Jump to content

Gunnar Henderson 2024


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I don't think it's possible now with the way teams place value on players getting the occasional rest day. I don't see any future player even coming close to challenging Cal's consecutive games played record.

I think Cal's record was able to happen because of a time in O's history when there was no strong manager.  I doubt Cal's streak would have made it to one season if he had played his whole season under Weaver.  Weaver was way ahead of his time on matchups, platoons and resting players.  The  bigger thing about Cal's streak, imo was that it was allowed to happen, where it took on a life of it's own, dwarfing the team.  I'm not diminishing the feat, but there's rarely a player that plays 162 games in a year now.  It's just recognized that people wear down and need rest.  I want to say to that probably the 5 players behind Cal on the streak list did things to basically cheat and prolong their streak especially Gehrig, where he would hit once and then not play the rest of the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I don't think it's possible now with the way teams place value on players getting the occasional rest day. I don't see any future player even coming close to challenging Cal's consecutive games played record.

Gunnar is going to break Cal's streak....

 

 

 

 





Wearing a Yankees uniform.

Good morning! 🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I don't think it's possible now with the way teams place value on players getting the occasional rest day. I don't see any future player even coming close to challenging Cal's consecutive games played record.

Since Cal’s streak, only one player has played more than 555 straight games.   That was Miguel Tejada, whose streak of 1,152 ended in 2007 while with the O’s when he broke his hand.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Frank Robinson and Johnny Oates weren’t strong managers. 

Nor was Earl in 1985-86, I guess. 

Edited by Frobby
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Back to Gunnar, he’s got two off days ahead next week. I’m not sure if his little slump is cause he’s tired or whatever. But need to see how he handles this little slide he’s on. 

He had two hits last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

That’s what I get for not being able to sit down and watching the whole game. 

You would have missed the first one because he was thrown out at second. The second hit was a chop over the 1B man's head. He did hit some balls hard which is a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal and his dad worked together on ending the innings streak aspect of it, and once the club fired his dad and the player saved baseball I think all engaged parties knew the score.

His anomalous playing time pattern was balance positive for the industry.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Nor was Earl in 1985-86, I guess. 

Cal was in his prime then.  If Cal played from 1960-1980, do you think Weaver would have never rested him.  I don't think Weaver was one to ask a player if he needed a day off or if he needed to come out of a game, i.e. stories of Palmer arguing w/ Weaver about coming out of a game.  Anyway I have hella respect for Cal being able to play all those years as an elite athlete w/o missing a game.  I was proud of myself when I went 1 year of work w/o missing a day d/t injury or illness.  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I want to say to that probably the 5 players behind Cal on the streak list did things to basically cheat and prolong their streak especially Gehrig, where he would hit once and then not play the rest of the game. 

Gehrig also rode on trains during road trips and sports medicine didn't really exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

That’s what I get for not being able to sit down and watching the whole game. 

You were to busy thinking about Elly Cruz. What was up with that by the way? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...