CitiFieldPornRoom

Give me a chance to wager right now and I'd take the under on Chris Williams, 1 PA.

Then what are we even talking about here? Looks like a multi-comment multi-day discussion on something that takes 3 seconds to look up. I think you can even get rolling averages from Savant if you want. Subtracting BA from OBP gives you a quick and easy roundabout ballpark figure of a player's walk rate. It won't give you the precise number for reasons discussed, but it'll yield a pretty close number and give you a decent idea of that player's walk rate. It's easier than looking up the actual walk rate. You almost never get a player's walk rate. The stat doesn't appear on the back of baseball cards and hardly ever comes up in news article about a particular player. You commonly get the player's slash line, though. Mentally subtracting BA from OBP is way quicker than linking to a web site, typing in a player's name, waiting for everything to load, and then scanning the site for the player's walk rate. What FK does is something else. He has some unique personalized method for calculating walk rate that produces what he calls a player's walk rate. It works for him. But it's not a walk rate and it's not even an approximation because FK's method produces a whole number whereas a walk rate is a percentage and almost never higher than 20% or .2 Only FK could possibly know what a "walk rate" of 108 means. I don't know if I've ever looked at the back of a baseball card. And you're clearly reading the wrong news articles.

I heard A.J. lost some weight and joined the Girl Scouts. He's now a thin Minter.

who wants to tell them how many places include BB% in the list of stats? Is everyone here 65 years old? [TWEET]https://x.com/JSterlingCalls/status/1300580776464068608https://x.com/JSterlingCalls/status/1300580776464068608[/TWEET] Baseball Reference lists walk rates (BB%). It's in the Advanced Batting section for each player. Also, I don't get your age reference. You'd figure that, generally, younger fans would be more interested in walk rates than older fans. Then what are we even talking about here? Looks like a multi-comment multi-day discussion on something that takes 3 seconds to look up. I think you can even get rolling averages from Savant if you want.

who wants to tell them how many places include BB% in the list of stats? Is everyone here 65 years old? [TWEET]https://x.com/JSterlingCalls/status/1300580776464068608https://x.com/JSterlingCalls/status/1300580776464068608[/TWEET]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: So anyway... When is the physical? It seems that Cohen has been openly acknowledging the deal, which you typically don't see until the physical has been completed. he's got a habit of bragging and then reneging on his deals, but I don't think there's any real issue here.

Frayed Knot wrote: I don't remember the source of the article (which may have said "widely believed" rather than widely accepted) but it was from earlier this year and was in connection with Soto's pending FA-gency saying essentially that what the signing team doesn't want to experience is what happened with the Angels and Pujols where it is now widely believe/accepted within the game that Albert was then several years older than his listed age. There's no hint or allegations I know of that this is the case with Soto (which I already stated) and it would be harder to do in this era (which I also said) but let's also not pretend that it's never happened before: El Duque, Rey Ordonez, Raffy Furcal, Adrian Beltre, others. The Yanx wound up taking legal action of some young foreign players who fudged their ages but only against the ones who turned out to not be as good as the team thought they were going to be because to take no action was to admit that they mis-judged their talent. They let things slide on the good players. I was merely pointing out, in the wake of overnight news, that what one doesn't want to occur following the long-term signing of the uber-FA is either a succession of injuries which rob the player of what he once was [see Griffey, Ken Jr., the Cincinnati years] or a questionable age discrepancy [Pujols, Albert: the Disney era]. "there's no hint or allegation I know of" then bringing it up is essentially making one. And again, unfounded believes or accusations about Pujols are certainly not precedent. Soto was also born in the capital where presumably records are better kept. Of course, the incentives are there to lie, but if there's fault, it's with the Washington Nationals, not Soto. The way to go with this line of reasoning is all the extremely exploitive and sketchy stuff teams are getting up to. The Nats essentially swooped in and grabbed Soto at 16. So sure, maybe the Nationals are like "pretend you're 16 already we'll make it work" but it seems extremely unlikely especially as there were other teams also looking to sign him. Meaning he was vetted by multiple people and there was probably incentives by the other clubs to find a reason to say he was 15 and nullify the Nats pick. Speaking of sketchy international drafting and the Mets, enter Roki Sasaki. Whoever signs Sasaki is likely going to reneg on 'commitments' to other international free agents.

Frayed Knot wrote: None. But neither did anyone have anything on Pujols until it was recently reported that it's now "widely accepted" in MLB circles that he was up to three years older than his listed age. I think it's tougher to get away with that kind of thing now but so it was said during Albert's time too. The point is that when you're agreeing to pay a guy through his age 41 season it would be nice to be sure that you're not really agreeing to pay him through his age 44 season. It's not "widely accepted" with Pujols. There's no evidence, but there is the implication that he's presented documentation for things like becoming a citizen. Is it "widely accepted" that he lied to the US government too? Or that his paycheck lists his age but his official stats age is different? Or is it just that "haha DR is third world!" bias plus a healthy dose of jealousy? A lot of the initial rumors are from coaches when he was young insisting he must be older because he was so good. Even more insane to imply anything about Soto, who was born in the digital age. Seinfeld was off the air already. McGuire was the HR king. The Diamondbacks already existed.

What would likely happen if this rule is adopted, I would guess, is not much, fan-wise, other than griping about or applauding the new rule. The new rule will neither drive away old and established fans nor will it bring in new fans all on its own. Existing fans aren't going away no matter what they say. They're addicted to baseball the same way cigarette smokers are addicted to nicotine. And the owners know that better than the fans do. Even without any rule changes, the game is already drastically different than what it was 20, 25 years ago. Nothing lasts forever. If youse don't like this rule, maybe youse'd like a basketball rule where any player that takes a shot can't take another shot for two minutes. The argument that the rule is bad simply because it was never done that way before is an extremely weak argument. That Kay likes it is a pretty convincing argument that it's bad. Basketball doesn't matter. Baseball shouldn't be making rules based on how another sport operates. There's making changes to the game to adjust for changing times, ability, etc. That's the DH. Pitching got specialized, so they separated out that aspect of it. But fundamentally the game is the same. 9 batters, locked into a batting order. 9 fielders, can 'roughly' play anywhere to try to get the batters out. offense vs defense. It's a team game with individual pitcher-batter faceoff at the crux of it. Sort of like Family Feud. This is also why the shift rules are bad, but for opposite reasons. That takes away defensive strategy and freedoms and streamlines the game. That's boring. Golden AB stuff is needless complexity and messes with the team game dynamic. And not in a good way. The entire history of the modern game has dealt with complex strategies of lineup management, bullpen management, etc. You're basically taking that agency out of the defensive team's hands. It's for spectacle, not for game, and that's a bad reason to make changes to the game. If you want to have a more spectacle-based game, go for it, but why destroy the good game you already have? Do something like Rugby Tens and make a separate version of the game. Or keep it to the WBC? You've already got this tournament, that can be pretty fun. Introduce the rule there. Have it more often even, or variants of it. Make a Winter Ball league or takeover the Australian league or something, and have the variant there. Quick interjection to say: GAMBLING. This ties into the "we gotta win the 22 year old bro eyeballs" take of Kay and other idiots that don't get it. The Gambling opportunities here are not to be ignored. Especially the teeth-gnashing hot-take screamfests that will draw views/clicks/etc to/with scum like barstool when a manager does or does not use this rule the way they want. Image the odds swing if you think like Ohtani is going to hit for the backup catcher. Or you bet on the team down 2 thinking your star is going to hit for that struggling OFer you hate, but the manager doesn't do that? btw, they're re-upping Stephen A Smith at ESPN, giving him all the money from the actual talented people they fired. to sum up. It's dumb and bad, Manfred's incentives are terrible and he hates baseball. Also it's rarely going to be used for the fabled Ohtani-Trout matchup to end the game. You're more likely to deploy your slugger in a 5th inning 2 on, 2 out situation with your light-hitting catcher up. And then the opposing manager will bring in a reliever.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It can be frustrating, if you let it. Lately, whenever I search for news about the Mets, I get a flood of stories about trade proposals and predictions from "MLB insiders" who are working with little more than their imaginations. Yes!! I haven't bothered to even search for Mets articles for almost a month, now. It's all mostly, like you say, BS imaginary trade proposals, probably from teenagers typing from their mother's basements. Newsfeeds are becoming more and more like Amazon or Yelp reviews: you have no idea if the source is credible or a 12-year old. This has always been the case. It's just that 30 years ago without laypeople adding their own takes, people like Olney or Francesa sounded like they knew what they were talking about just due to scarcity.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=167361 time=1724451757 user_id=68] =CitiFieldPornRoom post_id=167357 time=1724450751 user_id=194] But bottom line is that if Manfred hadn't watered down the playoffs without complementing with expansion, the Mets wouldn't seriously be thinking they were in it.

The Mets are a mediocre team still, in general. More things have gone right than wrong, so they're slightly better than mediocre perhaps now, but on average, they're not really better than the Padres, Diamondbacks, or Braves. That doesn't mean they can't beat them, or things can't go more right for them, but they're playing with a slight handicap in talent and the front office has still been treating this year as house money. Huascar Brazobán just got optioned, lending additional credence to the idea that "going for it" wasn't really the main plan of the deadline. Senga getting hurt again really is the pivot point, imo. Having that real #1 down the stretch would've been key, but now we slide down the depth chart and the 6th best guy gets those innings. But they've got enough talent to go on a run again too, and if it's now, keeping the Diamondbacks and Padres close, that could be the difference. Alonso can pick it up, so can Alvarez. Winkler at least raises the floor, keeps them from using truly Quad-A folk. Anything can happen in a short series, but if they're the third WC they're even more overmatched. Probably comes down to if Severino and Manaea are on. But bottom line is that if Manfred hadn't watered down the playoffs without complementing with expansion, the Mets wouldn't seriously be thinking they were in it.

Nice of Olney to finally notice, 4 years in, that Lindor is awesome.

can you really not paste pictures here either? yikes. https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/david-peterson-656849?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlbhttps://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/david-peterson-656849?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb Peterson's rankings are poor. He's got a good sinker, but they hit it hard. He's been lucky in that most of the ones they hit hard are good sinkers, into the ground, but he elevates any of those even a little and he's gonna get crushed. He also has a poor K%.

You know what modern baseball is missing? flagging mid starting pitchers struggling to get through the order a third time. I can't wait until Buck Showalter sees his pitcher at 99 pitches against Juan Soto in the 5th and has him throw one in the dirt so he can pull him.

Edgy MD wrote: I don't think the evidence suggests that anybody was intent on doing any such thing. Hang tight, let me just scroll back to my texts with Max Scherzer. There are a lot of them you understand. Keeps asking me to send him some NY pizza.

They were intent on punting this season unless everything went right, and when it started to they took the same tactic at the deadline "If these moves work out they'll be good, otherwise at least we didn't waste assets". It's an uninspired philosophy unless you're a prospect hugger, and I fear they underestimated (or simply didn't care) the Diamondbacks and Padres. Their best hope may be Atlanta just flat-out fading.

The Mets are better with Pete than without. It's almost impossible to replace that type of power. The ball is pretty dead this year. Steve Cohen is 10 billion dollars richer since he bought the Mets. If winning is a serious goal, there seems to be zero reason to let Alonso get away.

I didn't even know they made papers anymore. Lot of baseball left. How you finish colors perceptions a lot. There's always the pillow contract.

The way the Mets churn relievers I'd be very worried if I ended up pitching that Cardinals game. I feel like the move is to send the SP and 1-2 AAA relievers directly to Colorado, and option/dfa 1-2 of the ones you use, maximize rest.

I was figuring that all the Mets have to do to win that Card game is for them to set the floor to win that game. But then I saw that "both sides know this" comment and realized that the Cards can just the same, set their own floor to win that game. And so we're back to scratch with this setting the floor business as each team's own floor setting should cancel out the other team's floor setting. Maybe Edgy's right all along when he suggested that the Mets should just forfeit the game. They each can submit a starting pitcher, and then each manager submits a number of runs they think they'll score to Manfred, and Manfred looks at the numbers and assigns a winner on a live ESPN prime time show.

I've come to adore the late night starts in my old age. House is quieter, less to do, I can actually sit and watch and drink and watch and drink.. Then I wake up in the morning and check the highlights for what happened after I dosed off on the couch.

I think some of the deGrom thing is gone over here, I didn't re-read it today but recall reading it.... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/sports/baseball/jacob-degrom-rangers.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/sports/baseball/jacob-degrom-rangers.html I remember that article from when it was first published. It doesn't answer any of the questions I raised in my previous post in this thread. And I don't believe a single word of anything deGrom says in that article. None of it makes any sense. It's disingenuous. I figure that deGrom's smart enough to know what he should say publicly to appear as diplomatic as possible. And if he didn't know what to say, then he was coached by his handlers and advisors. I'm not knocking deGrom personally. He was a good guy here and never made any trouble as far as I can see. And he had the right to choose to play for Texas if that was his preference. All to say, I don't believe deGrom was somehow desperate to get out of here so much that if the Rangers were to ask him to waive the no-trade he wouldn't consider it.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=164650 time=1722354217 user_id=68] =CitiFieldPornRoom post_id=164646 time=1722353196 user_id=194] =Gwreck post_id=164634 time=1722348991 user_id=56] Has full no-trade rights. If he didn't want to be here in 2023 he probably doesn't want to be here in 2024.

=Gwreck post_id=164634 time=1722348991 user_id=56] =Centerfield post_id=164611 time=1722314870 user_id=65]Trade for deGrom you cowards