros' pending cheating investigation during the interview process and he denied any involvement? When the report later came out, Beltran was named in the report as a participant. Wouldn't being shown to have lied in the interview process be sufficient grounds?
  17. OK, Mr Altuve, just one more test, then you can bat.
  18. What if they had a trash can under their shirt? 😀
  19. I hear ya, but that just seems way too high to me. Seems like .6 runs would be closer to the number for the entire half inning, not one out. That would be 5.4 runs per team per game by simple math ( 9 X .6.) I'm sure the formula that whoever came up with .6 runs per out came up with is far more complex than that. I've found in life that there are times that more complex isn't always better. It would be nice to at least be given a reasonable explanation of how they arrived at the number and a reason that the actual number of runs scored versus outs made would be an incorrect way to do it. Again, I'm no mathematician, but I do like to be able to at least have something make some kind of sense to me.
×
×
  • Create New...