General Baseball Chit-Chat Thread

[WrigleyField 22]

I don't think the players should be trying to play the court of public opinions with fans. There's no equivalent baseball group for the owners to leverage against these players and with the fans. There's only the fans running for other forms of entertainment which fucks the owners just as much as the players.

[Bluescale]

I don't think the players should be trying to play the court of public opinions with fans. There's no equivalent baseball group for the owners to leverage against these players and with the fans. There's only the fans running for other forms of entertainment which horsefeathers the owners just as much as the players.

 

All the more reason to not waste time asking for the universal DH? Go for the biggest fish then, no? Opening with a softball that makes the already more popular other side look good seems like a bad idea

 

No big changes are going to be implemented before the next CBA is negotiated. These kinds of small potatoes changes happen in the interim. Nothing valuable is exchanged right now.

[WrigleyField 22]

I don't think the players should be trying to play the court of public opinions with fans. There's no equivalent baseball group for the owners to leverage against these players and with the fans. There's only the fans running for other forms of entertainment which horsefeathers the owners just as much as the players.

 

All the more reason to not waste time asking for the universal DH? Go for the biggest fish then, no? Opening with a softball that makes the already more popular other side look good seems like a bad idea

By all means ask for big fish too. No demand it. Demand everything. Who cares if the fans end up siding with ownership? The fans can't support owners without it enriching players, especially if they do a good job negotiating. What do they get by holding back on any demand, big or small?

[PackLandVA]

So Yanks back in the mix (are they ever really out of the mix for anyone) with an offer to Machado of $220 million over 7/8 years.

 

I know fans want the big FAs signed early in free agency because it makes for a more exciting offseason. But they really don't need to be signed until spring training starts, right? And as someone else mentioned, as long as they're not signed by anyone, there's still a sliver of a possibility that Tom gets drunk and green lights Theo.

[NOLA]

 

This just seems like a really stupid idea.

[Clem Fandango]

 

This just seems like a really stupid idea.

 

Opener? Like starting the game with a reliever instead?

[weis21]

 

This just seems like a really stupid idea.

 

Opener? Like starting the game with a reliever instead?

yeah i was confused, too (nothing new there)

[NOLA]

It just seems like a way to voluntarily tax your bullpen. A manager burns a reliever, your starter has a bad outing and you’re stuck one man down trying to get through a game. Over the course of a season that could wear down a staff.

[treebird]

do you guys think the outs the opener gets don’t count towards the 27 you need to win the game?

[Clem Fandango]

I think if you have a starter going who you know won't go longer than 6 innings because that's just how they profile or they're young and you're limiting their innings, I think having an opener makes a fair amount of sense. Just seems like a lot of players are going to get all cry baby about it as Bumgarner did.

 

Because he won't start the game, he won't rack up meaningless statistics to help his career. It also means starters will be more likely to finish out games, making closers less useful and hurting their financial value.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

do you guys think the outs the opener gets don’t count towards the 27 you need to win the game?

Or that it is a thing that has not already happened?

[Bluescale]

Because he won't start the game, he won't rack up meaningless statistics to help his career. It also means starters will be more likely to finish out games, making closers less useful and hurting their financial value.

 

In one sense, it could help in the meaningless statistics area. If there's an opener, the established starter who comes into the game second won't have to to get 5 innings to get a win. Likewise, if you enter the game with a deficit, even if you stink after you come in, the loss could very well be on the other guy. Truly meaningless stats, but we know how much they matter to these guys.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

I always assumed the main benefit to starting with a reliever was that you can start with a reliever with opposite splits of the "starter" that would come in for the 2nd inning. If you have Rich Hill up in your rotation,the opposition would pack the line up with righties, and the top of the line up is where you put your best hitters, for obvious reasons. But if you bring in a right-handed reliever to start the game, you either get an inning of good match ups, or you cause a bunch of early-game, non-double-switch PH/defensive switches (unless the other team is also starting the game with a reliever) OR at the least, you force the other team into putting their best split-dependant hitters lower in the order. Am I thinking of this wrong? I think the make up of the bullpen plays a lot into how beneficial it can be.

[Derwood]

There may be some strategy to it now and then, but I certainly understand why pitchers who have contract bonuses based on games started (for example) would strongly oppose this trend.

[jersey cubs fan]

[Bertz]

EVERY. HORSEFEATHERING. TIME.

 

https://twitter.com/maxrieper/status/1095017661652783106?s=19

[squally1313]

I always assumed the main benefit to starting with a reliever was that you can start with a reliever with opposite splits of the "starter" that would come in for the 2nd inning. If you have Rich Hill up in your rotation,the opposition would pack the line up with righties, and the top of the line up is where you put your best hitters, for obvious reasons. But if you bring in a right-handed reliever to start the game, you either get an inning of good match ups, or you cause a bunch of early-game, non-double-switch PH/defensive switches (unless the other team is also starting the game with a reliever) OR at the least, you force the other team into putting their best split-dependant hitters lower in the order. Am I thinking of this wrong? I think the make up of the bullpen plays a lot into how beneficial it can be.

 

Mostly this, yeah. In an era where a team can have 3-4 bullpen pitchers more effective than the starter in a one inning stint, having one of those relievers guaranteed to face the other teams best sequence of hitters in the first is another benefit for me.

[Derwood]

 

Is he firmly committed to a late growth spurt, because the dude is short. Like, short short.

[soccer10k]

EVERY. HORSEFEATHERING. TIME.

 

https://twitter.com/maxrieper/status/1095017661652783106?s=19

 

It really is impressive how he manages to be wrong every time.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

http://66.media.tumblr.com/6d38629b87447acfee215af706b4d5bd/tumblr_nbo4ilWCtb1suzl23o1_r1_250.gif

[Bote McBoteface]

Ive spent like 10 minutes trying to find an image to post....i mean its not hard I just screwed up and got frustrated....

 

Annnnnyways, I really dig the new Marlins logo/uniforms. Maybe thats just because the old ones were so hideous, but either way, very welcomed change from me

[Brian]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

The comments are awesome:

The more I see Sale the more I think he's better suited to be a closer. His velocity would be maintained with the much shorter amount of innings,and he certainly has the mental make up for it. Would fill a huge hole in the BP.

[jersey cubs fan]

you'd be crazy to move him out of the rotation, the guy is a machinist

[Transmogrified Tiger]

you'd be crazy to move him out of the rotation, the guy is a machinist

 

I need to clarify my like is a hate like