Ceetar

I'll watch through the recording of Mets On Tap and then probably drift away. To me the ASG is about the pageantry and celebration. I think they should adopt cinderella rules, everyone bats ones, you can just rotate 3-4 at a time this way you can cycle in a few pitchers to throw a bit, and then once it's done, it's done.

=Fman99 post_id=100235 time=1658226546 user_id=86] I watched not one bit of this crap.

=Fman99 post_id=100208 time=1658186306 user_id=86] Is there a more masturbatory professional sporting event than the home run derby? I think not.

supposed Jauss has three pots of coffee brewing already.

the wild pitch, btw, was worth 635.99. Topped only by the 643.33 of Keith's 2-run single in the bottom of the 6th of game 7.

https://www.sports-reference.com/blog/2020/09/__trashed-2/https://www.sports-reference.com/blog/2020/09/__trashed-2/

my guess is just that it's another team in the hunt for a WC spot and it was early enough that simply winning games against the competition is key. Mostly I think you're overvaluing the difference between like 1.3 and 1.2. for instance, in game of of the NLDS last year, LA starting pitcher Walker Buehler averaged a 9.71 cLI in his 6.1 IP. I think this means basically one batter in that game was worth about as much as a random May game. The first scoring play in game 5 of that series, top six, a double by Corey Seager that scored a run, was worth 77.92.

=Marshmallowmilkshake post_id=100179 time=1658168037 user_id=119] =Ceetar post_id=100173 time=1658164868 user_id=102] no, he made himself mega rich by cheating and scamming, as all billionaires do.

honestly it'll probably drop for everyone, except maybe key matchups against Atlanta, depending on how close the standings stay. Fangraphs has the Mets at 99.5% to make the playoffs, so the only thing that's gonna significantly push the WS odds is potentially losing the division. But a lead is more and more stable the fewer games there are, so that works against them. The next Atlanta series might still be high, but if the Mets come out of that better than they are now, with that many more games in the bank, it probably won't change. It's not a particularly interesting number in mid-July.

It's less now against the Cubs because we've banked a ton more wins since the Angels series. The probability that the Met make the playoffs is that much higher, so the consequences of losing to the Cubs in mid-july is just less. Likewise, it'll mostly drop going forward because the chances that the Mets miss the playoffs grows less likely. Seeding just doesn't matter enough to push the needle this far out.

championship leverage index. Beating a team like the Cubs that aren't competing against you for a spot, versus beating the Braves who are fighting for multiple spots with you is HUGE.

no, he made himself mega rich by cheating and scamming, as all billionaires do. I hope Eppler or Sandy or whoever is _Actually_ calling the shots extends good sound data-driven baseball decision making and not whatever it is that Cohen does. We can just look to last year's draft, or the trade deadline, to see that nonsense.

you're pretty much gonna have to pay deGrom 40/per as well, at least. for ..5 years?

all of them. literally, you can have all 125 or whatever. Take 'em. We'll fill it with minor league free agent signings.

didn't someone suggest they should charge less for 7 inning games? well, does that mean charging double for non-split doubleheaders?

maybe they'll develop a mobile app one of these days for it at least.

because he's black and outspoken.

Mets fans made endless death threats and racist remarks to Stroman on social media pretty much non-stop (and probably elsewhere)

Edgy MD wrote: Really, any story that involves accusations of racism and death threats shouldn't really be allowed to just fade away. don't worry, Mets fans will inevitable renew the racism and death threats on Friday. I mean, the Mets beat won't cover it because it wasn't pre-written for them in a press release, but they'll be there.

=roger_that post_id=99653 time=1657749924 user_id=128] It's purely a win-win. I don't get why teams are so reluctant to make the best of a short-term injury to give some high-performing kid a taste of MLB.

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: My take was, Apple TV is what the people we want to watch baseball are watching, so to be considered to be watched, we have be there too. Also, its good for MLB to be a part of Apple, which is an exclusive and distinct brand that people love enough to pay to belong to that locked down, faux exclusive nonsense though, is very akin to MLB's current blackout 'problem'. Also Apple TV has an estimated 25million subscribers. NetFlix has ~75m (though this article says 222?). HBO has ~75m. Amazon Prime has about ~75 (and supposedly 71% of those watch video, though a different article says they have 200 million). obviously grain of salt on all of these, but as they kind of match, that makes sense. Peakcock had 9 million at the end of last year. Discovery+ (what?) has 22. Hulu.. which is tricky, is 45m. Paramount+ 56. Disney 130m (42 us/canada) https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/how-many-subscribers-netflix-disney-plus-peacock-amazon-prime-video-1234705515/https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/how-many-subscribers-netflix-disney-plus-peacock-amazon-prime-video-1234705515/ Anyway, who are the two laggards there? It's Peacock and Apple. "They have the fans baseball wants" is nonsense.

=G-Fafif post_id=99560 time=1657728729 user_id=55] I would've been curious to know why the streams have to be exclusive. It feels as if they're being shoved down the throats of the longtime fan who actually cares about team identity in order to reach those potential dabblers who might be charmed by this alternative presentation. Apple+ and Peacock away on all the devices you like — leave me my GKR. Surely the ballparks have the bandwidth to allow home, away and bonus productions (a la TBS and ESPN weeknights).

but it's not about marketing _one_ player or _star_ players. It's about all of them. And it's not precisely about baseball either. You get them as people. Even if Alonso goes 0-4, he's still standing at first base, doing baseball things. Or he's in the dugout, engaged in the game. And Alonso didn't really 'entertain' for a day or two? That's okay, we brought up this other guy, he's kind of cool. He did this funny skit on his TikTok interacting with security when he got to Citi Field, I wonder how he'll do today? There have been all sorts of memorable bit players on teams going back forever. Remember the Hunter Pence signs? That's a fun little thing. "Hey, Hunter Pence is coming to town, any one got some new signage material?" or take Atlanta's organist. Always coming up with fun walk-up songs for the visitors. Or just playing the jeopardy music while Nido ambles back to the plate after a foul ball. That's engaging.

I'm skeptical that they actually _talked_ to young baseball fans in a meaningful way, but maybe I'm just out of the loop. This, to me, reads like "how can we adapt OUR process to pitch to this crowd" rather than "how can change our process to adapt to THEIR consumption" i.e. we're still going to pitch the game to you with mostly old white men blathering on on TV, but this time they'll throw to DJs! They won't understand the DJs, and the rhetoric will be a lot of "kids these days" from them, which will turn you off, but LOOK MUSIC. The delivery method of the game needs work, and it's not a pace thing, I don't think say 22 year old kids care if they have to watch 3 tik tok videos during breaks or would magically be more interested if the game was 3 hours instead of 3:20. relatedly, putting some of that meaningful humanizing player/celebrity stuff ON the broadcast, LIVE, during commercial breaks and down time would probably be better than trying to get interesting sound bytes from them during games and such. Another angle that doesn't get explored is whether or not the 'youngs' are still fans if they're not engaging as much (or you can't measure how they engage). This talks about how to get their attention, but maybe getting their attention for 3-4 hours 162 times year just isn't attainable. There is A LOT of things out there. But get the hooks and incentives out there enough that that 20 year kid, when she graduates college and gets a paying job and money, might head out to a game as part of the mix. And then, when she's 32, potentially home with a family and a less vibrant social life, is still into baseball and gradually becomes the "old, avid fan into baseball". i.e. Is it that only the older generations commit that time and energy to baseball, or simply older _people_? I think MLB might've been on the right track with the Fan Cave stuff. Sort of how Tik Tok has a few paid influencers that live together and sorta feed off each other to make content. There's no reason MLB couldn't create similar situations where you've got 10 baseball fans making baseball content daily, feeding off each other, and rivalries and to tie it to MLB's latest grift since that's where the money is... The PointsBet friendly wager/challenge/etc when like, the Red Sox and Yankee fan in the house make a wager when the teams play each other.

psst: _aaron_ judge not Mike Judge.