Frayed Knot

I hope the book was better than the movie.

Yeah, that's the major problem. The DH started as an "experimental" rule. But then even as the conditions which spawned its birth -- low offense, sagging AL attendance, fear that older stars forced into retirement would take fans with them (as if they'd never be replaced) --- went away, the rule never did. And then once it's entrenched, fans (and probably the clubs) get it into their heads that 'Player X' wouldn't be in the league without the DH which is nonsense. David Ortiz could have played for any team, the team would just now have to consider his drawbacks rather than rely on an artificial rule which allow his drawbacks never to see the light of day. But it's rarely an advantage, certainly not a sustained one anyway, for any individual club because everyone is working with the same factors.

He's one of those guys who's a real good athlete but, no way to sugarcoat it, is a BAD fielder; just seems to have bad hands no matter where you put him. Also, his lack of walks usually kept his OPS+ under 100 even as he hit near, or sometimes over, .300. But he does have some value so I'm not going to squawk over a minor league deal. He was one of those guys who, seemingly out of nowhere, has a good season for the MFY -- he filled in at SS during Jeter's injury year -- but also one where the team realizes that it's likely not a sustainable pace [see: Ricky Ledee, Shane Spencer, etc.] so they deal him off hoping to 'sell high' or just let him walk when a better option (in this case, Didi) comes around.

Now get to the important question left unanswered here: Was your preferred brand L&M, Lark, or Chesterfield?

That Arenado honeymoon in Denver sure didn't last long. He's claiming the team made promises to spend elsewhere after they spent on him. But now the team seems to be gun-shy about throwing big buxx around after their strong pitching of 2018 turned south on them in 2019, so maybe they're not as close as they thought a year ago. So they've at least talked about trading N.A. just one year into a L-T contract (although he can opt-out after '21) and he's not only not happy about it but hasn't been shy about saying so publicly.

Not being a Catholic I'm not always up on the history of the church ... but I would have thought there were way more than just two popes.

Never mind Keef, what does his cat think of Rojas? He thinks it's a purrfect choice. Sorry, couldn't resist

Benjamin Grimm wrote: http://leaptoad.com/mets/managers.phpUltimate Mets Database: Mets Managers The rest of the world may disagree, but I'm listing Carlos as number 22 and Luis as number 23. I agree that a manager who is named and then un-named, even when no games played in between, is a different category than one who serves as an interim for a few games due to manager sickness/suspension/whatever. Now one could argue that the interim should be considered the official manager as well, but I think the officially named one certainly makes for the better case.

=Centerfield post_id=30332 time=1579721322 user_id=65] How old is he? Like 14? So this is Felipe's son, Moises's brother? Doesn't look anything like Moises. I guess that's a good thing. Moises always kinda reminded me of the guy from Fine Young Cannibals.

Good move ... just no retired number please.

Keith Hernandez is "stunned" and "floored" and thinks that they needed an experienced manager for a "win-now" team. Was he also 'stunned and floored' when they announced Beltran, or is this more a case of 'I don't know him therefore he can't be any good'? I actually thought they might go the experience route after the Beltran hire crashed, both because of the need for 'stability' and if anyone knows how to over-correct it's the 'Pons. I thought they might turn to Showalter which I would have been OK with (even if not thrilled) but recoiled at the rumors of Dusty with whom the Astros are talking to (talk about your over-correcting ... the Astros would be going from the cutting edge of the analytics spectrum to the completely opposite extreme w/Baker).

As much fun as MFY-angst can be, the difference between 99.7% and 100% is negligible and I have no problem that the long-standing taboo against unanimous selections was finally broken, should have happened decades ago. The fact that 20-some voters failed to cast a ballot for Mays doesn't make Jeter the better player, it only means that today's panel has wiser voters. My two major concerns with this vote were those writers willfully admitting to trying to create a Jeter-and-only-Jeter class, as if sharing the stage with someone else would somehow be a stain on HIS day. Voters who took votes away from other deserving candidates, including from ones they had voted for in the past, just so as to create this (attempted) artificial and contrived 'honor' deserve to be horse-whipped for using that logic. The other is, had Jeets achieved a perfect score, that there would be a move to return back to the days of 'no first-timers' so that the 100% 'honor' forever remain the property of Rivera and Jeter. Much of the 'no first-timers' garbage existed from those DiMaggio worshipers who reasoned that if Joe D didn't go in on his first ballot (there were several reasons for this as the process was different back then) then no one else should either. Having finally busted that stupid logic, it would be far worse to start an even dumber standard.

And don't take Liberatore if you're pregnant and are considering an induced labor movement.

btw, there apparently is now, at long last, a Mrs. Tim Tebow

=ashie62 post_id=30186 time=1579565356 user_id=90] Liberatore projects as a 2

“Shit makes sense now ... I remember wondering how these guys were laying off some of my nasty pitches. Relaying all my signs in live speed to the batter. Ruining the integrity of the game. These dudes were all about the camera and social media. Now, they're all quiet! Lol” -- Marcus Stroman after seeing video from an Aug 6, 2017 game in which he pitched for the Jays against the Astros and was roughed up for 11 hits over 6-2/3 IP including a 3-for-4 by his would-be manager Carlos Beltran. On the video the now infamous sounds of garbage can banging can be heard. Well at least that's one awkward spring training meet-and-greet that now won't have to occur.

=Ceetar post_id=30135 time=1579481138 user_id=102] You are implying it's okay for me to bypass your security system if I simply guess a bunch of times as long as I don't use a computer program? And that it'd be basically impossible for me to get in, even with tech, if you simply used more than a 3 digit password? I'm saying if it's okay for me to sometimes bypass your security, if we're going to make that okay, might as well just make it always okay and if you use a 15 digit password and I guess it that's just good on me, but if you use a 1 digit password and I get in maybe bad on you? And you're going to get all up in arms because I used a computer to run every single digit password to get passed it?

I mean, the report contradicts what you're saying, but okay. What part? The part about how they set up cameras specifically aimed at the catcher's signals? ... No it doesn't. The part about how they had a real time monitor next to the dugout so as to immediately relay the gained knowledge to the batter? ... No it doesn't The part about how Manfred had specifically said any type of this stuff was strictly prohibited? ... No it doesn't. The part about how MLB now has (though not originally) a person overseeing each team's video replay room so as to make sure that that info isn't getting relayed to the dugout? ... No it doesn't. I'm saying that a lot of times the Astros weren't simply seeing 1 finger and not banging for a fastball. Sometimes they had to decipher the more 'complex' set of signs that a battery uses when say a guy's on second. I.e. the "we know the other team is probably seeing these signs and therefore we're going to give the bare minimum level of effort involved to keep them from guessing it" And how is that better?!? All that means is that it's stealing that clearly couldn't be done except with an illegal system set up just for that purpose. Or does the fact that the signals weren't as easy to decipher as See-Spot-Run make this stuff OK? Gee, everything I stole from you shouldn't even qualify as a crime because of the expensive and intricate security system I had to disable just to get past your front door!

Could any topic be less meaningful?

well no, not illegally installed, this all stems from MLBs dumb idea of having managers challenge calls rather than just simply getting the call right. Which I guess it is also the reason for no delay on the feed, which ALSO would've solved the issue. And because you can challenge calls on the road, you could conceivably do it on the road too, depending on your opponents placement of the CF cam (which, you know, might mean they were cheating too) The replay challenge, with which I have numerous issues, is designated to come from a specific booth and NOT one to be also displayed on a monitor next to the dugout. So, yes, Houston's system was quite illegally installed. And it's not simply 'stealing' it, as they were decoding them too. No one's elaborated on this, but I imagine they wouldn't have used that word for simply "haha, he put down 1 finger" and figured out what the more 'complex' (because real code would've solved this problem too!) pattern. I have no idea what you are saying here. The home team is installing cameras for the specific purpose of stealing signs which are otherwise not possible (or very difficult) to see in conjunction with a system for relaying them to the batter in real time, something the visiting team can't possibly have access to. Which is why I'm generally fine with it and think it should be totally legal, like, there are a billion avenues to resolve it both by MLB and the 'victim' team. Let it be part of the cat and mouse game and don't over legislate something. But hell, baseball is still acting like it's 1930 and has to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming. Absurd!

Willets Point wrote: The fact that sign-stealing has long been a part of the "gamesmanship" of Major League Baseball is why I think that fines, suspensions, and firings will ultimately be meaningless with an effort to address the systemic problem within the game. The narrative that's already forming that the teams that got caught are "cheaters" who didn't deserve to win and other teams are "clean" who deserved to win helps absolutely nothing. But there is cheating and then there's CHEATING!! While the acts of trying to decipher your opponents' signs, pitcher 'tells', and other body language have long been part of the game, referring to those as 'cheating' is more symbolic than actual. If your catcher isn't hiding his signs well enough, or your third base coach's relays fall into predictable and easily outed patterns, then that's your fault rather than the fault of those who uncover them. But what Houston (and maybe Boston) did with electronic spying and illegally installed real-time monitors for the sole purpose of giving an edge which obviously isn't an option to the visiting team goes way beyond what has long been considered acceptable in the sport even before Manfred specifically warned each club against attempting any such practice. It's why the penalties were as harsh as they were (even as the initial reaction by some within the game that they weren't harsh enough) and it is what's going to taint the Astros' lone championship to date. So absent some kind of new evidence that this level of skullduggery was going on everywhere then, yeah, I am going to treat other clubs as competing 'clean' (at least in this area) and hope that the penalties leveled on Houston are a big enough scare to prevent teams from trying something like this in the future. In the meantime, dugout detectives are still welcome in my world.

Yup, one of those 'born a Met/died a Met' types ... even with a bunch of stops in between.

Luke Walton, who coached the Golden State Warriors for like half a season whilst Steve Kerr was sidelined with serious back issues, is NOT listed as ever being a head coach for GSW because they consider him to be merely as the interim rather than as the titled coach. Every game that season, whether under the direction of Walton or Kerr was credited to Kerr's record which, appropriately enough, sounds like a system that was concocted by Simple Minds. It's totally fucking ridiculous but that's how the NBA handles it.

Frayed Knot wrote: I'm wondering if the Mets -- or anyone for that matter seeing as how there are suddenly now THREE teams in search of managers despite it being mid-January -- go with a 'safe' choice like Showalter even though I can't remember if anyone even gave him a sniff during managerial sweepstakes time back in October/November. Cuz when your first choice turns out to be crooked, the way to go just might be to hire the guy who gets upset when players wear their hats crooked. And, as if on cue, Houston is talking to Showalter

On those chilly Bay area nights, he can be the pitcher who came in from the cold.