Frayed Knot

During one spring training, or maybe more than one, Marty Noble daily attached an 'Innis in the Morning' blurb onto his columns. It contained his favorite quote or quip of the previous 24 hours from the often very quotable and quipable Jeff Innis.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=85115 time=1643160130 user_id=68] Football is like that card game the baseball players played in Bang the Drum Slowly. No one knows nothing and everybody makes believe they're experts.

Yeah, football is endlessly complicated but, unlike baseball, those variations are mostly hidden to even the most avid fans. When the head coach, after being asked how his O-line played, says, 'I dunno, I have to watch the game film first', that doesn't leave much chance for the average fan to know. The thing I've always loved about baseball is that the average fan does know and we can have intelligent and informed discussions about strategy and choices made on the game we just watched.

Edgy MD wrote: As for football, I think we hit peak NFL ten years ago. I think it's taking plenty of scratches. I remember a reporter going to a tailgate before a Jets season opener and nobody there could name any players on the team. But, oddly, this is one of the NFL's great strengths, that fans will attend, and particularly watch, games involving teams that aren't theirs and which they know very few of the players. It's like the most common answer for why Joe NFL-Fan is watching a particular game is: 'Duh ... Because it's on TV!' As I mentioned recently in another thread, talk about the NFL is endless these days but it revolves almost entirely around QBs while the majority of his teammates remain anonymous. At best one or two others might get occasional mentions (often for bad reasons) but usually the second-most mentioned name is the head coach and I'm not sure that the Offensive and Defensive coordinators aren't third and fourth. Personally I find that all a bit odd but it obviously doesn't bother a sizable percentage of fans and that's what fuels the TV ratings that are in turn responsible for the real business of the NFL: printing money

I thought Verducci put it well [paraphrasing] Bonds, Clemens, et al will still have their records, they'll still have their awards, they'll still have their money, they'll still have their recognition. But the HoF is an honor and it's one that [he feels] they didn't earn. Of course 2/3 of the voters disagree with Verducci's stance but Cooperstown's standard has always been high (3/4) and those guys didn't clear it.

77.9% -- so a very close call.

Edgy MD wrote: Rob Parker went for Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield, and Sosa, but felt too sketchy about Ortíz? I don't like to name call based solely on a HoF ballot, so I won't ... but Parker's a dope for oh so many reasons.

One electee only and it's... Papi!!!

... but the gambling advertising versus lottery advertising ratio is about 1,000 to one. On sports oriented shows, sure, but that's a case of finding their target and doing saturation bombing. I'd venture though that lottery ads are more widespread. They run on the 6 O'Clock news, Jeopardy, and a host of other 'family' programming. So thinner, maybe, but wider. Look, I don't like these ads any more than you. But to many the idea of following and knowing sports is synonymous with gambling on them -- again, particularly so in the case of football (both kinds of football as is quickly apparent by looking at Premier League 'kits') -- but they all see it as a 'growth' opportunity. I think it would be great if MLB, and shows connected to it, would decide that just because legalized sports gambling is now a fact of life doesn't mean they have to patronize those who promote it (maintaining the firewall that Edgy mentions), just not holding my breath until it happens. All of this reminds me of the scene in THE GODFATHER where the assembled Mafia bosses decide that they're going to "allow" [run] the drug trade ... But they're going to control it!! "I don't want it near schools ... we're going to keep it in the dark neighborhoods" Once you legalize something you begin to normalize it and it becomes a part of everyday life. We lived without legalized gambling for so long in this country -- again: except in those cases where governments had a monopoly on them -- that it suddenly being above ground takes getting used to.

=kcmets post_id=85040 time=1643076735 user_id=53] I have nothing against legalized gambling. ... I do have a problem with the incessant advertising that seems to have exploded overnight and the two-dozen betting shows on all the sports stations.

I don't gamble so I don't particularly care. But one of many open and honest conversations we Haven't been having in this country has been about gambling. Almost all state and local governments professed to be against it but only as they had a monopoly on it via lotteries, OTB, and other such schemes which essentially served as a tax on the poor but which they none-the-less promoted as a way to get ahead while disguising the odds against do so. And don't get me started on the bullshit rationalization about it all benefitting education, or the unfair protection that restricting it to Las Vegas (and later Atlantic City) gave those locations, or the idea that certain ethnicities were permitted to have them while others couldn't. To your question more specifically: that sports gambling is now rapidly being legalized is long overdue unless you're of the mind to go the puritan way and favor banning all the already existing forms. Like I said, I don't care, but I do get a kick out of the leagues (particularly the NFL) embracing it now that they see a way to get a piece of the action after years -- Decades!! -- of insisting that even the hint of it would lead to the ruination of their sports all while they silently knew it was the key to their success all along.

I think there'd be near zero interest in replacement baseball. Plus I don't think the owners are harboring the same pipe-dream as they had back in '94 when they convinced themselves that by playing their cards exactly right they'd finally be able to break the union. Football is different. Many regular fans seem willing to follow anything as long as it's attached to their favorite logo-ed helmet. Casual fans rarely know more than a handful of players on the field at any one time anyway so it wouldn't change much for them. And you would still be able to bet; now more than ever.

They can't possibly believe they can sell that ... can they?

mlb.com Top Ten 1 - Andy Rutschman - C - Orioles 2 - Julio Rodriguez - OF - Mariners 3 - Bobby Witt Jr - SS - Royals 4 - Spencer Torkelson 1B/3B - Tigers 5 - Marco Luciano - SS - Giants 6 - CJ Abrans - SS - Padres 7 - Riley Greene 0 OF - Tigers 8 - Grayson Rodriguez - RHP - Orioles 9 - Marcelo Mayer - SS - Red Sox 10 - Francisco Alverez - C - NYM [Francisco] Alvarez checked in as MLB Pipeline's No. 13 prospect for the 2018-19 international period before inking a $2.7 million pact with the Mets on July 2. The Venezuela native emerged as one of the better young catchers in the Minors in 2019, slashing .282/.377/.443 over 35 games in the Rookie Appalachian League at age 17 to conclude his pro debut. The Mets sent Alvarez to their alternate training site in Brooklyn in 2020 -- a challenge to which the teenage catcher responded by showing better than any hitter in camp. With his exceptional physical strength and explosive swing, Alvarez appears poised to do damage each time he steps to the plate. He has massive raw power and knows how to get to it during games, making hard, fly-ball contact using a leveraged right-handed swing. Alvarez also finds the barrel consistently and is comfortable hitting to all fields, thanks to an approach that belies his age and experience. Alvarez still has gains to make defensively with his blocking and catch-and-throw skills, but the arm strength is plus, and he's worked hard to improve his athleticism and mobility behind the plate. On top of the impressive physical tools, Alvarez earns high marks for his makeup and leadership skills and his desire to improve in all facets of the game. Those qualities give the Mets confidence that Alvarez will stick behind the plate long term, and the way he's taken off at Low-A and High-A He'll play this entire year at age 20 [DOB = 11/19/01] probably starting in AA. 5' 10"/220; BR/TR; ETA = 2023 [brett] Baty was old for his class as a 19-year-old high school senior, and that deterred some clubs from taking him early in the 2019 Draft. The Mets weren't one of them, as they made Baty the first third baseman to be taken by the organization in the first round since Chris Donnels in 1987, selecting the Lake Travis (Texas) High product No. 12 overall. Baty posted a .821 OPS with 25 extra-base hits (seven homers) while climbing three levels in his pro debut after signing for $3.9 million, then arrived at the Mets' alternate training site in '20 looking physically stronger and leaner. Hitting for power from line-to-line from the left side is Baty's calling card. He's shown early in his career that he can get to it during games, even hitting his longest and most impressive home runs to the opposite field, though he's still learning how to turn on the ball. Baty's swing mechanics and bat path do lead to swing-and-miss issues that raise questions about his hit tool, but he also employs a patient approach and controls the zone well enough to project him as an average hitter with plus game power. The athleticism that made Baty a three-sport standout as a prep shows up on the diamond, and he showed improved agility and more speed last summer at the alternate site. He could develop into an average defender at third base, where his plus arm strength -- he was clocked at 92 mph off the mound in high school -- is an asset, though, overall, Baty will need time to develop on both sides of the ball to reach his ceiling. Having climbed to Double-A in 2021, Baty has seen some time in the outfield with the Mets hoping to get his bat in the lineup anyway they can in the future. [Ronny] Mauricio commanded the seventh-highest bonus of any international amateur during the 2017-18 period, signing with the Mets for $2.1 million. The Dominican native made his pro debut in ‘18, finishing his age-17 season in the Appalachian League, then put himself on the map with a solid full-season debut at Class A Columbia in ‘19. Mauricio was among the first Mets prospect additions at the alternate training site in ‘20, receiving an assignment on Aug. 16. Mauricio's game is all about projection. He's struggled to drive the ball consistently early in his career, with some swing-length and pitch-selection issues mitigating his production, but it's easy to envision the switch-hitter eventually doing damage from both sides of the plate as he fills out his impressive 6-foot-3 frame. Mauricio's power, especially as a left-handed hitter, should emerge with those physical gains, and he may even be able to unlock more pop by merely improving upon his high ground-ball rate from 2019 (53.6%). He's less advanced as a righty and will need to do a better job controlling the strike zone as he works his way through the Minors. Mauricio has impressed evaluators with his athleticism, actions and plus arm strength as a shortstop. Those tools could also make him a plus defender elsewhere on the infield if he's ever forced off the position, with the hot corner representing Mauricio's likely destination on account of his below-average speed and larger frame.

Baseball America Top-100 #13 - Francisco Alvarez - C [mlb.com = #10] #39 - Brett Baty - 3B [mlb.com = #45] #92 - Ronny Mauricio - SS [mlb.com = #53]

Twins (and others) LHP Francisco Liriano after 14 seasons

I remember starting the book and then for some reason not finishing it. I don't remember why. Didn't even realize there WAS a movie.

I'm so good at these contests that I score points even when I don't participate.

=G-Fafif post_id=84614 time=1642217940 user_id=55] Basinski was the last survivor of that group.

And I remember an article in one of the papers the following day saying that there was no reason to believe that #301 would come any faster. It probably did (too lazy to look up right now) but it was a clear acknowledgement that Carter looked spent by that point.

An alternative to Willets's suggestion is for teams to keep certain uniform numbers out of circulation until they decide that a current player playing the position of a past star is worthy of the honor. Such a decision would be like saying, 'Yes Pete Alonso, we now think you are worthy of uniform #17', or that some pitcher has earned the right to wear #16, some catcher #8, etc. This is a tradition among at least some soccer cultures and those numbers -- and they'd be different for different teams -- would wind up being issued less often but usually for longer spans and thus form a kind of team history. You might still want to permanently retire a few for the truly career great guys -- in our case Seaver and ... probably no one else -- but I'd really like to get away from this trend where we seem to be in constant 'Who's next?' mode and the notion that they're somehow dis-honoring someone by not retiring their number, even if said player spent the majority of his career on a different club. Too few > Too many

Was there ever any definitive word that Mitchell was dealt for the 'bad influence' card or was that just one of those things that became a "fact" because people assumed it to be a fact even though there was nothing factual about it? The bigger part of the story was that Joe McIlvane thought McReynolds to be the best amateur player he ever scouted. So when he saw a chance to get him he pounced and you have to give up to get so the five years of control Mitchell was attractive to the always cash-strapped Padres. The bad influence story reminds me of the one where they didn't draft Reggie Jackson because they didn't like that he had a white (actually Mexican) girlfriend. That attitude may have fit the outlook of the conservative NYM ownership at the time and, like the Kevin Mitchell story, it might even be true. But the sole source of that one seems to be Jackson himself (he claims his college coach told his such) and since Reggie is only lying when his lips are moving pardon me if I'm not going to take it as gospel. I don't even think there was a particular source of the Mitchell story other than it seemed like it might be true so was treated as if it were.

Coupla thoughts here While I'm not advocating for hard and fast rules on number retirement, I think general guidelines should fall somewhere around these 1) HoF stature player or at least something close to it 2) a long tenure with the club and one which constitutes the majority of his career 3) and then you get into contributions and overall good-guy-ness Keith falls short on both #1 & #2 but is close and close-ish for both Carter has #1 sewn up but barely 1/4 of his career is Queens falls woefully short even if his five years here were good/great but not even half of that was. Keith is a bit more sketchy on the good citizen part but a good chunk of his induction is likely tied to his now lengthy broadcast career so that makes up for it.

I remember Hairston torching LHPs during his NYM tenure ... although I didn't look up any numbers and maybe they don't back me up.

But, again, they didn't say "Get Out, we hate you", and neither am I. They offered to keep him at a certain number and he chose --whether over dollars, years, or respect -- not to take it. I would have been fine with him on the '87, although as that season went he would have been most useful if he could fill in on the mound.