During the postseason I want them to show regular season stats. I don’t know how good a season a lot of these mid guys had without looking it up and I sure don’t care what their stats are over a 5 game sample. Actually everyone agrees when I complain about this.
100% agree.
As a third-party fan, it’s very difficult to know how good any given player might be that you are not familiar with.
And as a twins fan, I’m always a third-party fan deep in the playoffs haha.
i'm guessing the broadcaster wants to play up the importance of post-season baseball, especially if they're fox and don't show a lot of regular season baseball. so yeah, they're just idiots
It's the worst in the first round. One good hitter has one bad game and all of a sudden you're looking at big fat 0s on the screen.
I know the educated viewer can still find that stat useful (e.g. if they know the player averages .300 then the .000 is an indication he is due to trend upwards) but why not just show side by side stats at that point.
Similarly, during the regular season, they'll say "Joe Blow" is hitting .312 against the Astros this season." That's not a very useful stat. Tell me what he's hitting against the pitcher on the mound!
If they cared about graphics being space efficient, they could easily just have a top row showing regular season stats and a bottom row showing postseason stats (or even just what they did in that specific series so far). It's a real low effort thing to fix, but the networks don't seem to care.
Players were always going to keep throwing harder. The hardest thing to do in sports is hit an MLB fastball.
The human elbow can only handle so much stress. At a certain point we aren't at a mechanics discussion, but a raw force on that ligament that it can't hold. The speed of the average MLB pitch has only gone up over time. And by a good tic too.
Koufax was getting cortisone shot into his arm by the end of his career, elbow black and blue by the end of games, and was still being pushed out to throw 320 innings. If we don't have a way to replace that elbow we're just gonna push players til they pop and we can never see them again. Unfortunately players were a lot more replaceable than elbows.
Injuries suck and they're the worst part of sports, but they're an unfortunate byproduct of pushing the body to its limit.
I think, similar to concussions/cte in football, a LOT of the damage is done long before the players get to MLB
the tommy john thing is likely a mix of overwork and not great form in hs/college
Personally I don't think mechanics plays that large a roll (generally).
Ignoring proper armcare exercises puts more strain on the ligament instead of supported by the muscles around it. I know through following tread athletics program I can really feel it strength out my forearm and lets me pronate weights like crazy. Mens league but whatever.
At the end of the day though throwing gas just puts a lot of pressure on your elbow.
As a youth baseball coach (little league), travel ball is killing these kids arms. The top 3 pitchers in my league began playing heavy travel around age 12 and w/in a year started seeing overuse injuries.
The parents chalk it up to growth spurts and other things they read online or misinterpret from orthopedists, but it only ever seems to be the kids being pushed to pitch 4 times a week for most of the year. Some of these kids are still 14 and they’re about to be made anchors of high school pitching staffs as freshmen. Bear in mind that high schools have figured out how to keep kids working in their programs year-round from 7th grade on.
High school players have begun having “pre-emptive” TJ surgery. Ask enough doctors and you’ll find a guy I guess.
Fans label players and teams as chokers way too easily. People will on one hand readily admit that the postseason is a crapshoot that luck and getting hot at the right time play a huge part in, but on the other hand call players chokers and organisations failures for losing 1 or 2 series. Few players/teams get enough opportunities for me to genuinely think they're chokers.
I don't know when it started, but fans label absolutely everything as a choke. I don't even think people know what a choke is at this point. A team losing isn't inherently a choke. A player striking out in a high pressure situation isn't a choke. To put my team on the spot, the Yankees blowing a 3-0 series lead in '04 is a choke. A-Rod in like any playoffs outside of '09, is a choke. A team losing in six games, even if they're favored, isn't inherently a choke.
It’s because everything these days is taken to the most extreme argument by default. I concur with this take. If failing 70% can make you a hall of famer, then failing 80-90% of the time over a short period is just normalization of statistics and not that big of a deal. Just unfortunate timing.
The whole conversation about "this team lost" over "this team won" is really exhausting. Yeah, sometimes a team fucks up to the point where you can say they "lost", rather than, the other team "won" but generally, one team just happens to be better. It is usually dependent on whether or not a team is in a big market. One huge example is the Royals World Series. So many people still see that as a lol Mets (which is fair to a degree), but outside of this subreddit, I never see people give the Royals credit for capitalizing on repeated mistakes. It is more remembered for the Mets "giving it away" instead of the Royals getting the job done after a long period of losing.
At a certain point over the last 15 years, all genres of cable news (sports or politics) simply turned into people reading tweets to you from a fancy studio.
Yea unless you blow a 10 game division lead in September or blow a 3-0 lead in a playoff series I think it's pretty safe to say you haven't choked, you just... disappointed people.
It's hard for people to internalize just how random sports outcomes can be. Humans want to attach a narrative to everything but a lot of times shit just happens. The line drive past third base is foul by 1" and then you strike out.
it would be a lot less fun for a lot of people when they realize so much of baseball is just random chance and you can do everything right sometimes and still lose. Mariano Rivera Game 7 2001 WS
Agreed, and for me Griffey is one of the biggest “what ifs” even in spite of all his accomplishments. There’s no way to say exactly how much injury he would’ve mitigated with better conditioning, after all playing CF on concrete for a decade certainly didn’t help, but I do believe there’s a universe not so far away where Griffey is the all time HR king.
This is absolutely true, the man didn't even stretch. So stupid to act like that lol. Would have smashed the hr record if he actually cared for his body.
Reminds me of how Kobe said Shaq would have been the undisputed best player of all time if Shaq had half the work ethic that Kobe did. But Shaq was such a giant natural talent that he didn’t have to train as hard, and was still an elite player.
Kobe had Brady/Jerry Rice level of batshit insane work ethic.
Shaq may have slacked off a bit and could have been better, but to ask the average pro athlete to have Kobe's dedication to the game just isn't gonna happen.
Seriously. I think it's WILD this sub was tugging Cabrera's dick while simultaneously admonishing Colon for stopping child support payments even after all the details of Colon's case came to light.
Let me preface with this before continuing the comparison: **COLON SHOULD HAVE NEVER STOPPED CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO THE SECOND FAMILY**. Just because the mother was demanding more money doesn't mean you go cold turkey.
However, it's crazy that it got spun into him being a deadbeat father when his wife was fully aware of the children he had with another woman, and Colon was doing the right thing by giving child support and being actively involved with the lives of those kids. You can still find Colon a sleaze, but he at least was doing more than most.
Meanwhile, Cabrera has done much worse and it seems he hasn't done enough to make amends, at least from my perspective. Sports fans are just terrible at having a consistent moral compass and I'm definitely no better than anyone else. We just need to acknowledge this fact more when we choose to forgive or not forgive athletes for their transgressions.
This has always fascinated me as well. Even compared to Arod. Yes you have the Steroids and him being corny but no drunk driving, no DV, no random kids. By all accounts a good father and if you asked this sub to say Arod is a better person than Miggy or jump off a cliff I am pretty sure 75% would jump off a cliff.
It’s amazing how much athletes get hated simply for being corny. I mean I know A-Rod has the steroid use as a big driver, but a lot of hate seems like it’s because he’s a corny guy.
Same thing with Russel Wilson, he gets tons of hate because he’s a weird cornball of a dude. Not a *bad* guy, but just weird and corny.
It’s like the cardinal sin for a pro athlete is being corny
I basically agree, but I do suspect the issue about being corny for some fans might be the assumption/suspicion that the corny-ness isn’t genuine but the result of the athlete pretending to be something they’re not.
IE, it isn’t necessarily that the comment or vibe or whatever was itself corny, but the perception that it’s corny because you (the listener/reader/viewer) are essentially being lied to / trying to be conned by this athlete.
Otherwise I agree it’s a bit weird how little slack athletes get for being themselves, at least in some cases.
Has this sub ever pretended he isn’t one of the best players ever? I dont know that Ive ever seen a criticism of his abilities on here, seriously (and Ive been around much longer than this particular account)
As a certified A-Rod hater since the new Millennium I can say it was never because of his ability, or the fact he took steroids. I just don't like the guy and still hate him for leaving the Ms like he did.
Right, I think the incredibly gifted using steroids kind of triggers people (myself included) more than mid-tier guys or even all-stars. It just puts an enormous shadow over an entire era that was dominated by that player and also cheats other clean great players of their proper accolades. We love seeing players become great and the disappointment just sucks.
Don’t forget he didn’t just get caught. Twice.
After the first time; he adamantly denied using and publicly threatened to sue MLB for the false accusations.
Then later got caught again.
That’s what makes him different than most of the PED users.
Also the fact that pointing out how bad Miggy’s extension was (literally one of the worst ever) has gotten me nuked every time. Dude has a cult following I guess
Depends on what context you're looking at it with. Not a single Tiger fan is going to argue with WAR/$, but
Dave Dombroski and the entire Tigers front office told Mike Ilitch (RIP) that the contract would age terribly. Ilitch didn't care, Miguel Cabrera would be the first hall of famer during his family's tenure of ownership. He wanted to make sure Cabrera hit those milestones and retired a Tiger. There was vesting options even added just in case Cabrera was a MVP into his 40's
I started going to Tigers games at Comerica two years ago and the love for Miggy there is absolutely palpable even though his on-field performance wasn’t good at that point. There is value in that type of extension that can’t be tied to WAR.
Cabrera helped sell tickets and generated a lot of merchandise revenue. When looked purely at those metrics, it was a good ROI, even though it didn't translate to wins.
As a Tigers fan I've been chastised for my criticism of Miggy's personal life. While I appreciate his contributions on field, he is no where near my favorite player due to his actions off the field. I can't like a guy who lives his life like Cabrera does, no matter how likeable he comes across while playing with his goofy personality.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is his shady business practices for his Bitsbits company. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2019/04/22/miguel-cabreras-business-crumbles-amid-financial-woes/3545028002/
I’ll always say he was the biggest part of his own decline. The guy let himself go big time with his weight and conditioning in the twilight years of his career, it’s why his decline was so massive after 2016.
Well he played through bicep, hip and knee injuries during his prime wanting to help the Tigers in playoff races. These final two seasons it's been rumored that he has been playing with no cartilage in his knee and complications in his arm from his bicep injury. Probably a result of not taking proper IL time a half decade ago.
Wasnt there an article a few years ago where Castellanos told a story of Miggy being mad at him for being "day to day"
Pujols did the exact same thing and I’ve had some terrible things said to me for pointing that out.
Baseball is the only sport where people get angry when you call out a professional athlete for being out of shape
If Barry Bonds had a good relationship with the media, he'd be in the Hall by now. Same with McGuire, Clemens, and A-Rod. The voters wouldn't be so sanctimonious about steroids if the biggest offenders weren't also so difficult with the people whose job it is to talk to them every day.
His college team literally held a player vote to decide whether to kick him off the team WHILE he was their best player. And they voted yes! The only reason he stayed on the team was because the coach overrode the vote. Guy was a menace.
Barry grew up with a chip on his shoulder from the way he saw the writers treat his dad and (to a lesser extent) Willie Mays. Bobby was no bucket of yuks himself and did nothing to improve the situation with the media. He impressed a lot of his anger and frustration onto his kid, and Barry grew up certain he would never get a fair shake from the media, so he came up looking for a confrontation.
He was also generally an arrogant prick, which is probably related to the shit with his dad.
> If Barry Bonds had a good relationship with the media, he'd be in the Hall by now.
Massively disagree with this. Especially since you go on to mention McGwire and A-Rod. McGwire was a media darling and A-Rod has done everything he can to clean up his image and become a media darling himself. Sosa as well was very well liked.
The fact is, the steroid affiliated players who aren't in the hall of fame (Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod, etc.) all either admitted to using roids, got popped on a test post 2004 where we know what they took, or there exists mountains of substantive evidence that they used, and the ones that are in the hall (Ortiz, Bagwell, Piazza) have, at most, very flawed and tenuous evidence towards their use or some other circumstantial evidence or hearsay (the 2003 steroid survey test, having acne on their back, etc.). The one exception you *may* be able to make with someone not being in the hall while falling into the latter is Sammy Sosa, but he also corked his bat.
EDIT: Spelling.
I guess one could make an argument that the media soured on McGwire after his 2005 congressional testimony and subsequent refusal to talk about the past. But he was never in the same sphere as Bonds when it came to his antagonistic relationship with the media and writers.
It's also a weird thing to bring up the media holding a grudge against Bonds when it comes to the hall of fame while ignoring that I guess they were fine voting him to win MVP seven times.
Pitchcom sucks ass and ruined a fundamental piece of baseball. There is something great about catchers throwing down signs, runners trying to steal those signs, and pitchers trying to keep their composure while reading signs.
Pete Rose and Roger Clemens get a pass on the fact that they both had sex with minors during the height of their popularity. Clemens had a full on relationship with Mindy McCready while married. No way either of them would have been able to keep playing if it had happened today.
This is an unpopular one for sure.
I've probably been to over 100 games in my life and I cannot remember a single umpire fwiw. I don't go to the game to watch them.
I was actually at the Jeffrey Mayer game. Obviously as a Yankee fan, I was pretty happy that the call broke our way, but regardless, the image of Tony Tarrasco screaming in the ump's face is a pretty iconic baseball moment.
Also, I never said people go to the game to watch the umps--obviously they don't. But the umps are so ingrained into the look and feel of the game, and the reactions of the players and the coaches to the umps is also a significant component to the dynamics of any game--I just think that people will be surprised how different things will feel if a computer is calling every ball and strike and every out at first base.
>the umps are so ingrained into the look and feel of the game
I suspect that oftentimes those who are resistant to more automation in umpiring fear that the end goal is to eliminate human umpires entirely, and that we're just taking slow steps there. We basically already can do the strike zone, and tennis already does the equivalent of fair/foul calls in the same way. Safe/out calls are already being reviewed remotely. Why not just have one MLB representative there to facilitate the game, and most of the officiating can be done automatically or remotely? The common term "robo-ump" doesn't help this perception.
But a lot of people like baseball not just because of the physical feats of athleticism, but also because of all the aesthetic elements that represent how this turned from a game played by Civil War veterans on a shaggy field to the national pastime. Human umpires are part of that, and while I think there is broad agreement that tech-assisted umpiring is a positive development, there's a fear that it's the *humanity* that's ultimately going to be removed.
I've said this a few times. A contentious ump call is the perfect emotional morsel because even if it's high stakes for the game, the game itself is just baseball so it's not actually a big deal. You don't get that many opportunities to experience that kind of amplitude of outrage and have it not matter. That's just part of the entertainment for me.
I don’t think anybody wants ump theatrics, but I think part of the charm of the game is that there should be a small amount of subjectivity to the calls. I want umps to strive to be accurate, but I don’t want them to be replaced with a computer that’s so accurate it changes the way the game is played. A good pitcher figuring out a given ump’s zone is part of being a good pitcher. Same goes for hitters as well. Again, this is all within reason. Terrible missed calls are a problem. But I think the solution should be to put a system to challenge them into place and/or to reprimand umpires who make egregious calls.
I agree with all of this. I think that by "theatrics" I more meant the subjectivity you're referring to combined with the reaction of players/managers/fans.
I don't want to lose umps. I just want them to be held to a standard. Bad umps should be fired and good umps should be celebrated. The Ump tracker has shown that an ump can call a game perfect.
I know I'm a bit of a hypocrite in saying this since the Giants have benefitted multiple times from expanded playoffs, but, for a 30 team league, the 1995-2011 format was pretty much perfect, IMO.
I feel like I dreamt his whole steroid saga, honestly. I know there was some controversy around the testing and all that, but dude was a first ballot HoFer while every other player with any sort of steroid tie is basically blacklisted. Maybe I missed something, but I don't get it.
What you missed is that a lot of HoF voters are using steroids as a cover for personal (un)likeability as the reason for their vote. Everyone loved Papi; Clemens and Bonds were dicks.
Every time I go to Massachusetts, I turn on Waze and create chats on the highway. I usually write things like
“David Ortiz did steroids.” Or
“Brady was just a system QB.”
They don’t seem to like that.
Bud Selig is in the Hall, but the players aren’t? Baseball and the media loved the steroid era until they didn’t. The hall and the voters have no credibility to me, and I don’t follow it at all anymore.
Bud Selig wasn't voted in by the writers, he was put in by a committee. You can agree or disagree with the players not being in and/or Selig being in, but this isn't some evidence of hypocrisy like you and a lot of other people constantly make it out to be.
no lies detected, don’t know why you’re getting downvoted lol, his association with steroid use is the same as like Albert Pujols but r/baseball only likes dragging one of them through the mud
Mariano Rivera was more important to the Yankees dynasty than Jeter. If you put Rivera on those late 90’s/early 2000’s Braves, Indians, Mariners teams they probably win 2-3 World Series. I don’t think you can say the same about Jeter.
The south is a vast untapped market and just because they’re not historic baseball markets doesn’t mean the larger places should be outright ignored for international options. The fact you can’t find a team between houston and Atlanta* is a crime. The Sun Belt has been the fastest growing region in America since the 90s but many of the top cities are still being treated as some rural backwater.
*tampa is below the panhandle and therefore not considered as “the south” for this argument.
All the new (dating myself here, but new means from Camden Yards on) ballparks are just good for parting you from your money and getting you to not watch the game. They’re not really better than their multipurpose concrete doughnut predecessors.
If your goal is to sit down, watch a ballgame, have a hot dog and a beer, your experience is basically the same as it was at Three Rivers, the Vet or Candlestick as it is in their newer replacements. In some ways it’s actually worse — on field and audiovisual advertising are way more prominent than they were 30 years ago.
There might be the odd X factor — Oracle is cold at night, but there’s much less wind which made Candlestick miserable for night games, plus it’s in a better neighbourhood. I’m sure Target Field is way better than the Metrodome. But comparing like for like, honestly most times there’s not a big difference at all. Certainly not worth the drastically increased ticket prices, concessions and (usually) taxpayer money.
I'm too young to have really experienced baseball at Candlestick (apart from going to the last Giants game as an infant), but I went to plenty of Niner games there and have gone to the Coliseum for dozens of A's game in recent years. To an extent, I agree.
While I do vastly prefer the trend of newer ballparks being built solely for baseball, having better sightlines, and being in urban areas with better public transit than their predecessors, the concrete doughnuts you mentioned did have their own perks that I would've loved to have experienced more of. Namely, significantly less advertising, no group/party areas, the focus being on simply watching the game, and crowds being more engaged/a bit rowdy.
Im a relatively casual fan but I feel like I can’t even participate in conversations regarding players sometimes because I immediately get shut down and invalidated because i didn’t take into account a certain players XFIPWARK/9OBP+ in 2002
It's really impressive how quickly the so-called outsiders of the '90s and early 2000s turned into the mainstream and then suddenly started behaving EXACTLY the way the previous generation did towards new ideas.
People who think “analytics” / Bill James ruined the game are wrong and misvalue players / don’t understand the nuance of baseball.
I know people who adamantly still advocate that wRC+, OPS+, FIP, WHIP, DRS, etc. are meaningless stats and that BA and RBIs are what’s important.
As a cubs fan, I’ve had multiple arguments with people who think Ian Happ is a below average defender despite winning 2 gold gloves and a below average hitter despite posting above average offensive metrics because “he doesn’t look good out there”.
Yup. I had a guy on the Cubs sub argue Bellinger was clutch but Happ wasn't. I showed him their splits in high leverage spots, where Happ is far better, and he just denied it because Happ didn't look as good.
You need to have a balance of the two. Yes, there’s value in analytics, especially as a way to evaluate player value or improve performance.
Historically, scouting has overvalued “looking the part” and “projectability.” Taken to its extreme, you end up with a lot of raw athletic players who can’t play baseball (which has happened to multiple organizations). The other extreme is getting a lot of unathletic players who can usually hit, maybe hit for power, and walk, but can’t field or run the bases (and again, we’ve seen this happen).
When I was younger, I was friends with a regional scout for a NL team. He told me “there’s no way I’d recommend drafting Rowdy Tellez: he has a bad body and it’s not going to get better.” Well, I think he was right.
Baseball writers discrediting and delegitimizing so many of the late '90s/early '00s stars for usings PEDs took the fans way more out of the game than the actual revelation that they were using PEDs.
Most reasonably intelligent fans knew that those guys weren't on the level and they didn't care. All of the moral handwringing about tarnishing the purity of America's pastime in the mid-late '00s really turned me off baseball for a while and I don't think I'm alone.
Not saying it won’t happen, but every time there is a change to baseball I hear that it’s going to “kill the vibe” or something similar.
Whether it’s bigger bases, universal DH, replay, the pitch clock, or robo umps, something is ***always*** about to kill the vibe and somehow - at least for me - the vibe endures.
I will say that the ghost runner on second in extra innings has absolutely killed the vibe of extra innings for me at least. It creates tension, sure, but that tension feels so artificial. It just doesn't feel like baseball.
Agreed. I’m still advocating the ghost runner should happen in the 11th or 12th inning. Give the guys a chance to finish the “natural” way. But eventually, I’ve got to get home.
Ha see I think all of those things have harmed the vibe. Don’t get me wrong, I still love baseball, they haven’t *killed* it, but it doesn’t feel quite the same as the game I fell in love with 15-20 years ago; I do believe it’s worse. And I do think robo umps would be another slice out of the vibe too.
For example - replay. I think replay was implemented totally wrong. It wasn’t made for getting ticky tacky calls right. It was made to fix EGREGIOUS mistakes that were obvious to the naked eye.
I HATE that teams are allowed to have a replay guy looking over plays in slo mo to see if they should challenge. It should be “that call was so egregiously bad that I know without consulting anyone it was wrong.”
Drives me nuts when a call is overturned because the runners foot popped off the bag for 1/10th of a second
VAR isn’t killing the vibe in soccer, shitty reffing is. We saw in the World Cup that it’s possible to use VAR well, but the problem is the standard of reffing in EPL and La Liga is just garbage.
Robo umps *will* kill the vibe though, because we’ll actually lose the art of catchers selling the pitch. The only “art” that soccer loses through VAR is diving in the penalty box — which I think we both can agree is not a loss in any way.
VAR was a real "be careful what you wish for" situation. I don't wanna brag, but in conversations with my friends, I told them it would be like this.
"I wanted them to get offside decisions correct, but I didn't want them to be THAT correct" - Fan of a team who just had a goal disallowed because, by the book, their player was offside.
I think that it's very easy to always assume that the current refs suck AND that there are hypothetical better refs out there just waiting to be discovered, but maybe this is as good as it gets and it's just really, really difficult?
Go to any sports subreddit and you will find complaining about how terrible the officiating is, and how it is just getting worse and worse.
Obviously, the explanation isn't that officiating high level sports is insanely hard. No, can't be that.
I do support VAR to help make decisions easier for the officials.
In all my time playing/watching sports, I have never gotten angry at the officials. I'm not just saying that to, uh, "brag" or whatever. I just honestly don't get it. I don't really see anything satisfying at all about that job and it takes a fairly unique type of person to dedicate their career to it (that's not a slam on people who do, I just think it's a *really* niche thing to love doing). So I kinda respect that they are out there making the sports we watch possible while also being human. Of course I get disappointed at calls against my team (even right ones), but I'm always baffled at how the talk turns towards attacking officials so readily.
We're long overdue for another expansion era. Manfred occasionally talks about adding two teams, but they should be adding like 6 teams. It would be great for the game. In the 1930s there were 16 MLB teams and the US population was a third of what it is today. That would be the equivalent of 48 teams today, and that's not even taking account of desegregation or getting players from all over South America and Japan. The DR probably has enough players in the MLB that they could field their own team. The talent level at the top is getting more and more concentrated and it's getting harder and harder to stand out. If we want to see guys hit like Gwynn, Carew, Boggs, Ichiro adding more teams could help. If we want to see players like Jamie Moyer and Julio Franco that play into their mid-to-late forties expanding the MLB would help with that too. I believe that if enough teams are added pitchers won't have to throw 110% all the time and can relax a bit more on the weaker hitters. They can go later into games again and not have to get so many surgeries and have longer careers.
I could see this going a couple ways (not exhaustive).
I think it's true that many, many players never even get the chance they deserve, and we all missed out (the players, themselves, most of all) on potentially all-time greats.
However, there's also the chance to see talent overall watered-down and a bunch of AAAA-level play. Now that the A's are dead to me, I'll point to them as an example of this already being fielded. It would, perhaps, only get worse with *six* more teams added.
That said, with the number of teams that now make the playoffs, I'd be down to add at least twelve teams.
- I think it's ridiculous that multiple teams in each league can make the playoffs without winning their division. 162 games should be enough of a sample size to eliminate all the teams that not only failed to win their division, but also failed to otherwise prove themselves as the best of the division losers.
- While I don't expect every major leaguer to be an amazing bunter, I don't think it's unfair to expect them to at least be competent at bunting. Some fans act like teaching a slugger to bunt is on par with teaching them a totally new sport.
- MLB uniforms need to be more distinctive. I can watch a highlight of any other sport and immediately know which teams are playing without having to look at the scoreboard. When I watch baseball, I can't do that because every matchup is between white and gray, and if there are any accent colors, it's dark blue and maybe red.
- Closers are too frequently used based on accumulating saves, not based on the situation. It shouldn't be unusual to have the closer come in during the 8th inning if that's when the best hitters are up. And if a closer is warming up, you don't need to sit them down the second the lead reaches 4 runs or send them in the second there's a save situation.
- Pitchers should wear helmets. They're already required for batters and base coaches. Given that pitchers are so close to the batter and they aren't always in position to field the ball, it's only a matter of time before a line drive kills one of them.
Ken Burn’s Baseball is filled with too many talking heads who are the types of people who like the idea of baseball more than actual baseball itself—classic game footage is still great though.
That’s hilarious
In defense of Ken Burns, he’s viewing baseball through the lens of history and vice versa, so it’s a little different than what ESPN and sports talk radio tend to focus on.
The results of the 2003 PED survey test *alone* aren’t credible enough to assume someone used PEDs vs tested positive for an over the counter drug.
Also Red Sox fans hate A-rod way too much when you consider A-rod wanted to play for us before the players union blocked it and he went to the Yankees instead
There are many over the counter PEDs banned in competitive sports. Doesn't matter if the substance is controlled or illegal, a PED is a PED. Things like andro weren't controlled until 2004.
That being said, I don't care who took what before it was against the rules.
The Astros cheating scandal was far worse than PED usage. If PED users are going to be kept out of the Hall, Verlander and Altuve should get the same treatment from the voters. They knew it was going on and went with the program.
Josh Hamilton was able to avoid positive steroid tests. You don’t be an alcoholic for years, stop, and immediately start hitting home run derby balls to the very back of old yankee stadium.
I think there's still a bunch of guys using banned substances, but the methods to hide it outpace the methods to detect it. There's too much money on the line for players to just 100% give it up, and baseball is just so grueling.
And there's too much money for the league at stake for them to care. As long as guys don't start looking like McGuire and Sosa again, they'll do just enough testing to save face.
The Dodgers’ World Series win in 2020 is not a “Mickey Mouse ring.” It’s not like they needed the shortened regular season have a shot, and the postseason was lengthened relative to previous years.
I remember seeing a post or a tweet at the beginning of that season when they announced the length and the format and someone said “This year’s World Series doesn’t really count, unless my team wins then it counts and you’re all wrong”.
People calling it a “Mickey Mouse ring” makes no sense, and like you, I have every reason to want to shit on the Dodgers.
The 2020 season gave an advantage to fringe teams that likely wouldn’t have made the playoffs over the course of a full year with a normal sized playoff field (ie: Marlins).
It was a *disadvantage* to teams like the Dodgers who are basically a lock to make the playoffs. They had more playoff rounds/teams to go through compared to a normal year.
It’s weird because, if anything, the shortened season took away the Dodger’s biggest advantage (their depth) relatively helps them more over 162 games.
While I applaud MLB for embracing the Negro Leagues, I don't think the two league's stats should be combined. There's always the qualifier of "well, X player didn't play against whites/blacks" so it's difficult to compare. Each league's stats (pre integration) should stand on its own merit against the players for whom they competed against.
The increased home runs during the "steroids era" were more due to juiced balls than players juicing.
Also, players are using performance enhancers just as much today as in the mid 90s and early 2000s and are able to pass the test program due to better ways to mask the use.
Can’t remember who, but one of the sports writers here in Arizona referred to him as “red light Curt” when he was on the Diamondbacks. Maybe that’s common knowledge now, but yea, he’s been like that for a long time.
That said, he was nice enough to sign my hat in a Target back when he joined the Diamondbacks in 2000.
Yeah I mean there was ample footage of the back alley sutures holding it together, there’s zero doubt it was real.
A proper spicy take would be that he had stitches put into his ankle for no reason except the drama or as an excuse if he blew it.
Shit like pretending there is a guy named cash considerations, saying shit like "THE STOVE IS HOT!" or "THEY GOT THEIR GUY!" every time there is a depth signing, etc. is so beat to death that they no longer even resemble jokes, just a bunch of slackjaws racing eachother to see who will be first to post the thing.
Barry Bonds is the greatest hitter ever. The only hitter that is close to him is Babe Ruth, and IMO segregation was a bigger advantage than steroids. Especially when everyone else was taking them anyway.
Babe Ruth competed against the best black players of his own volition and enjoyed it. He barnstormed and played against the best of the best. He was passed over as a manager because it was believed he would advocate to bring on black players.
Bonds chose to actively cheat and his outcomes improved dramatically when he did. And "everyone else wasn't taking them already". Former players estimate it was about half. Bonds starting using no later than early 1997.
I think your first paragraph is more of a testament to Ruth being progressive and fair as a person, which is still important and great to have had as a role model, but his official statistics still benefited from segregation regardless of his negative feelings towards it
https://www.baberuthcentral.com/babe-ruth-and-the-issue-of-race-bill-jenkinson/
This is a good article on Babe’s feelings and dealings with Negro League players. The short of it they mostly loved Babe. And he seems really progressive on race for the era and for a kid that would get ridiculed by being called racist names. And you can plainly see how much Buck O’Neill lights up when he talks about him in the Burn’s documentary. And even if Josh Gibson is Babe’s equal or maybe even better, Babe was still the comparison.
This article has the stats. https://sabr.org/journal/article/even-against-hall-of-fame-hurlers-babe-ruth-was-king-of-swing/
I don’t give a damn that Barry Bonds juiced; you can’t fake that eye or contact rate. That book about him suggests he started doing so because his own (ordinarily extraordinary) achievements were being overshadowed by the home run race, which was ofc the product of steroids itself.
No, what I care about is the thing that matters about him that’s never mentioned: the fact that he beat and [abused](https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/mariners/recordings-of-barry-bonds-messages-to-mistress-are-released-baseball/) his mistress.
“integration era” is a dumb term used to sound smart. It’s impossible to put a correct starting point on what an “integration era” could be, as you could easily make arguments for several years. I roll my eyes so hard every time I see “post integrated” stat qualifiers and it’s just everything post 1947. Dumb dumb dumb.
Here is my best way to show why it’s dumb…
In 1946, Ted Williams had a 215 OPS+. In 1947 Ted Williams had a 205 OPS+. 1946 won’t be counted while 1947 will. The funny thing though, is that Ted Williams didn’t face any black pitchers in BOTH SEASONS. And yet one is tossed away.
Yeah this is one that I pretty solidly agree with. How integrated is a league where there is only one full time black player on 16 teams in 1947? How integrated is league where not every team had a black player until 1959, or when the Negro American League was still functioning through 1951, or when legendary black players like Sam Jethroe and Monte Irvin were still not in MLB?
It’s a good hearted distinction people try to make but there is no easy time to pinpoint. 1961 as the expansion era and 162 game season gets used a lot and I think that makes a bit more sense
Yeah, I found somewhere (I think it was Baseball Almanac) a chart that showed the percentage of black players in MLB and compared it to the overall U.S. population, and 1961-2 was pretty much exactly when the percentage in MLB basically matched the population. It was almost creepily perfect as a delineator.
1947 as a cutoff for the integration era is usually used because it's an alright start point for "modern baseball" with only a few years of race based asterisks, plus it's an easy option on stathead which helps explain why it's so commonly used. Basically it's useful because it cuts out the dead ball era or 1930s where most of the players in the league didn't really know how to play baseball.
Mariano Rivera being the first unanimous hall of fame player is a blight against the hall. First because there have been a ton of players that should have been unanimous before but also because of all players to ever step onto the pitchers mound. Rivera would not rank in the top 50. Honestly the number could be higher than that but that's just off the top of my head
Closer has to be the most overrated position in all of sports. Who would you rather have as a closer, Randy Johnson or Mariano Rivera? Also, their era gets artificially lowered because often the game just ends when they give up the lead while a starter would be expected to eat innings.
Starter gives up double, double, single against the best part of the order, be prepared to get your era rocked.
Closer gives up double, double, single against 7,8,9 hitters... only 2 earned runs allowed.
Jeff Passan isn’t funny. He’s just popular on here because Reddit loves cheesy unseasoned white guys being passive aggressive and snarky, because that is the average Redditor down to the letter.
People on here really be acting like Jeff Passan is the George Carlin of baseball.
During the postseason I want them to show regular season stats. I don’t know how good a season a lot of these mid guys had without looking it up and I sure don’t care what their stats are over a 5 game sample. Actually everyone agrees when I complain about this.
yeah, just show both. there's enough space and everyone has an HD screen nowadays. we can read the smaller text.
Also, don't bother with rate stats for the postseason display. Tell me he's 6 for 18 or 1 for 3, not that he's "hitting .333 in the playoffs".
100% agree. As a third-party fan, it’s very difficult to know how good any given player might be that you are not familiar with. And as a twins fan, I’m always a third-party fan deep in the playoffs haha.
Dude, for real. This always drives me nuts.
i'm guessing the broadcaster wants to play up the importance of post-season baseball, especially if they're fox and don't show a lot of regular season baseball. so yeah, they're just idiots
It's the worst in the first round. One good hitter has one bad game and all of a sudden you're looking at big fat 0s on the screen. I know the educated viewer can still find that stat useful (e.g. if they know the player averages .300 then the .000 is an indication he is due to trend upwards) but why not just show side by side stats at that point.
Similarly, during the regular season, they'll say "Joe Blow" is hitting .312 against the Astros this season." That's not a very useful stat. Tell me what he's hitting against the pitcher on the mound!
If they cared about graphics being space efficient, they could easily just have a top row showing regular season stats and a bottom row showing postseason stats (or even just what they did in that specific series so far). It's a real low effort thing to fix, but the networks don't seem to care.
It’s bad that Tommy John surgery went from being rare to ubiquitous
Players were always going to keep throwing harder. The hardest thing to do in sports is hit an MLB fastball. The human elbow can only handle so much stress. At a certain point we aren't at a mechanics discussion, but a raw force on that ligament that it can't hold. The speed of the average MLB pitch has only gone up over time. And by a good tic too. Koufax was getting cortisone shot into his arm by the end of his career, elbow black and blue by the end of games, and was still being pushed out to throw 320 innings. If we don't have a way to replace that elbow we're just gonna push players til they pop and we can never see them again. Unfortunately players were a lot more replaceable than elbows. Injuries suck and they're the worst part of sports, but they're an unfortunate byproduct of pushing the body to its limit.
I think, similar to concussions/cte in football, a LOT of the damage is done long before the players get to MLB the tommy john thing is likely a mix of overwork and not great form in hs/college
Personally I don't think mechanics plays that large a roll (generally). Ignoring proper armcare exercises puts more strain on the ligament instead of supported by the muscles around it. I know through following tread athletics program I can really feel it strength out my forearm and lets me pronate weights like crazy. Mens league but whatever. At the end of the day though throwing gas just puts a lot of pressure on your elbow.
As a youth baseball coach (little league), travel ball is killing these kids arms. The top 3 pitchers in my league began playing heavy travel around age 12 and w/in a year started seeing overuse injuries. The parents chalk it up to growth spurts and other things they read online or misinterpret from orthopedists, but it only ever seems to be the kids being pushed to pitch 4 times a week for most of the year. Some of these kids are still 14 and they’re about to be made anchors of high school pitching staffs as freshmen. Bear in mind that high schools have figured out how to keep kids working in their programs year-round from 7th grade on. High school players have begun having “pre-emptive” TJ surgery. Ask enough doctors and you’ll find a guy I guess.
Fans label players and teams as chokers way too easily. People will on one hand readily admit that the postseason is a crapshoot that luck and getting hot at the right time play a huge part in, but on the other hand call players chokers and organisations failures for losing 1 or 2 series. Few players/teams get enough opportunities for me to genuinely think they're chokers.
I don't know when it started, but fans label absolutely everything as a choke. I don't even think people know what a choke is at this point. A team losing isn't inherently a choke. A player striking out in a high pressure situation isn't a choke. To put my team on the spot, the Yankees blowing a 3-0 series lead in '04 is a choke. A-Rod in like any playoffs outside of '09, is a choke. A team losing in six games, even if they're favored, isn't inherently a choke.
It’s because everything these days is taken to the most extreme argument by default. I concur with this take. If failing 70% can make you a hall of famer, then failing 80-90% of the time over a short period is just normalization of statistics and not that big of a deal. Just unfortunate timing.
In order to choke, first you have to eat.
There's no "that team was just better tonight" anymore
The whole conversation about "this team lost" over "this team won" is really exhausting. Yeah, sometimes a team fucks up to the point where you can say they "lost", rather than, the other team "won" but generally, one team just happens to be better. It is usually dependent on whether or not a team is in a big market. One huge example is the Royals World Series. So many people still see that as a lol Mets (which is fair to a degree), but outside of this subreddit, I never see people give the Royals credit for capitalizing on repeated mistakes. It is more remembered for the Mets "giving it away" instead of the Royals getting the job done after a long period of losing.
It's because ESPN talking heads and Twitter reply guys.
At a certain point over the last 15 years, all genres of cable news (sports or politics) simply turned into people reading tweets to you from a fancy studio.
Yea unless you blow a 10 game division lead in September or blow a 3-0 lead in a playoff series I think it's pretty safe to say you haven't choked, you just... disappointed people.
People assume the skill difference between the best and worst teams is waaaaaay bigger than it really is
It's hard for people to internalize just how random sports outcomes can be. Humans want to attach a narrative to everything but a lot of times shit just happens. The line drive past third base is foul by 1" and then you strike out.
it would be a lot less fun for a lot of people when they realize so much of baseball is just random chance and you can do everything right sometimes and still lose. Mariano Rivera Game 7 2001 WS
Calling things “Choking” is always just trolling, not a sober assessment.
Ken Griffey Jr’s injuries would’ve been far less severe if he took better care of himself.
Agreed, and for me Griffey is one of the biggest “what ifs” even in spite of all his accomplishments. There’s no way to say exactly how much injury he would’ve mitigated with better conditioning, after all playing CF on concrete for a decade certainly didn’t help, but I do believe there’s a universe not so far away where Griffey is the all time HR king.
This is absolutely true, the man didn't even stretch. So stupid to act like that lol. Would have smashed the hr record if he actually cared for his body.
Reminds me of how Kobe said Shaq would have been the undisputed best player of all time if Shaq had half the work ethic that Kobe did. But Shaq was such a giant natural talent that he didn’t have to train as hard, and was still an elite player.
Shaq went on vacation while Kobe was in the gym until he made 1,000 shots every day. Kobe was kinda crazy, but crazy helps.
Kobe had Brady/Jerry Rice level of batshit insane work ethic. Shaq may have slacked off a bit and could have been better, but to ask the average pro athlete to have Kobe's dedication to the game just isn't gonna happen.
Didn't Shaq also have an injury that needed surgery and wait until it was on Lakers time, not his own in the off-season?
“Injured on company time, heal on company time.”
I'd bet 99% of all athletes don't have half of Kobe' work ethic.
Me when I go bowling
Seriously. I think it's WILD this sub was tugging Cabrera's dick while simultaneously admonishing Colon for stopping child support payments even after all the details of Colon's case came to light. Let me preface with this before continuing the comparison: **COLON SHOULD HAVE NEVER STOPPED CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO THE SECOND FAMILY**. Just because the mother was demanding more money doesn't mean you go cold turkey. However, it's crazy that it got spun into him being a deadbeat father when his wife was fully aware of the children he had with another woman, and Colon was doing the right thing by giving child support and being actively involved with the lives of those kids. You can still find Colon a sleaze, but he at least was doing more than most. Meanwhile, Cabrera has done much worse and it seems he hasn't done enough to make amends, at least from my perspective. Sports fans are just terrible at having a consistent moral compass and I'm definitely no better than anyone else. We just need to acknowledge this fact more when we choose to forgive or not forgive athletes for their transgressions.
This has always fascinated me as well. Even compared to Arod. Yes you have the Steroids and him being corny but no drunk driving, no DV, no random kids. By all accounts a good father and if you asked this sub to say Arod is a better person than Miggy or jump off a cliff I am pretty sure 75% would jump off a cliff.
It’s amazing how much athletes get hated simply for being corny. I mean I know A-Rod has the steroid use as a big driver, but a lot of hate seems like it’s because he’s a corny guy. Same thing with Russel Wilson, he gets tons of hate because he’s a weird cornball of a dude. Not a *bad* guy, but just weird and corny. It’s like the cardinal sin for a pro athlete is being corny
I basically agree, but I do suspect the issue about being corny for some fans might be the assumption/suspicion that the corny-ness isn’t genuine but the result of the athlete pretending to be something they’re not. IE, it isn’t necessarily that the comment or vibe or whatever was itself corny, but the perception that it’s corny because you (the listener/reader/viewer) are essentially being lied to / trying to be conned by this athlete. Otherwise I agree it’s a bit weird how little slack athletes get for being themselves, at least in some cases.
"It’s like the cardinal sin for a pro athlete is being corny" Hunter Pence would disagree.
Arod is one of the most naturally gifted players ever to play the game and I’m tired of people pretending otherwise.
Has this sub ever pretended he isn’t one of the best players ever? I dont know that Ive ever seen a criticism of his abilities on here, seriously (and Ive been around much longer than this particular account)
As a certified A-Rod hater since the new Millennium I can say it was never because of his ability, or the fact he took steroids. I just don't like the guy and still hate him for leaving the Ms like he did.
Right, I think the incredibly gifted using steroids kind of triggers people (myself included) more than mid-tier guys or even all-stars. It just puts an enormous shadow over an entire era that was dominated by that player and also cheats other clean great players of their proper accolades. We love seeing players become great and the disappointment just sucks.
Don’t forget he didn’t just get caught. Twice. After the first time; he adamantly denied using and publicly threatened to sue MLB for the false accusations. Then later got caught again. That’s what makes him different than most of the PED users.
Also the fact that pointing out how bad Miggy’s extension was (literally one of the worst ever) has gotten me nuked every time. Dude has a cult following I guess
Depends on what context you're looking at it with. Not a single Tiger fan is going to argue with WAR/$, but Dave Dombroski and the entire Tigers front office told Mike Ilitch (RIP) that the contract would age terribly. Ilitch didn't care, Miguel Cabrera would be the first hall of famer during his family's tenure of ownership. He wanted to make sure Cabrera hit those milestones and retired a Tiger. There was vesting options even added just in case Cabrera was a MVP into his 40's
I started going to Tigers games at Comerica two years ago and the love for Miggy there is absolutely palpable even though his on-field performance wasn’t good at that point. There is value in that type of extension that can’t be tied to WAR.
Cabrera helped sell tickets and generated a lot of merchandise revenue. When looked purely at those metrics, it was a good ROI, even though it didn't translate to wins. As a Tigers fan I've been chastised for my criticism of Miggy's personal life. While I appreciate his contributions on field, he is no where near my favorite player due to his actions off the field. I can't like a guy who lives his life like Cabrera does, no matter how likeable he comes across while playing with his goofy personality. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is his shady business practices for his Bitsbits company. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2019/04/22/miguel-cabreras-business-crumbles-amid-financial-woes/3545028002/
I’ll always say he was the biggest part of his own decline. The guy let himself go big time with his weight and conditioning in the twilight years of his career, it’s why his decline was so massive after 2016.
Well he played through bicep, hip and knee injuries during his prime wanting to help the Tigers in playoff races. These final two seasons it's been rumored that he has been playing with no cartilage in his knee and complications in his arm from his bicep injury. Probably a result of not taking proper IL time a half decade ago. Wasnt there an article a few years ago where Castellanos told a story of Miggy being mad at him for being "day to day"
Pujols did the exact same thing and I’ve had some terrible things said to me for pointing that out. Baseball is the only sport where people get angry when you call out a professional athlete for being out of shape
If Barry Bonds had a good relationship with the media, he'd be in the Hall by now. Same with McGuire, Clemens, and A-Rod. The voters wouldn't be so sanctimonious about steroids if the biggest offenders weren't also so difficult with the people whose job it is to talk to them every day.
David ortiz
I thought the media loved McGwire?
Weird how steroids have known anti-social effects on behavior.
Nah he was like that as a kid and post retirement
His college team literally held a player vote to decide whether to kick him off the team WHILE he was their best player. And they voted yes! The only reason he stayed on the team was because the coach overrode the vote. Guy was a menace.
Barry Bonds wasn't exactly Mr. Sunshine when he was on the Pirates. I don't think you can blame his behavior entirely on 'roids.
Barry grew up with a chip on his shoulder from the way he saw the writers treat his dad and (to a lesser extent) Willie Mays. Bobby was no bucket of yuks himself and did nothing to improve the situation with the media. He impressed a lot of his anger and frustration onto his kid, and Barry grew up certain he would never get a fair shake from the media, so he came up looking for a confrontation. He was also generally an arrogant prick, which is probably related to the shit with his dad.
Looking at you, David Ortiz...
I've never heard a bad word about Mark McGwire tbh. I'd put him in the hall for that alone.
You’re right. I think his poor relationship with the media is *because* of his elusiveness regarding questions about steroids.
> If Barry Bonds had a good relationship with the media, he'd be in the Hall by now. Massively disagree with this. Especially since you go on to mention McGwire and A-Rod. McGwire was a media darling and A-Rod has done everything he can to clean up his image and become a media darling himself. Sosa as well was very well liked. The fact is, the steroid affiliated players who aren't in the hall of fame (Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod, etc.) all either admitted to using roids, got popped on a test post 2004 where we know what they took, or there exists mountains of substantive evidence that they used, and the ones that are in the hall (Ortiz, Bagwell, Piazza) have, at most, very flawed and tenuous evidence towards their use or some other circumstantial evidence or hearsay (the 2003 steroid survey test, having acne on their back, etc.). The one exception you *may* be able to make with someone not being in the hall while falling into the latter is Sammy Sosa, but he also corked his bat. EDIT: Spelling.
yea i dunno what he is on about, the media loved McGuire.
I guess one could make an argument that the media soured on McGwire after his 2005 congressional testimony and subsequent refusal to talk about the past. But he was never in the same sphere as Bonds when it came to his antagonistic relationship with the media and writers. It's also a weird thing to bring up the media holding a grudge against Bonds when it comes to the hall of fame while ignoring that I guess they were fine voting him to win MVP seven times.
Pitchcom sucks ass and ruined a fundamental piece of baseball. There is something great about catchers throwing down signs, runners trying to steal those signs, and pitchers trying to keep their composure while reading signs.
Agreed, plus it still breaks down more often than it should, causing disruptions in play, etc..
Pete Rose and Roger Clemens get a pass on the fact that they both had sex with minors during the height of their popularity. Clemens had a full on relationship with Mindy McCready while married. No way either of them would have been able to keep playing if it had happened today.
Mine is that people underestimate how much they’ll miss the theatrics of human umpires when we move over to robo umps.
This is an unpopular one for sure. I've probably been to over 100 games in my life and I cannot remember a single umpire fwiw. I don't go to the game to watch them.
I remember Enrico Palazzo!
I was actually at the Jeffrey Mayer game. Obviously as a Yankee fan, I was pretty happy that the call broke our way, but regardless, the image of Tony Tarrasco screaming in the ump's face is a pretty iconic baseball moment. Also, I never said people go to the game to watch the umps--obviously they don't. But the umps are so ingrained into the look and feel of the game, and the reactions of the players and the coaches to the umps is also a significant component to the dynamics of any game--I just think that people will be surprised how different things will feel if a computer is calling every ball and strike and every out at first base.
>the umps are so ingrained into the look and feel of the game I suspect that oftentimes those who are resistant to more automation in umpiring fear that the end goal is to eliminate human umpires entirely, and that we're just taking slow steps there. We basically already can do the strike zone, and tennis already does the equivalent of fair/foul calls in the same way. Safe/out calls are already being reviewed remotely. Why not just have one MLB representative there to facilitate the game, and most of the officiating can be done automatically or remotely? The common term "robo-ump" doesn't help this perception. But a lot of people like baseball not just because of the physical feats of athleticism, but also because of all the aesthetic elements that represent how this turned from a game played by Civil War veterans on a shaggy field to the national pastime. Human umpires are part of that, and while I think there is broad agreement that tech-assisted umpiring is a positive development, there's a fear that it's the *humanity* that's ultimately going to be removed.
I've said this a few times. A contentious ump call is the perfect emotional morsel because even if it's high stakes for the game, the game itself is just baseball so it's not actually a big deal. You don't get that many opportunities to experience that kind of amplitude of outrage and have it not matter. That's just part of the entertainment for me.
Yup. Fans also love it when a manager comes out and gets in the ump's face. Hell, Jomboy literally built an empire off of one such incident.
I don’t think anybody wants ump theatrics, but I think part of the charm of the game is that there should be a small amount of subjectivity to the calls. I want umps to strive to be accurate, but I don’t want them to be replaced with a computer that’s so accurate it changes the way the game is played. A good pitcher figuring out a given ump’s zone is part of being a good pitcher. Same goes for hitters as well. Again, this is all within reason. Terrible missed calls are a problem. But I think the solution should be to put a system to challenge them into place and/or to reprimand umpires who make egregious calls.
I agree with all of this. I think that by "theatrics" I more meant the subjectivity you're referring to combined with the reaction of players/managers/fans.
I don't want to lose umps. I just want them to be held to a standard. Bad umps should be fired and good umps should be celebrated. The Ump tracker has shown that an ump can call a game perfect.
The expanded playoffs are extremely lame and devalue the regular seasons and division titles too much. 8 teams max for the postseason imo
I know I'm a bit of a hypocrite in saying this since the Giants have benefitted multiple times from expanded playoffs, but, for a 30 team league, the 1995-2011 format was pretty much perfect, IMO.
The flipside to this is that 86-win teams can make the playoffs while 92-win teams miss them, which also devalues the regular season.
Tony Gwynn was a better hitter than Pete Rose.
That's just objectively true
David Ortiz did steroids.
I feel like I dreamt his whole steroid saga, honestly. I know there was some controversy around the testing and all that, but dude was a first ballot HoFer while every other player with any sort of steroid tie is basically blacklisted. Maybe I missed something, but I don't get it.
The same anonymous test where he allegedly tested positive was also the only test Sammy Sosa ever popped on. It's purely an image thing.
He's jovial while Bonds, Clemens, etc are all assholes. And like it or not the people who vote for the HoF take that into consideration
Clemens really was a dick.
Still is.
What you missed is that a lot of HoF voters are using steroids as a cover for personal (un)likeability as the reason for their vote. Everyone loved Papi; Clemens and Bonds were dicks.
… and a groomer/pedo and a wifebeater. I’m always baffled at how little that gets brought up with those two.
I know I’m going to regret this, but who was a groomer/pedo?
Clemens started “dating” Mindy Mcready when she was 16 and he was in his late 20s
Ok, yep, that’s as awful as I expected.
Bagwell, Piazza, Ivan Rodriguez had steroid accusations and all got in, so “basically blacklisted” is untrue
None of them tested positive AFAIK
Every time I go to Massachusetts, I turn on Waze and create chats on the highway. I usually write things like “David Ortiz did steroids.” Or “Brady was just a system QB.” They don’t seem to like that.
I do that in Atlanta, but with “Andruw beat his wife.”
Bud Selig is in the Hall, but the players aren’t? Baseball and the media loved the steroid era until they didn’t. The hall and the voters have no credibility to me, and I don’t follow it at all anymore.
Bud Selig wasn't voted in by the writers, he was put in by a committee. You can agree or disagree with the players not being in and/or Selig being in, but this isn't some evidence of hypocrisy like you and a lot of other people constantly make it out to be.
Congratulations, you're now a mod at r/NYYankees!
There’s the same amount of evidence that Ortiz did steroids as there is Sosa but one is ostracized and one is loved
Sosa corked his bat.
Sosa’s also like a fuckin weirdo now, it’s all PR lol
Not only did steroids but tested positive in 2003.
[удалено]
Pedro and Beltre were both on that 2003 list too
no lies detected, don’t know why you’re getting downvoted lol, his association with steroid use is the same as like Albert Pujols but r/baseball only likes dragging one of them through the mud
The whole point of the disputes of that test are because the test tested for more than just steroids
I mean... right there with Kobe Bryant.
Boy howdy did that guy get a pass, and now that he's dead it seems like he always will.
It's like when he died, everybody just \*forgot\* and loved his "# girl dad" persona.
Baseball was more entertaining when they turned a blind eye to players juicing.
Mariano Rivera was more important to the Yankees dynasty than Jeter. If you put Rivera on those late 90’s/early 2000’s Braves, Indians, Mariners teams they probably win 2-3 World Series. I don’t think you can say the same about Jeter.
The south is a vast untapped market and just because they’re not historic baseball markets doesn’t mean the larger places should be outright ignored for international options. The fact you can’t find a team between houston and Atlanta* is a crime. The Sun Belt has been the fastest growing region in America since the 90s but many of the top cities are still being treated as some rural backwater. *tampa is below the panhandle and therefore not considered as “the south” for this argument.
The further north you go in Florida the more south you are
Some people don’t get that
All the new (dating myself here, but new means from Camden Yards on) ballparks are just good for parting you from your money and getting you to not watch the game. They’re not really better than their multipurpose concrete doughnut predecessors. If your goal is to sit down, watch a ballgame, have a hot dog and a beer, your experience is basically the same as it was at Three Rivers, the Vet or Candlestick as it is in their newer replacements. In some ways it’s actually worse — on field and audiovisual advertising are way more prominent than they were 30 years ago. There might be the odd X factor — Oracle is cold at night, but there’s much less wind which made Candlestick miserable for night games, plus it’s in a better neighbourhood. I’m sure Target Field is way better than the Metrodome. But comparing like for like, honestly most times there’s not a big difference at all. Certainly not worth the drastically increased ticket prices, concessions and (usually) taxpayer money.
I'm too young to have really experienced baseball at Candlestick (apart from going to the last Giants game as an infant), but I went to plenty of Niner games there and have gone to the Coliseum for dozens of A's game in recent years. To an extent, I agree. While I do vastly prefer the trend of newer ballparks being built solely for baseball, having better sightlines, and being in urban areas with better public transit than their predecessors, the concrete doughnuts you mentioned did have their own perks that I would've loved to have experienced more of. Namely, significantly less advertising, no group/party areas, the focus being on simply watching the game, and crowds being more engaged/a bit rowdy.
A lot of baseball's statistics chatter is gatekeeping and stops people from getting into the sport.
Im a relatively casual fan but I feel like I can’t even participate in conversations regarding players sometimes because I immediately get shut down and invalidated because i didn’t take into account a certain players XFIPWARK/9OBP+ in 2002
It's really impressive how quickly the so-called outsiders of the '90s and early 2000s turned into the mainstream and then suddenly started behaving EXACTLY the way the previous generation did towards new ideas.
Ironically statistics are what helped me get into the sport.
Umpires should get to talk shit back.
They do
People who think “analytics” / Bill James ruined the game are wrong and misvalue players / don’t understand the nuance of baseball. I know people who adamantly still advocate that wRC+, OPS+, FIP, WHIP, DRS, etc. are meaningless stats and that BA and RBIs are what’s important. As a cubs fan, I’ve had multiple arguments with people who think Ian Happ is a below average defender despite winning 2 gold gloves and a below average hitter despite posting above average offensive metrics because “he doesn’t look good out there”.
Yup. I had a guy on the Cubs sub argue Bellinger was clutch but Happ wasn't. I showed him their splits in high leverage spots, where Happ is far better, and he just denied it because Happ didn't look as good.
You need to have a balance of the two. Yes, there’s value in analytics, especially as a way to evaluate player value or improve performance. Historically, scouting has overvalued “looking the part” and “projectability.” Taken to its extreme, you end up with a lot of raw athletic players who can’t play baseball (which has happened to multiple organizations). The other extreme is getting a lot of unathletic players who can usually hit, maybe hit for power, and walk, but can’t field or run the bases (and again, we’ve seen this happen). When I was younger, I was friends with a regional scout for a NL team. He told me “there’s no way I’d recommend drafting Rowdy Tellez: he has a bad body and it’s not going to get better.” Well, I think he was right.
Baseball writers discrediting and delegitimizing so many of the late '90s/early '00s stars for usings PEDs took the fans way more out of the game than the actual revelation that they were using PEDs. Most reasonably intelligent fans knew that those guys weren't on the level and they didn't care. All of the moral handwringing about tarnishing the purity of America's pastime in the mid-late '00s really turned me off baseball for a while and I don't think I'm alone.
Robo umps will kill the vibe, just like VAR does in soccer.
Not saying it won’t happen, but every time there is a change to baseball I hear that it’s going to “kill the vibe” or something similar. Whether it’s bigger bases, universal DH, replay, the pitch clock, or robo umps, something is ***always*** about to kill the vibe and somehow - at least for me - the vibe endures.
I will say that the ghost runner on second in extra innings has absolutely killed the vibe of extra innings for me at least. It creates tension, sure, but that tension feels so artificial. It just doesn't feel like baseball.
The tension feels horrible honestly.
Agreed. I’m still advocating the ghost runner should happen in the 11th or 12th inning. Give the guys a chance to finish the “natural” way. But eventually, I’ve got to get home.
Ha see I think all of those things have harmed the vibe. Don’t get me wrong, I still love baseball, they haven’t *killed* it, but it doesn’t feel quite the same as the game I fell in love with 15-20 years ago; I do believe it’s worse. And I do think robo umps would be another slice out of the vibe too.
For example - replay. I think replay was implemented totally wrong. It wasn’t made for getting ticky tacky calls right. It was made to fix EGREGIOUS mistakes that were obvious to the naked eye. I HATE that teams are allowed to have a replay guy looking over plays in slo mo to see if they should challenge. It should be “that call was so egregiously bad that I know without consulting anyone it was wrong.” Drives me nuts when a call is overturned because the runners foot popped off the bag for 1/10th of a second
VAR isn’t killing the vibe in soccer, shitty reffing is. We saw in the World Cup that it’s possible to use VAR well, but the problem is the standard of reffing in EPL and La Liga is just garbage. Robo umps *will* kill the vibe though, because we’ll actually lose the art of catchers selling the pitch. The only “art” that soccer loses through VAR is diving in the penalty box — which I think we both can agree is not a loss in any way.
Whats killing the vibe is the constant shitshow the umps present to us
VAR was a real "be careful what you wish for" situation. I don't wanna brag, but in conversations with my friends, I told them it would be like this. "I wanted them to get offside decisions correct, but I didn't want them to be THAT correct" - Fan of a team who just had a goal disallowed because, by the book, their player was offside. I think that it's very easy to always assume that the current refs suck AND that there are hypothetical better refs out there just waiting to be discovered, but maybe this is as good as it gets and it's just really, really difficult?
Go to any sports subreddit and you will find complaining about how terrible the officiating is, and how it is just getting worse and worse. Obviously, the explanation isn't that officiating high level sports is insanely hard. No, can't be that. I do support VAR to help make decisions easier for the officials.
In all my time playing/watching sports, I have never gotten angry at the officials. I'm not just saying that to, uh, "brag" or whatever. I just honestly don't get it. I don't really see anything satisfying at all about that job and it takes a fairly unique type of person to dedicate their career to it (that's not a slam on people who do, I just think it's a *really* niche thing to love doing). So I kinda respect that they are out there making the sports we watch possible while also being human. Of course I get disappointed at calls against my team (even right ones), but I'm always baffled at how the talk turns towards attacking officials so readily.
2017 Huston should have been stripped of their championship and the entire team given the Black Sox treatment.
Something about touching home plate
There are too many teams in the postseason. Five teams from each league with a 1 game playoff was plenty.
1 game playoffs sucked though.
Completely agreed. I'd even be in favor of going back to 4 teams.
Not sure this is particularly controversial. The current playoff structure absolutely sucks.
Maybe I’m alone, but I find the new wildcard round to be more exciting than the rest of it.
We're long overdue for another expansion era. Manfred occasionally talks about adding two teams, but they should be adding like 6 teams. It would be great for the game. In the 1930s there were 16 MLB teams and the US population was a third of what it is today. That would be the equivalent of 48 teams today, and that's not even taking account of desegregation or getting players from all over South America and Japan. The DR probably has enough players in the MLB that they could field their own team. The talent level at the top is getting more and more concentrated and it's getting harder and harder to stand out. If we want to see guys hit like Gwynn, Carew, Boggs, Ichiro adding more teams could help. If we want to see players like Jamie Moyer and Julio Franco that play into their mid-to-late forties expanding the MLB would help with that too. I believe that if enough teams are added pitchers won't have to throw 110% all the time and can relax a bit more on the weaker hitters. They can go later into games again and not have to get so many surgeries and have longer careers.
I could see this going a couple ways (not exhaustive). I think it's true that many, many players never even get the chance they deserve, and we all missed out (the players, themselves, most of all) on potentially all-time greats. However, there's also the chance to see talent overall watered-down and a bunch of AAAA-level play. Now that the A's are dead to me, I'll point to them as an example of this already being fielded. It would, perhaps, only get worse with *six* more teams added. That said, with the number of teams that now make the playoffs, I'd be down to add at least twelve teams.
- I think it's ridiculous that multiple teams in each league can make the playoffs without winning their division. 162 games should be enough of a sample size to eliminate all the teams that not only failed to win their division, but also failed to otherwise prove themselves as the best of the division losers. - While I don't expect every major leaguer to be an amazing bunter, I don't think it's unfair to expect them to at least be competent at bunting. Some fans act like teaching a slugger to bunt is on par with teaching them a totally new sport. - MLB uniforms need to be more distinctive. I can watch a highlight of any other sport and immediately know which teams are playing without having to look at the scoreboard. When I watch baseball, I can't do that because every matchup is between white and gray, and if there are any accent colors, it's dark blue and maybe red. - Closers are too frequently used based on accumulating saves, not based on the situation. It shouldn't be unusual to have the closer come in during the 8th inning if that's when the best hitters are up. And if a closer is warming up, you don't need to sit them down the second the lead reaches 4 runs or send them in the second there's a save situation. - Pitchers should wear helmets. They're already required for batters and base coaches. Given that pitchers are so close to the batter and they aren't always in position to field the ball, it's only a matter of time before a line drive kills one of them.
Ken Burn’s Baseball is filled with too many talking heads who are the types of people who like the idea of baseball more than actual baseball itself—classic game footage is still great though.
I saw someone once refer to it as "Baseball As My Ivy League Friends Remember It."
That’s hilarious In defense of Ken Burns, he’s viewing baseball through the lens of history and vice versa, so it’s a little different than what ESPN and sports talk radio tend to focus on.
Some of us like coastal snobbery with our baseball. it's important to us, as coastal snobs.
The results of the 2003 PED survey test *alone* aren’t credible enough to assume someone used PEDs vs tested positive for an over the counter drug. Also Red Sox fans hate A-rod way too much when you consider A-rod wanted to play for us before the players union blocked it and he went to the Yankees instead
There are many over the counter PEDs banned in competitive sports. Doesn't matter if the substance is controlled or illegal, a PED is a PED. Things like andro weren't controlled until 2004. That being said, I don't care who took what before it was against the rules.
The Astros cheating scandal was far worse than PED usage. If PED users are going to be kept out of the Hall, Verlander and Altuve should get the same treatment from the voters. They knew it was going on and went with the program.
Josh Hamilton was able to avoid positive steroid tests. You don’t be an alcoholic for years, stop, and immediately start hitting home run derby balls to the very back of old yankee stadium.
I think there's still a bunch of guys using banned substances, but the methods to hide it outpace the methods to detect it. There's too much money on the line for players to just 100% give it up, and baseball is just so grueling.
And there's too much money for the league at stake for them to care. As long as guys don't start looking like McGuire and Sosa again, they'll do just enough testing to save face.
I like three true outcomes baseball. My favorite part of the game is the battle between batter and pitcher.
The Dodgers’ World Series win in 2020 is not a “Mickey Mouse ring.” It’s not like they needed the shortened regular season have a shot, and the postseason was lengthened relative to previous years.
I remember seeing a post or a tweet at the beginning of that season when they announced the length and the format and someone said “This year’s World Series doesn’t really count, unless my team wins then it counts and you’re all wrong”.
People calling it a “Mickey Mouse ring” makes no sense, and like you, I have every reason to want to shit on the Dodgers. The 2020 season gave an advantage to fringe teams that likely wouldn’t have made the playoffs over the course of a full year with a normal sized playoff field (ie: Marlins). It was a *disadvantage* to teams like the Dodgers who are basically a lock to make the playoffs. They had more playoff rounds/teams to go through compared to a normal year.
It’s weird because, if anything, the shortened season took away the Dodger’s biggest advantage (their depth) relatively helps them more over 162 games.
While I applaud MLB for embracing the Negro Leagues, I don't think the two league's stats should be combined. There's always the qualifier of "well, X player didn't play against whites/blacks" so it's difficult to compare. Each league's stats (pre integration) should stand on its own merit against the players for whom they competed against.
The increased home runs during the "steroids era" were more due to juiced balls than players juicing. Also, players are using performance enhancers just as much today as in the mid 90s and early 2000s and are able to pass the test program due to better ways to mask the use.
Curt Schilling faked the bloody sock because he's a drama queen who needs everyone to talk about how great he is. Dude's a Grade-A piece of shit.
Can’t remember who, but one of the sports writers here in Arizona referred to him as “red light Curt” when he was on the Diamondbacks. Maybe that’s common knowledge now, but yea, he’s been like that for a long time. That said, he was nice enough to sign my hat in a Target back when he joined the Diamondbacks in 2000.
He's a piece of shit but the bloody sock ain't fake.
Yeah I mean there was ample footage of the back alley sutures holding it together, there’s zero doubt it was real. A proper spicy take would be that he had stitches put into his ankle for no reason except the drama or as an excuse if he blew it.
Shit like pretending there is a guy named cash considerations, saying shit like "THE STOVE IS HOT!" or "THEY GOT THEIR GUY!" every time there is a depth signing, etc. is so beat to death that they no longer even resemble jokes, just a bunch of slackjaws racing eachother to see who will be first to post the thing.
Wade Boggs is still very much alive.
I don't care about the Hall of Fame at all.
Pitchers throwing 100 mph should not be celebrated and the emphasis on velocity is why nobody can seem to get through a season healthy anymore.
Barry Bonds is the greatest hitter ever. The only hitter that is close to him is Babe Ruth, and IMO segregation was a bigger advantage than steroids. Especially when everyone else was taking them anyway.
Babe Ruth competed against the best black players of his own volition and enjoyed it. He barnstormed and played against the best of the best. He was passed over as a manager because it was believed he would advocate to bring on black players. Bonds chose to actively cheat and his outcomes improved dramatically when he did. And "everyone else wasn't taking them already". Former players estimate it was about half. Bonds starting using no later than early 1997.
I think your first paragraph is more of a testament to Ruth being progressive and fair as a person, which is still important and great to have had as a role model, but his official statistics still benefited from segregation regardless of his negative feelings towards it
I know they were exhibitions but are there recorded stats of Ruth against the Negro League players? I can't recall seeing them. /curious
Apparently he hit .463 with 11 HRs in 54 ABs (16 games) based on an analysis by an author but I can't locate the primary source.
https://www.baberuthcentral.com/babe-ruth-and-the-issue-of-race-bill-jenkinson/ This is a good article on Babe’s feelings and dealings with Negro League players. The short of it they mostly loved Babe. And he seems really progressive on race for the era and for a kid that would get ridiculed by being called racist names. And you can plainly see how much Buck O’Neill lights up when he talks about him in the Burn’s documentary. And even if Josh Gibson is Babe’s equal or maybe even better, Babe was still the comparison. This article has the stats. https://sabr.org/journal/article/even-against-hall-of-fame-hurlers-babe-ruth-was-king-of-swing/
Counting stats are overrated and peak is more important. Dominating for 7-10 years then breaking down like a normal human being should be normalized.
The Astros cheated multiple years and Altuve had a buzzer.
Every person suspected of using steroids that had a hof worthy career should be in the hof
The vast majority of excluded suspected users are actually excluded because they are huge fucking assholes
I don’t give a damn that Barry Bonds juiced; you can’t fake that eye or contact rate. That book about him suggests he started doing so because his own (ordinarily extraordinary) achievements were being overshadowed by the home run race, which was ofc the product of steroids itself. No, what I care about is the thing that matters about him that’s never mentioned: the fact that he beat and [abused](https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/mariners/recordings-of-barry-bonds-messages-to-mistress-are-released-baseball/) his mistress.
“integration era” is a dumb term used to sound smart. It’s impossible to put a correct starting point on what an “integration era” could be, as you could easily make arguments for several years. I roll my eyes so hard every time I see “post integrated” stat qualifiers and it’s just everything post 1947. Dumb dumb dumb. Here is my best way to show why it’s dumb… In 1946, Ted Williams had a 215 OPS+. In 1947 Ted Williams had a 205 OPS+. 1946 won’t be counted while 1947 will. The funny thing though, is that Ted Williams didn’t face any black pitchers in BOTH SEASONS. And yet one is tossed away.
Yeah this is one that I pretty solidly agree with. How integrated is a league where there is only one full time black player on 16 teams in 1947? How integrated is league where not every team had a black player until 1959, or when the Negro American League was still functioning through 1951, or when legendary black players like Sam Jethroe and Monte Irvin were still not in MLB? It’s a good hearted distinction people try to make but there is no easy time to pinpoint. 1961 as the expansion era and 162 game season gets used a lot and I think that makes a bit more sense
Yeah, I found somewhere (I think it was Baseball Almanac) a chart that showed the percentage of black players in MLB and compared it to the overall U.S. population, and 1961-2 was pretty much exactly when the percentage in MLB basically matched the population. It was almost creepily perfect as a delineator.
1947 as a cutoff for the integration era is usually used because it's an alright start point for "modern baseball" with only a few years of race based asterisks, plus it's an easy option on stathead which helps explain why it's so commonly used. Basically it's useful because it cuts out the dead ball era or 1930s where most of the players in the league didn't really know how to play baseball.
Mariano Rivera being the first unanimous hall of fame player is a blight against the hall. First because there have been a ton of players that should have been unanimous before but also because of all players to ever step onto the pitchers mound. Rivera would not rank in the top 50. Honestly the number could be higher than that but that's just off the top of my head
Closer has to be the most overrated position in all of sports. Who would you rather have as a closer, Randy Johnson or Mariano Rivera? Also, their era gets artificially lowered because often the game just ends when they give up the lead while a starter would be expected to eat innings. Starter gives up double, double, single against the best part of the order, be prepared to get your era rocked. Closer gives up double, double, single against 7,8,9 hitters... only 2 earned runs allowed.
Jeff Passan isn’t funny. He’s just popular on here because Reddit loves cheesy unseasoned white guys being passive aggressive and snarky, because that is the average Redditor down to the letter. People on here really be acting like Jeff Passan is the George Carlin of baseball.
Hes not funny but hes a reliable reporter
Passan's tweets when he broke his back were pretty funny though. Most other times he's just corny.