Friday July 22: Nats come to town

[HowAboutThat]

51 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

It was a bad decision to trade for him and a lot of us said so.

Including me. That was a terrible trade, arguably the worst Dan ever made, but I still like him personally, I thought he was fine quality human being 

Edited July 24, 2021 by Philip

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, LA2 said:

and 23 RBIs

Trade that man!

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Wrong way to look at it. Look at Severino. Why is he playing? He makes more than Wynns. Chris Davis played even though Mancini was a better option. Same with Franco. 
 

The larger investment usually gets more playing time.

Sometimes investments are wasted. Franco is terrible on defense, and his offense doesn’t make up for it. Give him his money, write him off as a bad gamble and send him on his way, while learning from the mistake. It makes no sense to keep playing a terrible player because you have to pay him.
The same applies to Severino. You’re saying that Severino is playing because he makes more than Wynns. But that doesn’t justify playing him, and it can’t be used as a reason for also playing Franco. A bad reason used twice is still a bad reason.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, SteveA said:

Second time in two weeks that a ballboy touches a ball in play.  It was the RF ballboy on Saturday the 10th vs the White Sox, about 30 feet in front of me.

While neither was good, this one was a little more understandable.  The ball was literally about to roll under his chair while he was sitting there.   The fans were nice - a couple innings later there was a foul that hit the wall and was about to ricochet into the OF and the kid snagged it.  They cheered him for that effort, not something fans typically would have done but they knew he was feeling bad after his prior mistake.  

Question -let’s say the ball boy had jumped out of the way and the ball had either rattled around under the chair or had hit the chair and ricocheted off.  Would the ball have been in play?    

 

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, WillyM said:

Listening on the radio, and the announcers spent the whole third inning interviewing an Oriole draft choice instead of describing what was happening on the field.

I'm sure no one cares what I think, but when I tune in the broadcast of tonight's game, I want to hear about tonight's game.  Tonight, I have very little interest in hearing an interview in which some young fellow who might, possibly, play for the Orioles in a game three or four or five or so years from now expresses banalities about how nice it is to have been drafted.  I am interested in what the guys are doing on the field tonight.

I wish the people in charge of Oriole broadcasts saw things my way.

I don’t mind it much when the TV guys do it, since you can see the action.  It bothers me more on radio, where you’re dependent on the announcers to know what’s going on.   A skilled announcer can do an interview between the action but describe the game decently at the same time, and minimize the spillover.   

[Il BuonO]

3 hours ago, Philip said:

Sometimes investments are wasted. Franco is terrible on defense, and his offense doesn’t make up for it. Give him his money, write him off as a bad gamble and send him on his way, while learning from the mistake. It makes no sense to keep playing a terrible player because you have to pay him.
The same applies to Severino. You’re saying that Severino is playing because he makes more than Wynns. But that doesn’t justify playing him, and it can’t be used as a reason for also playing Franco. A bad reason used twice is still a bad reason.

Oh, I don’t agree with it, but after years of having arguments about “sunk costs” I’m left without any other impression. 

In my mind, including Davis when the team was horrible, and now Severino or Franco, these guys are taking the roster spot of someone more deserving. Not always, but there’s a pretty good case for someone to take any of those spots.