survivedc
-
Posts
1532 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by survivedc
-
-
16 minutes ago, Philip said:
One thing about the players association union is that a whole lot of very good baseball players are not members, because they aren’t allowed to be yet.
That means that if the players association decides to sit on their hands, MLB can field teams consisting of guys from the high minors. They aren't crossing any picket lines because they’re not members of the union because they’re not good enough( or for whatever reason.)
if the owners would lower ticket/concession/parking costs to reflect teams making major league minimum, I think that would be exciting and fun to watch. Tony Clark and Scott Boras would scream and I would point my finger and say,” hah hah.”
What am I missing?
Why wouldn’t this work?
What you’re missing is that while the players share a small amount of blame, the majority of it lies at the feet of the owners. The players shouldn’t be punished for wanting to be paid what they deserve.
-
1
-
-
I bought a portable radio a few years ago for use at work when I was there evenings and the last two years it has been nice to use that and go about my evening instead of being glued to the TV (given the game was effectively over after a few innings anyway).
I agree with the larger sentiment but also think when baseball is back people will be back, despite being happy without it.
-
4 minutes ago, Philip said:
I don’t really disagree with most of what you said, I think our emphasis is different.
AR Going to be an outstanding catcher, yes, but None of the guys you mentioned as close to the majors, And none of the guys we currently have can be considered even an average defender with the possible exception of Hayes and Santandar.
My main point is that if you have to trade to fill a need, it is less expensive to trade for a bat then it is to trade for pitching.
And I’m not complaining about Mike’s strategy, I’ve said many times that I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, even if his moves appear a bit curious.
I think Diaz and Mountcastle would both profile as avg defensively (COF & 1B respectively).
-
Westburg is more advanced than Hall or DH but I think Hall has more potential. Same goes with Gunnar, who as another poster mentioned has a better chance at defensive value. His baseball name value is off the charts, though Mayo isn’t too shabby.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DirtyBird said:
Are you trying to tell me I can’t read?
Or comprehend.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:
This years BA doesnt count as its a small sample size
.294 and .287 aren’t very close to .250. That’s the difference between a starter and an all star caliber player in the bigs.
-
7 minutes ago, SteveA said:
And if we had a mid to late first round pick, that plan might be more palatable. You don't get a #2 pick all that often, hate to not get full value out of it. We consoled ourselves that suffering through at 108 loss season would at least get us a special player who could jumpstart the rebuild. Well, I don't think it did now. Best case we got a much better 4th round pick longterm than most, but we didn't come out of this draft with a top-5 player and that means the suffering of last season was for naught IMO.
I don’t think the plan last year was to be the 2nd worst team in baseball. Regardless, Elias was in the position to take a player he wanted most and hopefully he’s being somewhat honest and did so.
-
Kinda cool how every player could have gone much higher if the season played out. Would have been like 60 first round picks! Historic.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
I'd hope someone like Hall would be ready in 3-4 years.
Well it would be a good problem to have both ready at the same time, whenever it may be.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
If his swing does need to be rebuilt how fast can he get to the majors?
We don’t know his swing will get rebuilt. Even if it does, 3-4 years is reasonable and would line up well with a theoretical competitive window.
-
5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Something tells me teams weren't lining up to draft Westburg.
Two college SS’s were taken after him in the round. Dunno he would have been taken instead but that may have been their calculation.
-
Right, #39 will be interesting. With so few picks separating the two maybe there were 4-5 guys they look at as overshot guys and figured somebody would still be there but Westburg wouldn’t.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Ruzious said:
So, is Ben Zobrist the best comp to Austin Martin? I'd really stay away from comps to Rendon - who I thought was a freak prospect - because he combined the absurd hit tool with a very good... eh... power tool.
Some guy (O’Dowd from MLBN?) they interviewed on the fan compared him to Betts. Talked about how the athleticism compares but his best trait is his intelligence/eye. Great pitch recognition so doesn’t chase bad ones and very smart on base paths etc. I’m all in on this dude.
-
1
-
-
I don’t think baseball’s problem is that it’s boring to play, it’s that it is boring to watch if you aren’t involved. Football had turned it into a one day a week event (technically 3 sure) basketball has a continuous loop of explosive plays and dynamic personalities (at least they have convinced most of America they are).
Baseball certainly needs to do a better job of getting less privileged youth involved. The cost to furnish equipment and facilities for a few leagues in each city they are based is a drop in the bucket to teams, and while I know this happens to a degree, I wish they did more.
-
6 hours ago, camdencrush said:
Baseball is very expensive to play and you can't play it that effectively with no equipment and a couple of friends. With football all you need is a ball 2 people. With basketball a ball and a hoop and 2 people. Baseball, unless you're hitting off a tee or throwing into one of those bounce back nets (which gets boring quickly), you just can't do by yourself. Besides playing catch I guess. But how much can you do that? Baseball is going the way of the dodo because it hasn't (and probably won't) adapt to a changing environment. We can't be mad at people for not being entertained by a sport that was basically the only form of entertainment aside from movies in its heyday.
Playing baseball with 2 people is just as authentic as playing football with two people. Maybe even more so, if you have a bucket of balls you can reasonably imitate the batter-pitcher experience. In fact, Patterson park near me, I’ve seen significantly more people playing some version of baseball than I have seen playing a version of football.
-
On the other hand, I would bet adult softball leagues are probably the most popular leagues out there (volleyball and kickball also seem to have high participation) at least it feels that way in Baltimore.
Outside of soccer, the major 4 sports are always changing, but so far basketball with emphasizing the 3 (which I don’t enjoy) and football emphasizing passing (which I also don’t enjoy to the level it’s at) have done much better jobs marketing and getting fans excited about their new styles.
-
13 minutes ago, UpstateNYfan said:
The death of baseball has more to do with the number of sport choices youth has today. Forty years ago, there was basically two youth (male) organizations recognized at the national level, Little League and Pop Warner football. Some other sports began to expand, CYO basketball (male), youth soccer programs (maybe the first co-ed). Overtime, more expansion....volleyball, hockey, gymnastics, cheerleading teams, club basketball, girls' softball and more.As time went on, many of these sports were not seasonal, some lasting 9 months of the year. Travel teams began. Nine year old's (or parents) told to make decisions, chose a sport (two at most). Baseball had setbacks, mainly unplayable weather in most of the country half the year, kids families with summer vacations, so a limited season. Even high school sports became specialized off season eight programs, "unofficial" summer basketball teams ("not coached" by the HS coach..but he or she in stands). Today, three sport HS athletes are rare. Back in the day, kids would grab their gloves, say adios and disappear to the local park and do pick up games or some random variation of the game. In Rochester, Kodak had an organization called KPAA, part of it was a summer softball program...send in an application, they assigned you to a team....you'd grab a bus (and transfer) and go to some field in a 20 mile radius and play with strangers. You go to the same parks today and they are barren, no kids playing. You watch youth baseball (non travel) practices and kids are not involved. You watch games of 6-7 with kids pitching that have trouble hitting the backstop...kids picking dandelions in the field. Baseball is a difficult game to coach, let alone the rules. You wonder why baseball is failing. Watch other, youth sports like hockey and watch their skill developing programs..skill not games. Likewise, with youth basketball programs. A lot of rambling here, but baseball interests will likely continue to decline.
I don’t think most of this is true. May be true anecdotally but from what I’ve read Youth Baseball participation has been up the last 4-5 straight years, at least in the 6-12 range. Football has taken a hit more than any other sport in recent years due to health concerns and hockey/lacrosse seem to be very geographically driven.
-
I think Keith Law had David Calabrese at #16ish and I saw him on the one Weams posted in the 30’s. I know people are targeting pitchers around there but the guy has game changing speed and good potential to hit for a high average.
(Full disclosure: I picked him in OOTP and by age 21 he was starting and 23 a perennial all star. I just want to have predicted the future in my little video game world).
-
1
-
-
I’d say I’m almost more excited about the next two picks than the first one. Can really add some top end talent this draft.
-
1 hour ago, Daddy-O's said:
If the season is going to get an asterisk anyhow, why not have some fun. 4 inning games that end in a tie are settled by a ten pitch home run derby. All teams make the play off's and the first round is NCAA tournament style. The bottom 16 teams play a Thursday /Saturday and Friday / Sunday tournament. The teams would play a 3 four inning game series in a day best two out of three advances. We could fill out brackets and everything.
I like the idea of an NCAA style tournament. Was saying they should do that for NBA this year. Can you imagine the low scores of shortened games though? Starters throw max effort for a few innings and call it a day.
OTOH I guess your top bullpen guy would most likely only be available every 3rd game...
-
1 hour ago, hoosiers said:
I am not a big Bowden fan and I don't like the claim in his article that one shouldn't draft a pitcher in the top five slots in the first round just because of who was drafted in that slot in prior years. The evaluation of a prospect should be a unique event, IMO. However, Bowden's generalizations of the recent historical failure rates of the pitchers taken at the very top of a draft class uses the same line of reasoning (again, which I don't like) as is used in the OP of this thread and provides a starkly different conclusion - that the failure rate of SPs who were thought to be the best of their class is quite high. A period which Bowden's article points out includes the Os selection of Brian Matusz.
Gausman is a good example of why he is wrong, I think. Sure he never became an Ace like we all hoped but he certainly pitched like one in stretches. IMO you make that pick every time and hope that guy can iron out the issues that were somewhat apparent at draft time.
-
1 hour ago, hoosiers said:
So, former GM Jim Bowden is now writing for the Atlantic. According to his research, there were 42 players taken among the 80 players selected in the first five picks of the 16 MLB drafts between 2000 and 2015 and only five of the 42 have justified the selection - Verlander, Price, Strausburg, Cole and Bauer. Two of those pitchers, Verlander and Strausburg, were "no-brainer" decisions. It is a hit rate far below WC's opening post.
Just to clarify, he’s talking specifically about pitchers that have justified being picked.
-
9 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:
At this moment. But you never draft to need, you draft the best player and then figure it out in three or five or seven years when the guy is ready.
Actually, the Orioles' biggest need for a very, very long time has been someone who gets on base a lot. Hits for average, draws walks, sets the table. They haven't had a consistenly good leadoff hitter since... Brady? Roberts was good, but never had a .400 OBP, career mark under .350.
Not to mention the alarming lack of middle infield prospects on the farm.
Personally, I prefer the safer pick given the lack of info to go off of. Let’s save the high upside gambles for 30/39.
-
1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:
Probably?
Look 8 straight 7+ WAR seasons may be good for you but it’s pretty thin from where I stand.
A season of AAA guys?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Uh, the owners did when they agreed to contracts with the players.