Jump to content

vs. RAYS, 7/24

OFFNY

By OFFNY
in Game Threads

Recommended Posts

SteveA Hangout Grand Counsel

SteveA

Posted
Posted
I see you type that, but yet I don't see you really celebrate much when your whipping boys get hits. The other night you ripped Paredes, Wieters, and Hardy early in the game. Those three guys all got hits to score 2 runs and tie up the game and I saw not one single word about any of them. They get whipped like hell when they fail though, over and over.

I don't think you're nearly as even handed as you think you are.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The "game thread mentality". For some reason, pessimism dominates over optimism. When a pitcher has a bad first inning, there are dozens o posts about how awful he is, how he's going to be blasted tonight, etc. Sometimes he sucks all night, sometimes he winds up having a good game despite the bad first inning.

When a pitcher has a GOOD first inning there are a FEW positive comments but not nearly as many negative ones if he is bad. And the wild extrapolation that accompanies one bad inning (" he doesn't have it tonight", "get the bullpen up now Buck", " he's not a major league pitcher") -- you never see the equivalent wild out of control positive extrapolation about how great he is after a good inning. For some reason its a 1 way street, and the pessimists dominate.

It is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 420
  • Created
  • Last Reply
LA2 Hangout Grand Counsel

LA2

Posted
Posted
Watching Paredes is like watching the Titanic sink. Now under .300 which he will never see again. The next 30 games will be him heading to .230 range and we get little from him again this season.

Wow, that could be a rather premature prediction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scOtt Hangout Grand Counsel

scOtt

Posted
Posted
We've had some excellent success swinging at the first pitch tonight, including our only run. If you think you've got a pitch to hit, i say go for it.

People make so much about seeing pitches. But with some guys that just puts you 0-2 all night. Some guys you have to go up there hacking. Usually more against the better pitchers than the bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LA2 Hangout Grand Counsel

LA2

Posted
Posted
The "game thread mentality". For some reason, pessimism dominates over optimism. When a pitcher has a bad first inning, there are dozens o posts about how awful he is, how he's going to be blasted tonight, etc. Sometimes he sucks all night, sometimes he winds up having a good game despite the bad first inning.

When a pitcher has a GOOD first inning there are a FEW positive comments but not nearly as many negative ones if he is bad. And the wild extrapolation that accompanies one bad inning (" he doesn't have it tonight", "get the bullpen up now Buck", " he's not a major league pitcher") -- you never see the equivalent wild out of control positive extrapolation about how great he is after a good inning. For some reason its a 1 way street, and the pessimists dominate.

It is what it is.

When I first started participating in game threads about a decade ago, my memory is that it wasn't this negative. I would say it's not inherent to the nature of game threads, but a shift in what type of personality posts. But it's not as bad as 2-3 years ago. Seeing someone like Jonesy10 transform out of almost complete pessimism has actually been refreshing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Baseball fandom
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Baseball fandom · Posted

      I've made it clear that if they don't sign Santa and Burnes I'm ok with it as long as the money is allocated to other players they feel that fits their profile better .You know you have people on here like SG who only hears what he wants to hear. I need to learn to ignore that guy. 
    • Baseball fandom
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Baseball fandom · Posted

      Oh mr know it all. Who most times is wrong. Lol
    • DrinkinWithFermi
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By DrinkinWithFermi · Posted

      I also think Santander will age better than Trumbo, despite my repeated comparisons of the two players. But I don't know that he will age better than Trumbo and all of the other one dimensional sluggers who were enjoying the retired millionaire sports star lifestyle by their mid-30s, and I don't want the Orioles to be on the hook when the world finds out in 2 or 3 years. Re-signing Santander to a 4 year, $80 million dollar deal is something the DD/PA regime would have done. Hopefully the ME/DR regime is smarter than that (and I think they are). 22nd percentile is really bad, man. And it's unlikely to improve in his 30s.
    • Moose Milligan
      Hyde Hot Seat

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      Looks like Baseball Fandom was at the game today!
    • Sydnor
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Sydnor · Posted

      But that is not what you said. You said he’s a bad fielder, just not quite Trumbo-tier. Thus, you were stating he is close to as bad a fielder as Trumbo was, which is not correct. Generally speaking, no player makes up the loss of offensive value with defensive value as the age. It is usually one of the first things to go. I was not making any sort of argument that he was going to make up declining offense with defense, just pointing out that you made a preposterous statement.
    • Hallas
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Hallas · Posted

      At least relative to the rest of the league Santander has an interesting profile because he is comfortably above-average at making contact; his whiff rates are much better than Trumbo's so he's not really as much of a TTO player as you would think.  This gives him hope that he will age a little bit better than someone like Trumbo.  Though he's still got a good shot of being out of the league in 3 years.
    • forphase1
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By forphase1 · Posted

      It's not the money, it's the years.  I wouldn't mind signing him for a year or two, even at what I'd consider to be stupid money.  But what I DON'T agree with is signing him for any more than 2-3 years as I don't think he's going to age well.  And I expect him to get more than 3 years from someone, so I'm a hard pass.  Can we afford him?  Money wise, sure.  But I don't want to see us stuck with him 4-5 years down the road when his skillset has greatly diminished, but he's still playing every day because we owe him a lot of money and a lot of loyalty.  Let some other club take that risk, get the QO pick and move on.  

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...