Sessh

I'm all for a reasonable extension for Villar. Don't get why so many seem to be in such a hurry to deal him. He's been great for us this year and he's been a solid player three of the last four years. We will have guys of all ages on the next contending team. This was brought up before, but half of the Astros WS roster was filled with guys 30 or older. I'd extend Villar for a couple years, why not?

I only mentioned those win totals because they were being bandied about in this thread. I disagree that getting the highest picks possible is not a short term goal that leads to the long term goal. Yes, we need talent. You get that by getting top picks in the first round especially. Not saying there isn't talent to be had with picks later in the first round, but the first round is why we want the top 3 pick. After round 5, nope, doesn't mean much, but it can matter a lot before the fifth. I don't think Elias cares at all about focusing on any win total and it wasn't my intention to imply that he was.

I would also add that I don't care about current attendance or if it's lower because of current performance because the fans will like the end result and they will come back. I don't blame them for taking another leave of absence, but they can go because they'll be back when this plan bears fruit. I am not interested in going for 70 wins to keep some of those fans here now. I'd rather go for teams that can produce 90 wins on a consistent basis and have the organizational depth and strength to produce such teams consistently. That's the goal. Not 70ish wins for 14 years.

Considering this is the first year of a lengthy rebuild that is directly following a massive collapse, 50 wins is absolutely better than 70 wins. The goal is to get the highest draft pick possible. This is about sacrificing the present for the future for several consecutive years in order to build a successful team built upon a model of sustainability that can be used to consistently produce teams that are playoff contenders year after year. For a team in the position we are in now trying to accomplish the things we're trying to accomplish right now, 70 wins is a wrench thrown into the plans. A top 3 pick is equivalent to winning the World Series in 2019 and probably next year as well at least. If you really need to know why going for 70 wins and filling in holes with free agents is a bad idea, review the 1998-2011 Orioles and remind yourself what happens when a team doesn't fully commit to either a rebuild or trying to contend. What we are doing now is fully committing to not only a team rebuild, but an organization rebuild from the ground up. FULLY committing. That is #1. Winning 70 games is not only not a step towards our goal, but is also a step away from it back to the attitude of that stretch of 14 golden years in a row. Winning games right now is not a priority. This is how a rebuild works. High draft picks are the goal, not 70 wins.

I understand. Honestly, it's been well over a year since I thought about this topic at all as I'm pretty comfortable with my position on this. So, I won't be going down that road. Besides, the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated. Nothing. :) I think I'm just more pro-choice on the issue than "anti" anything.

Hard to imagine things not starting out that way. No reason to think Hays wouldn't do well in ST considering the nature of it all and all the minor leaguers that will be pitching to him. I mean, we really don't have anyone to compete with him for CF and I don't consider Wilkerson an option. It is a little concerning that Hays has struggled against major league pitching thus far in his career, so his performance this month should supply some much needed information. Still much too early to say anything for sure, though. Certainly, staying healthy is a must and another concern. He still has a lot to prove, but the time has certainly come for him to do so especially next season.

All he has to do is show he can hit at this level. Hays can obviously handle center.

I do and I have. I wouldn't base it on anything else and if I do my own research, hours of it before I come to a conclusion which does include studies and research in peer-reviewed journals. I do not make knee-jerk emotional conclusions and I can and have defended my position successfully in the past. I was only supporting Palmer in what he said.

My reasons are pretty well fleshed out at this point with evidence and am not at all ashamed of my position. I was just showing my support for Jim's position as well and of course, Palmer is the best. I hope he's around for many more years and I hope he gets better soon!

Just goes to show you that no matter how much money you have, you can never solve all of your problems. I think the desire to alter the mind through intoxication is in our genes and isn't going anywhere, but I would guess Skaggs got into opiate use to deal with pain associated with his profession to some degree. I would much rather players be allowed to smoke weed for these purposes instead. It'll never kill them. Only question is was there an addiction involved? Also, I've never been a big fan of the "who gave these drugs to him" witch hunts. Tyler Skaggs was an adult capable of making his own decisions and he mixed two opiates with alcohol. Fentanyl is an incredibly powerful opiate (Thanks, China!), so I don't know what he was doing and it's hard to imagine a doctor with any integrity would tell anyone to mix these things. Skaggs made a bad decision and it unfortunately cost him his life. I've been close to an addicted person or two. Socio-economic status really has little do to with anything IMO. Rich, poor, middle class; they all do drugs of which alcohol is included since it is a mind-altering drug and a hard drug at that. Everyone has their reasons and some of them end up dead eventually. Besides, it's easy to get drugs in prison. Probably not a good idea for many reasons, but pretty easy to get.

As am I. Thing is Shingles is totally preventable with adequate intake of Vitamin C. I wouldn't get those shots either.

It's strange because the stigma with that is a fairly new thing. Not sure why. I guess the Royals in England gave it a bad look.

Yeah, but I think that's only with first cousins. What I found most interesting is that first cousins have the same risk of birth defects as a 40 year old woman would have, but yes it does accumulate. At third cousins, there's really no increased risk at all.

Haha. Jerry Lee Lewis, Edgar Allen Poe, H.G. Wells, Jesse James etc.. Turns out the risks of birth defects for even first cousins having kids were grossly exaggerated.

Fun fact: Johann Sebastian Bach was one of many famous people to marry his cousin. Others include Einstein (did it twice), Darwin, FDR, Rudy Gulianni, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.

The bat head broke the plane of the plate. It was a swing from the side view, but both Hunter and Roberts insist that it was borderline and could go either way. Roberts irritates me more every time I hear him.

No one runs in the base line. No one complies with the rule. Watch all the runners going down to first and you'll see that almost all of them run inside the baseline because it's more comfortable to plant the right foot into the bag than the left for righties. Doing it with the left foot is awkward. It's a stupid rule and no one follows it not to mention that forcing compliance may lead to some nasty left leg injuries down past the bag. If this rule were strictly enforced, everyone running down the line would get called for it.

Not according to GameDay. In the sixth (8 pitches), he threw four fastballs: 88mph, 89.7, 89.6 and 90. In the seventh (13 pitches), he threw five fastballs: 90.5, 90.7, 91.7, 90.1 and 90.8mph. He hit 92 a couple times earlier in the game, but was generally 89-91 the whole game peaking at 92 and bottoming out at 88. Not sure where you're getting 94-95 from.

I forgot it was a day game today, so missed the whole thing. Looking through GameDay, it seems Wojo was generally in the 89-91 range with a handful of 92's and a few 88's as well. I still don't like it, but glad he got through seven. It seems like the Rays were not being all that patient, am I wrong?

Verlander has thrown two no-hitters against Toronto and one against Milwaukee. He also took several no hitters into the eighth or ninth that got broken up.

He had one against the Brewers in.. 2007 or so, I think.

No hitter completed. 120 pitches throwing 97 until the end.

97.. lol Verlander has great mechanics. No surprise he's able to do that.

96.4 at pitch 114.

Two outs, 14K's .. has to get Bichette out for the finisher.