Jump to content

2018 MLB Thread

Netzer

By Netzer
in Baseball

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Player
Player

If only statcast had the technology to measure the launch angle and exit velocity of yankee balls that have been hit off of your chin.

Goo Punch
Goo Punch
Hank Chinaski
Hank Chinaski

Good fucking riddance. 

bschoolprof

bschoolprof 6252

Posted
Posted

No talk of the Rizzo slide?  

Whether you like the new rule or not, it sure looks like he changed his path to initiate contact, which is a violation, but they held it as a clean slide on review. So I have no idea what a clean slide is or isn’t in this brave new world. Very NFLish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dewey

Dewey 3286

Posted
Posted
No talk of the Rizzo slide?  
Whether you like the new rule or not, it sure looks like he changed his path to initiate contact, which is a violation, but they held it as a clean slide on review. So I have no idea what a clean slide is or isn’t in this brave new world. Very NFLish. 
Probably deemed a clean slide because his intention was to breakup a double play. If that were not in play, he would have gotten the hook. Just my thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bschoolprof

bschoolprof 6252

Posted
Posted

Here's the actual rule.  To me, he violated (4) pretty clearly.  If that's not "changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder," I don't know what is.  

 

(j) Sliding to Bases on Double Play Attempts If a runner does not engage in a bona fide slide, and initiates (or attempts to make) contact with the fielder for the purpose of breaking up a double play, he should be called for interference under this Rule 6.01. A “bona fide slide” for purposes of Rule 6.01 occurs when the runner: (1) begins his slide (i.e., makes contact with the ground) before reaching the base; (2) is able and attempts to reach the base with his hand or foot; (3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; and (4) slides within reach of the base without changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. A runner who engages in a “bona fide slide” shall not be called for interference under this Rule 6.01, even in cases where the runner makes contact with the fielder as a consequence of a permissible . In addition, interference shall not be called where a runner’s contact with the fielder was caused by the fielder being positioned in (or moving into) the runner’s legal pathway to the base. Notwithstanding the above, a slide shall not be a “bona fide slide” if a runner engages in a “roll block,” or intentionally initiates (or attempts to initiate) contact with the fielder by elevating and kicking his leg above the fielder’s knee or throwing his arm or his upper body. If the umpire determines that the runner violated this Rule 6.01(j), the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter-runner out. Note, however, that if the runner has already been put out then the runner on whom the defense was attempting to make a play shall be declared out.

The wide shots are the most definitive IMO.  He clearly changes his course to come further in the 3rd base line to initiate contact to break up the double play.  I realize in the old days, this was just part of baseball.  But under the new rules, this is illegal, at least to me.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shnsajax

shnsajax 3591

Posted
Posted

So the league decided the umps and the review officials were wrong in the decision and it should have been interference. The slide looked bad, but if the officials and review officials don’t know the rule, then I can’t blame Rizzo either.

Knowing the Pirates I hope Rizzo comes up to bat looking like Robo-Biggio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
Posted (edited)

Can anyone tell me the name of the home plate umpire in Boston today, and what kind of reputation he has? I don’t recognize him, and I may be wrong, but he seems like a jerk.

He already got nailed in the leg once esrlier, and just a little while ago took a sharp foul ball right to the heart. The Sox catcher immediately jumped up and grabbed him, and actually held the umpire up as he started to collapse. The umpire ends up trying to shove the catcher off of him, and then afterward, when the catcher came back to check on him, he didn’t shake his hand, fist bump him, nod his head, nothing. He actually looked away from the catcher who was clearly still trying to make sure he was okay, speaking to his face. I only have the body language and no audio, but it really really looked like the umpire got embarrassed and took it out on the one guy trying to help him out.

Edited by Goo Punch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
Posted (edited)

Baseball is crazy. Eduardo Rodriguez was honestly dealing today, just in total command. He took a perfect game into the 5th, and his changeup was just painting the black to right handlers. Rodriguez made *one* bad pitch with that changeup and it went for a 2-run HR. One mistake, and his dominant day was undone.

Edited by Goo Punch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UTexasFight

UTexasFight 9432

Posted
Posted
For whatever reason I was kind of looking forward to watching some of the  Cardinals / Brewers game today but it is one of those fucking Facebook broadcasts.  How many games do the data stealing overlords have exclusive rights to this year?


Speaking of baseball broadcasts, some interesting food for thought:

The date is May 30, 2028, and the hits keep coming for Vladimir Guerrero Jr., the two-time Most Valuable Player for the Toronto Blue Jays, who are in an early-season dogfight with the New York Yankees. Guerrero Jr. and the Jays are in the Bronx to face New York’s 34-year-old ace Luis Severino, who is one game shy of career win No. 200.

You have decided to watch tonight’s game from Guerrero’s perspective, which has been dubbed Vladdy Cam by ESPN+, Sportsnet, Facebook and the YES Network, all of whom own the rights to show the game. The technology has existed for a couple of years now: Viewers at home can experience what it is like from Guerrero Jr.’s perspective when Severino dials up his dazzling slider, or the angle Guerrero Jr. takes at third base on a blast from Yankees star shortstop Gleyber Torres. You can also hear what Guerrero Jr. has to say during the game, especially if you speak Spanish, which is why baseball broadcasts have been on a 30-second delay for a couple of years now. (Conversations between the pitcher and catcher and coaches and pitchers are still not for air, but the influx of multi-millions from baseball’s media rightsholders and convinced the players it was worth it to allow wearable cameras and microphones.)

After years of debate, Major League Baseball finally introduced a super-tier access package in 2028 where for $1,000 annually you can stream the pregame locker room talk from your favorite team’s manager, get individual batting practice and pitching sessions, as well as access to the home broadcasters answering your questions via FaceTime prior to the game. Scribes who cover baseball call it the Truman Show plan.

As was the case in 2018, you can watch tonight’s game on various devices, from your phone, laptop, television, even in your autonomous vehicles. One thing that has changed from the old days: Brian Anderson is now the lead voice of the World Series for Fox.

Obviously, it’s impossible to know how the sport will be broadcast 10 years from now, but those in the business of producing and directing MLB games say the above scenario is very possible. The one thing that’s clear is that technology will drive many of the changes on how you consume baseball, especially via broadcast, cable or streaming outlets.

“We tried something at the All-Star Game last year where we had helmets on the first base and third base coaches,” said Matt Gangl, who directed last year’s World Series for Fox Sports and works for Fox Sports North directing Minnesota Twins and Minnesota Wild broadcasts. “There is something there but it is too cumbersome to have something on a player right now. I think at some point it will happen. A button camera would not do you much good right now with a batter because that button is going to be facing the opposite dugout and not the pitcher. Same thing with a pitcher on the mound if say he is in the stretch. It needs to be something that can pivot and be part of a person’s head.”

Phil Orlins worked on ESPN’s baseball coverage in the 1990s and then returned in 2014 to oversee all of the network’s game production, including the exclusive “Sunday Night Baseball” telecasts. He predicts three areas where viewers will see changes over the next decade. For starters, keep in mind that from a visual camera standpoint, baseball is played on one of the largest perimeters of any sport. While there are powerful lenses that get you on the faces of players, the game is generally shot from far away. Orlins predicts that the game will eventually have comfortable and wearable cameras for the players and umpires, or possibly cameras embedded on the field. “I think it will happen with the advent of 5G (wireless technology) coming,” Orlins said. “Now there are other challenges related to unions etc… but the possibility of wearables within the field whether it is on players or umpires is somewhat inevitable over time.”

Orlins also predicts that the ability to process data for broadcasts will speed up, meaning that viewers will have virtual images available to them. Thus, you would be able to have a virtual look over a batter’s shoulder between the hitter and catcher and then data in real-time that tells you how much a ball is breaking on that hitter. It’s the ability to connect the data with the visuals that has people like Orlins excited. “Whether it is completely virtual, or a mix of virtual and real-life action, you will be able to move cameras around so you have some sort of virtual reality feel,” Orlins says.

“Sunday Night Baseball” currently embeds four microphones in the dirt in front of home plate, two in front of the pitching mound, and two on the edge of the outfield grass. How much more audio we might get 10 years from now in baseball? “Technically there are relatively easy ways to accomplish hearing every player on the field and the obvious way is everyone wearing microphones,” Orlins said. “I think that is very realistic technically but the challenges are not the ability to acquire it, but the ability to allow for the clearance of the content.”

Indeed, many of the challenges heading forward will be more human than tech. How comfortable will players and owners be giving fans immersive access? No one knows how far they will go. “I think that will greatly depend on the league,” Gangl said. “Certainly some leagues would be more willing to give access and others are trying to keep things stuck as they are. There would definitely be a market for it. But keep in mind that even if you had that ability to listen into a managers’ meeting, the manager knows it is being broadcast to X amount of people and they will probably not say much.”

Some other things to consider for the future:

More MLB games being produced remotely and away from the parks: “It will be interesting to see how many productions go that route,” Gangl said. “Will it be more on the regional level or the network level? As the technology changes and the ability to send feeds from any given venue to a control room or maybe someone’s home someday, it will mean you can do more productions at a cost-effective way.”

Sports gaming information on broadcasts: Logically, the recent decision by the Supreme Court to strike down a federal law that prohibits sports gambling will impact all sports broadcasts, Could we see in-game baseball betting via the broadcast holders? “There is a lot of money to be made there,” Gangl said. “If you are in Las Vegas, you can bet on the next play. Will that incorporate into these broadcasts? I think it is about where they individual leagues want to take the sport and how much pressure they feel about getting into that environment and if they are getting that piece of the pie too.”

Conversation over a single voice: Orlins believes the tone of the game will evolve away from the single play-by-play voices — which has its origins in radio — to a multi-person, conversational broadcast. We’ve already seen that this year on ESPN’s “Sunday Night Baseball.”

Regional broadcasts: While national viewership will likely recede, look for games continue to air in local markets a decade from now on regional networks given the strength of the game locally.

Digital players: Whether it is Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Netflix, Google or some other tech player, it is inevitable that one of these groups will have a legit package of games by 2028. This year’s Facebook experiment is just a petri dish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UTexasFight

UTexasFight 9432

Posted
Posted

LOTS of stuff in here. can’t decide what is most interesting/alarming.

Sure seems like the shift may be going away sooner than later.

First I’ve really heard much about expanding to 32 and 8 four team divisions.


Rosenthal Q&A with Manfred:

In an exclusive Q&A, Commissioner Rob Manfred discusses pace of play, expansion, betting (sorry, Pete) and more

As traditional as baseball is, no sport can remain static. The game changes. Society changes. The expectations of fans and even laws change, too.

Here at The Athletic, we’ve written a lot lately about the challenges baseball faces and ways to improve the sport. Some of the ideas were radical, such as Jim Kaat’s proposal to reduce games from nine innings to seven and David Samson’s series of head-scratching, jaw-dropping suggestions. But given the number of issues in play — from pace of play to pace of action, legalized gambling to expansion, the strike zone to the composition of baseball — we decided it was time to seek actual answers.

Commissioner Rob Manfred operates with only so much power — he implements change only with the approval of his owners, and in many cases must also secure agreements with the players’ and umpires’ unions. But Manfred, as the most powerful man in the sport, certainly possesses the authority to outline positions, propose solutions and drive conversations.

I sat down with Manfred on Tuesday at Major League Baseball’s offices in New York City for a wide-ranging discussion on the game’s present and future.

Rosenthal: We’re roughly one-third of the way into the season. How would you assess the way the pace-of-play initiatives are going?

Manfred: I’m positive about how they’ve gone for two reasons. No. 1, the threshold matter on any rule change is, “Has it been disruptive on the field?” I don’t think either the (changes in) innings breaks or the mound-visit rule has been disruptive on the field. People adjusted. We’ve had some other rules that had a longer period of adjustment. These did not. That’s a positive.

And we reversed the trend (on time of game). We had been going up every year. We’re down right around three hours right now (the average time of a nine-inning game through Tuesday night was three hours, 25 seconds; at the same point last year it was 3:04:06 and at the end of the season it was 3:05:11). I see that as a positive. There is no silver bullet on this that is going to take you to 2:40, not that I’m suggesting that is my goal. This is ongoing maintenance, making sure it doesn’t go in the wrong direction and trying to move it back in the right direction.

Rosenthal: Do you still believe a pitch clock is necessary?

Manfred: I think the clock probably would be a positive on pace of game. I am thinking about what our strategy should be for the next off-season. I think some of the things we have seen this year suggest that maybe we should be thinking a little broader than just pace.

Rosenthal: This is the next question — pace of action. This is an ongoing issue. The trend is clear that there are fewer balls in play, and it’s not just a one-year trend. How concerned are you that for some fans — maybe not all — the game is simply becoming too dull?

Manfred: I don’t believe the game is dull. I just absolutely will not buy into the characterization of our game as dull. I do believe this: There is a growing recognition that analytics have produced certain trends in the game that we may need to be more pro-active about reversing.

There are owners that feel that way. There are fans that feel that way. To me, those are really important indicators of what we ought to be thinking about.

Rosenthal: Early in your tenure, you said you were open to banning shifts. There was immediate blowback. But, as you just mentioned, analytics have produced certain trends. Some people believe the increase in shifts led to the launch-angle revolution, which led to pitchers working more up in the zone, which led to more strikeouts. So, is it time to give more serious consideration to the banning of shifts?

Manfred: I’m not prepared to get into individual rule changes at this point. This is as far as I will go: I do think there is sentiment in the game for the idea that we need to be more aggressive about managing the trends that have been introduced in the game, at least partly based on analytics. And when I say more aggressive, I mean beyond just pace issues.

Rosenthal: What about mid-inning pitching changes? I don’t know if they fall into this category or not.

Manfred: Same category. I’m just not ready to go there.

Rosenthal: What other ideas are you considering to increase the rate of action?

Manfred: I genuinely don’t mean to be uncooperative on this, but we’re at a point in the process where we’re kind of shifting our thinking.

Let me go back. We thought focusing on pace was the low-hanging, least controversial set of changes. We’re in the process as a result of two things — No. 1, apparently we’re going to have resistance (from the players’ union) even on pace changes and No. 2, there is a growing recognition that maybe we need to go beyond pace changes. You put those two things together, and we’re just beginning the process of saying, ‘OK, if we’re going to get off pace and get into a little different vein, what are we thinking about?’ I’m just not ready to talk about that publicly.

Rosenthal: Given that the reduction of balls in play has played out over several years, really almost a decade, at what point does the situation become urgent?

Manfred: I would not use the word “urgent.” I think it’s at a point in time where we need to be a little more aggressive. It’s not like we didn’t see what was happening. The hope always is the game is going to self-correct. That’s the natural response to these sorts of changes.

At the beginning, when the shifts started and started to pick up, people said, “They’re going to learn to hit the other way. They’re going to bunt.” We just haven’t seen those changes. It evolved a different way. Because we have not seen the natural correction, because the trends seem to be persistent, I think we’re at the point in time that we do need to think about and really analyze hard some potential changes.

Rosenthal: Competitive balance is always a hot topic. Five teams are on pace to lose 100-games and a sixth is close to that pace. The record for a single season is four. How much does this concern you? I know it’s an early stage of the season. This can correct. But those teams also might get worse.

Manfred: Focusing on a third of a season given what our record on competitive balance has been over the last decade and a half doesn’t seem wise to me. We’ve had 12 different winners in 17 years. Twenty-seven of 30 teams have made it to the playoffs over the last decade even though we have the most selective playoff system in professional sports.

I think our record on competitive balance is pretty good. You look at the divisions right now. If you had read (in the) preseason, you would think we were going to have four or five teams that were knighted. It was all going to be over by May 1. That’s just not what we’re seeing.

Do I like teams losing 100 games? We’ve never liked teams losing 100 games. Obviously that’s not great for the fans in those markets. It does concern us. But frankly, the increase from four to five (100-loss teams) is hardly seismic.

Rosenthal: The strike zone is a never-ending source of discussion . . .

Manfred: I will tell you something about the strike zone. The strike zone has to be in the set of issues you talk about whenever you talk about the game. The difficulty with the strike zone is that when you talk to really good baseball people, you get vastly different predictions as to what you’re going to get if you make a change. That always makes me nervous.

If you get people we respect, people who have been around the game a long time, who played the game, and they at least directionally agree, “If you do X, you’re going to get Y,” can you turn out to be wrong? Yeah, you can. But what really makes you nervous is when people say, “We’re going to do X,” and some people say, “You’re going to get A,” and others say, “You’re going to get B,” and others say, “You’re going to get Z.” That really makes me nervous.

Rosenthal: So it’s hard to change . . .

Manfred: I wouldn’t say it that way. I think with the technology we have, we’ve shown that you can adjust the strike zone through our evaluation system. The umpires are in fact really skilled. When you motivate them to move in a particular direction, they do. What concerns me more is the unpredictability of the outcome of a particular change.

Rosenthal: Given that, can you foresee a time when the zone is called by technology and not by umpires?

Manfred: Let me say it in two different pieces. I think we are much closer than we were a year ago to having the technological capability to actually call the strike zone. We have worked very hard on PITCHf/x (a pitch-tracking system). Hats off to (MLB Executive Vice-President of Strategy, Technology and Innovation) Chris Marinak and (Chief Technology Officer) Jason Gaedtke.

The accuracy is way up — way better than what it was a year ago. The technology continues to move . . . and it actually moved a little faster than I might have thought.

There remains a fundamental question the owners are going to have to address. When you take away the home plate umpire’s control over the strike zone, you take away a principal piece of his authority in terms of managing the whole game. You really need to think carefully about whether you want to make that change.

Rosenthal: I imagine the umpires would be violently opposed…

Manfred: It’s interesting. Fifteen years ago, the umpires were violently opposed to instant replay. They came around and actually wanted it. Who knows? We haven’t had a lot of conversations with them on this topic, but I do think there is a serious management-of-the-game issue you’d have to think about with respect to that change.

Rosenthal: Let’s talk about the baseball itself, getting to the report from last week (a committee of 10 experts, assembled by Manfred, attributed the increase in home runs, at least in part, to “a change in the aerodynamic properties” of the ball, citing, a “reduced drag for given launch conditions.”)

For years, baseball said there was no change in the ball. It turns out there was a change — inadvertently, it seems, and not in the way anyone suspected. Do you plan to address that in any way?

Manfred: The report says something happened that reduced drag. Whatever it was, there was no purposeful or known alteration of the baseball. (People wanted to test) whether the specifications were too wide (in range) or not. The report says they’re within a much narrower range than the actual specifications.

They don’t know what the drag change is. Maybe it’s global warming, who knows? (The committee determined weather is not a factor). We’re going to continue to test and hopefully we will get to the bottom of that.

Rosenthal: Why is there even drag? It just seems to be an odd thing.

Manfred: (The committee) did put forward two hypotheses. You can understand over time, with improved manufacturing capabilities, the centering of the pill (the round, cushioned cork center) might improve. No one would have noticed that. No one ever tested the centering of the pill. No one ever tested drag before we did, right?

And we did have the mud change. We have a different person (harvesting) it. It’s coming from the same place (the New Jersey side of the Delaware River). One of the things they’ve noticed, we’ve noticed, is that baseballs look different. It is a human process by which a guy puts mud on a baseball.

(The committee recommended a standardized application of mud on balls, which is used by clubhouse attendants to make balls less slippery; the texture of the surface affects drag).

Rosenthal: What about the tackier (stickier) ball you’ve tested? (The goal of such a ball would be to end pitchers’ rule-bending use of pine tar, sunscreen, rosin and other foreign substances).

Manfred: Over the long haul, I do think the idea of a baseball that is tackier and eliminates any human variation — whether it’s the way it’s mudded, the use of tar, whatever — would be a positive for the game. We haven’t gotten there in terms of the rest of the performance characteristics of the baseball.

Rosenthal: Let’s talk about the schedule. There are people on all sides who suggest that maybe it would be better to shorten it from 162 games. And yet, because of the financial implications, it almost seems like a non-starter. But might there be ways for players to share the burden of this without reducing their pay?

Manfred: There is always a deal to be made. So in the right package, do the financial issues get resolved? Yes and maybe no is how I would answer that question.

Yes in the sense of the aggregate amount of dollars involved. It would be possible in some package to make that (shortfall) up. The thornier issue is that it cuts very unevenly across the clubs. You’re going to go to 154 probably, that would be the number that makes the most sense. Some clubs tell you it doesn’t matter that much. Other clubs tell you it’s a fortune. That unevenness is always a complicating factor.

Rosenthal: How do you view legalized sports gambling for baseball. Is it an opportunity? Is it a threat? Is it both?

Manfred: It’s a reality. I want to be really clear about this. I think there’s a misconception. We were not out there saying, “Let’s have legalized sports betting.” We watched the progress of the litigation that we brought (along with the three other major professional leagues and NCAA) to prevent sports betting and came to the realization there was an “L” out there.

Once we came to the realization that there was a loss possible, we talked to people in other countries where sports betting had become legal. The advice we got consistently was, “If it’s coming, you need to protect yourself.” That answers the threat question.

I do believe we will — of necessity — have to be more vigilant about monitoring integrity issues. That includes weighing in with regulators as to what kind of bets ought to happen, monitoring gambling activity. This can be a threat to our product. People say, “Well, it happens in Las Vegas.” A relatively small sports book in Las Vegas is something very different than sports betting nationwide, which is probably what you’re looking at, No. 1.

No. 2, people who say you can leave it to state regulators — no thank you. Nice offer, but we will take care of our own integrity.

Do we recognize that sports betting can be a source of fan engagement? Yes, we do. In that sense, it is an opportunity. Obviously, we want people engaged with our sport. So, it’s both.

Rosenthal: I’ve always felt one of the reasons baseball is so popular is that people enjoy it in any number of ways — through fantasy, being a fan of a team, etc. Well, here’s another way.

Manfred: I agree with that. I’m not going to deny there’s upside. That doesn’t mean, for example, we ought to allow whoever the oddsmaker is in a particular state to ride free on our intellectual property and impose on us the burden of additional integrity monitoring just because there might be some upside for us. We’re perfectly fine where we are.

Rosenthal: Will legalized gambling change the outlook on baseball’s relationship with Pete Rose?

Manfred: No matter what happens in terms of legalization, there will always be a rule that prohibits betting on baseball. That’s the bedrock of our integrity. That’s the rule Pete Rose violated. Whether (gambling) is legal or illegal, the rule is still going to be there. First of all, it was illegal when he did it. But more importantly, we’re always going to have that rule applicable to on-field personnel. It doesn’t change my thinking at all.

Rosenthal: On expansion, you said recently you would like to get to 32 teams, that there are benefits to scheduling and the playoff format. Beyond eight four-team divisions, what do you have in mind in terms of structure?

Manfred: The toughest thing for us in the playoffs is always Anaheim against Boston (in a hypothetical matchup) on those four-game days in the Division Series. You’re either playing too early for the people in Anaheim or too late for the people in Boston.

Realignment has always been a difficult issue in baseball. You can make an argument that the demise of at least one commissioner (Fay Vincent in 1992) began with the issue of realignment. The reality of today’s media environment is that if you went to 32 teams and you could get to a more geographically-based alignment, you could help your playoff format, you could reduce your travel, you could more easily discuss things like a split season.

I’m not saying I’m in favor of any of those. I just think it creates options that the current three-fives (three divisions of five teams in each league) essentially make unavailable to you as a result of the inflexibility of the schedule.

Rosenthal: Where are you on a split season?

Manfred: I’ve never been a huge split-season fan. I think there is something pure about the one, long, grind-it-out (aspect). I’m sort of a purist. I know someone will say, “Oh my God, he characterized himself as a purist for the first time ever.” But I’m sort of a one-season thinker.

Rosenthal: Would a balanced schedule be more likely with expansion?

Manfred: Yeah, I think you probably could (do that). Balanced, unbalanced, it’s one of those issues like the DH. People are always going to debate it. The argument now is, “Win within your division. Winning the division is a big deal. You’ve got to play more games in the division.” That’s a good argument. I think it makes sense. The question is, how much?

Rosenthal: How would the playoffs work? Do you have an idea?

Manfred: We’ve just begun talking about a lot of formats. I want to be clear about expansion. We’re fortunate. I would not have raised the issue of expansion. We’ve made clear we have two big issues — Tampa Bay and Oakland — that need to be resolved before we think about it. But the fact of the matter is, we’re blessed. We’ve got cities out there that want to have Major League Baseball. And I think Major League Baseball has to show some receptivity to that because down the road, we are interested in it.

Rosenthal: That includes international cities?

Manfred: Some, yes.

Rosenthal: Last thing. In your mind, how healthy is the game right now, and how much healthier could it be if you did certain things?

Manfred: I think the game is very healthy. We’ve had two great postseasons in a row. It has increased the buzz around our game dramatically. Our involvement in the technology space has really helped people’s perception of the game. Financially, we’ve been a tremendous success. Our revenues continue to grow. And putting aside our weather-related issues at the beginning of this season, (average major league attendance through 62 dates is down from 29,172 to 27,334, a decline of 6.7 percent, according to STATS LLC) 114 million people go to watch baseball live, between us and the minor leagues. That’s the sign of a really, really healthy sport.

Having said that, no institution — no matter how great it is, and I do think our entertainment product is great — can sit still in today’s world. You have to think about ways to continue to grow the ties you have to our existing fans, which really matter to us, and how you make sure the game gets passed on to the next generation with the same kind of passion it has for yours and mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scraps

Scraps 13561

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Goo Punch said:

Paul Goldschmidt went yard in Arizona today. Anybody want to venture a guess at where his season tally for HRs at Chase Field stands?

1 because I have his bitch ass on my fantasy team and he has been a waste of space 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54220

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, spystud13 said:

The bullpens are even funnier than usual in this one. 

https://www.mlb.com/video/benches-clear-in-pittsburgh/c-2100917783

 

 

1.  I hope Tyler Glasnow ran track in HS.  He looks like he could kill in the 200m or 400m possibly.

2.  Josh Harrison taking 2nd base while everyone is arguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 5/23/2018 at 1:28 PM, Goo Punch said:

Thank you. And wow, he’s even hotter than I thought! Based on his hitting from April 21 - today, Jose Ramirez would hit the following in a 162 game season:

 

139 runs

232 hits

81 doubles

58 HR

151 RBI

81 K’s

24 SB

.360/.441/.757/1.198

 

Since this post: 7 GP, 9/27, 7 BB, 10 R, 4 HR, 9 RBI, slashing .300/.417/.700/1.117.

 

I put on my Greg Amsinger hat and I ask you: is Jose Ramirez the best hitter in baseball?

Edited by Goo Punch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54220

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

Since this post: 7 GP, 9/27, 7 BB, 10 R, 4 HR, 9 RBI, slashing .300/.417/.700/1.117.

 

I put on my Greg Amsinger hat and I ask you: is Jose Ramirez the best hitter in baseball?

That's great, but that's what Mookie has done since opening day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54220

Posted
Posted

theathletic.com:

Quote

Dan Otero stood in the visitors dugout at Wrigley Field and swung his arms back and forth. He has tried to mimic José Ramírez’s signature strut. After three or four paces, he gasps for air.

That isn’t part of the routine.

Lift your shoulders. Swing your arms like pendulums. Tilt your head back. Waddle from side to side, slightly shifting your weight with each exaggerated step.

“It burns a lot of calories,” Otero told The Athletic. “Try to do it. It’s freaking hard work. Gets the obliques going.”

Ramírez strutted around the Indians’ clubhouse when he served as a late-game havoc generator during the Indians’ frenetic 2013 wild-card chase. He maintained that stride when he kept the seat warm at shortstop for Francisco Lindor in 2015, even though his bat never thawed.

What might appear to be an act of machismo — an arrogant, attention-seeking front — isn’t that, even as Ramírez has blossomed into an All-Star and an MVP finalist. When he returns to his hometown of Baní in the Dominican Republic, children in the rural town waddle behind him like wide-eyed ducklings.

“He does it when walking on the side of the street,” Otero said. “He’s not doing it to pump out his chest. It’s just the way he walks.”

The strut has remained steady. His performance, however, has evolved. He’s no longer the little guy who looked lost with lumber in his hand. Now, he’s diminutive, but daunting. He’s imposing, which once seemed implausible.

Turns out, the short, stocky spark plug can hit. And now he hits for power. Has the league finally taken notice? No position player has accumulated more WAR in the past calendar year.

Really, though, no one could have anticipated this. The kid who dropped out of middle school and ultimately signed with the Indians for a measly $50,000? He didn’t have a choice but to dream about this degree of proficiency. There was no alternative, no backup plan.

Ramírez was the runt of the litter, the smallest, youngest player at every level. And while he doesn’t stand shoulder to shoulder with Aaron Judge and he doesn’t tower over the plate as opposing pitchers peer in for the sign, he strikes as much fear into them as any other specimen who braves the batter’s box.

Those in the Indians’ front office don’t pretend to have projected this. But it’s why they stress never to place ceilings on young players. Ramírez has stampeded past every expectation, and the Indians have him secured to the sort of bargain rate you’d find at a garage sale. Per Spotrac, there are 365 big-leaguers with a higher base salary than Ramírez, who will earn just shy of $3 million this season. He doesn’t care; he was ready to sign any offer last spring.

The Indians control the third baseman through the 2023 campaign, so they’ll continue to sit back, prop up their feet and watch the dynamo antagonize opposing pitchers. They might not have envisioned this, but they’ll certainly take it. After all, when Ramírez blitzed through stints in the Dominican Summer League and at Class A Lake County, evaluators in the front office mostly reported that Ramírez “was helping the team win.”

Sounds like a solid, unspectacular player. Now, he’s a franchise cornerstone.

“That’s how they really articulated his value,” Indians assistant GM Carter Hawkins said. “They weren’t articulating it as ‘Future All-Star and MVP candidate’ by any means. I don’t think anybody had any clue that he was going to be the type of player that he is. That’s the beauty of it all.”

GettyImages-954410788-1024x683.jpg
 
Teammates have had plenty of reasons to high-five José Ramírez. (Jason Miller/Getty Images)

A catcher from another team recently griped about Ramírez to Cody Allen.

That team tried to pitch Ramírez up and in. He yanked the ball down the left-field line. They tried to pitch him low and away, off the plate. He slapped the ball the other way. Lefty on the mound. Righty on the mound. Inside corner. Outside corner. High. Low. Sunny. Cloudy. Fastball. Breaking ball. It doesn’t seem to matter.

“He was saying to me, ‘We have no idea what to do,’” Allen said.

How do you pitch to the guy?

“I would just pitch to my strengths and just try to make good, quality pitches and hope he gets himself out,” Allen said.

Trevor Bauer has ribbed Ramírez about wanting to strike him out one day, but even Bauer detailed the challenges he would encounter.

“He doesn’t strike out.”

Ramírez has more three-hit games this season (seven) than multi-strikeout games (four).

Walk rate: 13.0 percent
Strikeout rate: 10.0 percent

“He hits homers.”

Only Mike Trout, J.D. Martinez and Bryce Harper (18 apiece) have slugged more homers this season than Ramírez, whose 17 match his total at the All-Star break last year. He’s on pace to join Jim Thome and Albert Belle as the only players in team history to slug 50 homers in a season.

“He hits for average.”

Ramírez’s batting average the past three seasons: .312, .318, .300.

“He hits doubles.”

Ramírez’s 56 doubles last season were the most by an Indians hitter in 91 years.

“He runs.”

Ramírez has rated as an above-average baserunner every season but last year, when he rated as league average. His frequently airborne helmet — the thing went flying 57 times during the 2016 regular season — also illustrates his aggressive approach on the bases.

“He steals.”

Ramírez swiped 39 bags over the past two years. He already has seven to his credit this season.

“He plays great defense.”

Ramírez has totaled six defensive runs saved this season, the third-most of any big-league third baseman.

He ranks third in baseball with 3.9 fWAR (behind Trout and Mookie Betts).

Screen-Shot-2018-05-30-at-7.00.32-PM.png
 
It seems like the best spot to pitch Ramírez is no spot at all.

“He’s one of the better hitters in the game,” Terry Francona said. “You look at him and I don’t know if you necessarily think you’re going to see a guy who can drive the ball out of the ballpark like that. And now, as he’s accumulating some experience, he knows the pitchers, he knows how to attack them, it makes him even better.”

There were always indications that Ramírez could hit — he boasted a .304 average in the minors, with nearly as many walks as strikeouts — but this level of output has conquered even the loftiest of expectations. And that’s why the Indians shy away from making definitive statements about a prospect’s trajectory.

Lindor was a glove-first guy when he first toted his suitcase into the visitors clubhouse at Comerica Park in June 2015. That narrative has evolved in three short years.

A few weeks ago, Lindor pounded his chest with his right fist and then flashed four fingers to Michael Brantley, who stood near home plate.

“I’m protecting you today,” Lindor told his teammate.

An hour and a half before first pitch, Lindor had no idea he was batting fourth. In all but one game this season, he had resided in the leadoff spot. So when The Athletic asked him about his shift to the cleanup spot, Lindor did a double take and requested to see a picture of the lineup.

He shouted the news to Ramírez and Erik González as they walked into the dugout in Detroit. Lindor raised his bat high above his head and exaggerated a leg kick that buried his left knee in his chin.

“I’m hitting fourth!” he yelled to assistant athletic trainer Jeff Desjardins.

Three years ago, upon the top prospect’s promotion, Francona texted Lindor: “Get up here, Frankie.” Lindor walked into the visitors clubhouse in Detroit the next morning, a sure-handed shortstop with slap-hitting singles potential embarking on his first tour of the majors. Right on cue, he singled and slipped while scurrying around first base. Lindor laughed and pointed at Miguel Cabrera, assigning blame for his stumble. Little did anyone know Lindor would wind up slugging somewhat like Cabrera, the Tigers’ longtime middle-of-the-order behemoth.

Ramírez has traveled a similar path, though his was devoid of the hype that surrounded Lindor, once the eighth overall selection in the draft. For years, Ramírez couldn’t escape the latter portion of Francona’s lineup. Now, it’s difficult to picture his name slotted anywhere but the No. 3 spot in the order.

A few of Mike Clevinger’s offseason workout buddies asked the Tribe pitcher how Ramírez could have possibly led the majors with 91 extra-base hits last season.

“I’ve seen him. I’ve played against him,” one guy said to Clevinger. “How is this even possible?”

Clevinger told him to watch Ramírez’s swing in slow motion to locate the answer.

“It’s the most connected swing,” Clevinger said. “His hips and shoulder separation are the best in the game. He’s a natural. He’s gifted with a swing like that. It’s compact. The barrel probably stays in the zone longer than anybody in the game, too.

“If you actually look at it, you understand why. And then looking at his size and the way he carries himself, it’s awesome.”

 
José Ramírez ranks near the top of the big-league home run leaderboard. (Elsa Garrison/GeImages)

Ramírez keeps an open door on the road and during spring training. If anyone wants to challenge him to a game of “MLB The Show,” he’s happy to oblige … and destroy.

Ramírez’s agent, Rafa Nieves, says his client has never lost. He’ll defeat minor leaguers who visit his house in Goodyear, Arizona, in the spring. He’ll vanquish his teammates in his hotel room during road trips. In the home clubhouse at Progressive Field, Ramírez routinely outpaces opponents on the team’s “Mario Kart” arcade setup.

“He is an ultra-competitor,” Allen said.

Lindor receives plenty of attention for his never-fading smile and his bubbly charisma. Ramírez has plenty of personality, too, even though his is often accompanied by a scowl and a wad of tobacco tucked inside his lower lip.

He summoned reporters to his locker after the game Tuesday to clear the air about the falsified rumor that surfaced about a possible PED-related suspension. He laughed throughout the interview.

“I don’t think a whole lot bothers him,” Francona said.

After the Indians’ 10-1 win at Wrigley Field earlier this month, a reporter asked Ramírez what type of pitch he swatted beyond the ivy for a three-run blast. Ramírez scanned the small group huddled around his locker before he stared at the TV camera pointed in his direction.

“Home run pitch.”

“He knows the game,” Otero said. “He doesn’t miss much. I don’t think he gets enough credit for his baseball IQ. It’s off the charts.”

That’s the sort of intangible that can elevate a decent player into an elite one.

“We have enough humility to know we can’t predict the future,” said Chris Antonetti, the Indians’ president of baseball operations. “Ultimately, players can go out and change what path they might be on. I’m not sure anyone sat here, looking at José in the minor leagues and said, ‘Hey, he’s going to (vie for) the major-league lead in home runs.’ But we wouldn’t rule it out. That’s not smart to do either. Our job is to try to provide the best environment, tools, resources, culture, coaching for guys to be the best they can be.”

When the Indians and Padres exchanged names during trade talks in 2010, the Indians couldn’t find Corey Kluber’s name on any prospect watch lists. Now, the two-time Cy Young winner ranks as one of the most accomplished pitchers in franchise history.

The most intriguing aspect of Ramírez’s growth is that he doesn’t turn 26 until September. There could still be some untapped potential within his stumpy frame.

Just two years ago, he served as the club’s starting left fielder, an assignment prompted by Brantley’s shoulder setbacks. The Indians weren’t sure what to expect; Ramírez had initially been tabbed to replace Mike Aviles as the club’s utility man.

“I remember talking to José,” Otero said. “I was like, ‘Where do you want to play?’ He’s like, ‘I just want to hit.’ That’s all he cares about. He just wanted to put a bat in his hands.”

Well, this is the same kid who would play baseball with anything he could find, be it a ball and a bat or a broomstick and a bottle cap. Now, it seems as though he could launch a marble into the outfield seats using a puny twig.

“He started out as the utility guy that we all loved for his swagger and his confidence,” Francona said. “He got sent down a couple times and now he’s genuinely one of the better players in the game. It’s pretty cool. It’s pretty fun to watch.”

That applies for Ramírez’s teammates as well. They’ve watched him bloom into an imposing figure at the plate. Now, the rest of the league is learning about the sport’s best-kept secret.

“Now the power is really starting to come,” Otero said, “and it’s like, ‘Whoa! This guy is special.’ ”

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dewey

Dewey 3286

Posted
Posted

MLB/Facebook partnership seems to be a real.winner, at least in MLBs pockets. Yesterday's game between the brewers and cardinals got 64000 viewers. A midweek game between the cards and anyone else usually gets 150000 viewers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19190

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dewey said:

MLB/Facebook partnership seems to be a real.winner, at least in MLBs pockets. Yesterday's game between the brewers and cardinals got 64000 viewers. A midweek game between the cards and anyone else usually gets 150000 viewers.
 

The sooner they kill off that BS the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19190

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, spystud13 said:

This is not strong. 

 

Tigers are putting an ass whipping on the halos and Victor Reyes is a homer away from the cycle.  He just led off the 8th with a single so he won’t get another AB unless Detroit goes full Astros bullpen meltdown in the top of the 9th.

Edited by Fudge Nuggets
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54220

Posted
Posted

I am a JoePos fan because I think he's a GREAT writer.  But it's also because he's my age, and he saw what I saw, and if you ask me who the greatest baseball player I've ever seen was, I'll ask if you mean for a career or a short period of time.  Career -- (not in any order) Bench, Schmidt, Morgan, Bonds, Clemens, Maddux, Trout, Pujols, RJ, etc.   Just a short period of time -- Pedro 1999-2001 might be the best ever, early Gooden, but I'd also mention this guy, because he was unbelievable:

Quote

This is mostly about one year of baseball. It's not a calendar year, because Eric Davis did not have a calendar-year kind of career. He had a baseball life that was splintered into pieces, a career stopped and started by injuries small and large, by colon cancer and movement from team to team, a career swirl of impossible brilliance mixed with swings and misses.

But for one year, when Davis was young, he played a sort of surreal baseball. The statistics look imaginary -- cannot wait to show them to you. The reality was even better than the statistics.

Baseball has its share of folk heroes, of players who for too short a time exploded our minds. Bo Jackson was such a player; he only had one season of 500 at-bats, but he did so many things -- broke a bat over head, ran up a wall, hit a homer off Nolan Ryan that seemed it would never land and threw Harold Reynolds out an impossible throw from the wall -- that remain lodged in memory.

Mark Fidrych was such a player. Joe Charboneau was such a player. Dwight Gooden. Hideo Nomo. You can think of others.

Think of Eric Davis as the greatest folk hero of them all.

Davis was a basketball player first. He averaged 29 points and 10 assists a game at Fremont High School in Los Angeles, and he was recruited by just about every school in the Pac-10. Davis had no doubt that he would play in the NBA. He probably would have played in the NBA. But then baseball scouts started coming out to watch Davis play, and he barely even knew how to play baseball. That stopped him cold.

"I chose baseball because I would have to wait for four years before I could make the pros," Davis told reporters. "I didn't want to go to school that long."

Ah, the 1980s. This was years before the one-and-done college basketball player. If one-and-done had been a thing back then, Davis probably would never have played baseball.

As it was, with all those scouts already interested. Davis decided to put some energy into baseball his senior year. He hit either .531 or .635 (accounts differ) and stole 50 bases. Davis' great friend and rival from crosstown Crenshaw High School, Darryl Strawberry, was the first overall pick in the 1980 Draft. The Reds took Davis in the eighth round.

Cincinnati did not know quite what to make of Davis. Was he a leadoff hitter? His speed said he was. Scouts see fast players all the time, but Davis was a different kind of fast -- world-class fast. He ran so easily that when scouts timed him running down the line, they did comical double-takes as they looked at their stopwatches. Davis stole 40 bases in 62 games in his first full year of professional baseball, and he barely knew how to take a lead.

But maybe Davis was a cleanup hitter. He had that kind of massive power. When Davis made it to the big leagues in 1984, he was just 22 years old, raw as he could be, a strikeout machine. But on sheer talent and strength, he hit five home runs in a four-game stretch in September.

"Wait 'til he learns how to play this game," then-Cincinnati manager Pete Rose said.

Yes, just wait. It did take a little while longer than Rose or Davis expected. His 1985 was a wash -- he was an extraordinary athlete, probably one of the 10 best to ever play Major League Baseball, but as he would say years later, he just wasn't a natural hitter. Davis chased a lot of bad pitches. He often fouled off the meatball pitches. Davis couldn't think with the pitcher, couldn't adjust to the curve. One of the sad truths about baseball is that some great athletes never could learn how to hit.

Davis refused to be one of those players. He never got the credit for how hard he worked in those years -- often with Rose -- to learn the subtleties of hitting. On June 10, 1986, Davis was hitting .198, and there were questions if he would ever get it.

The next 162 games are … well, just wait until you see the numbers.

Baseball fans of the 1980s will remember this … this was a time when players who combined great power with great speed were the holy grail. This is alway true, probably, but it was especially true in the '80s, and the measuring stick was the 30-30 season.

Ah, the old 30-homer, 30-stolen-base season. Remember? Up to 1987, only six players had ever done it. An underrated player of the '20s named Ken Williams was the only player to do it before '50. Willie Mays did it in back-to-back years in '56-57. Henry Aaron did it quietly in '63. Tommy Harper did it in '70 for the Brewers; that was a huge surprise, as Harper was a small guy who never hit even 20 homers every other year. Dale Murphy did it in '83.

And then there was Bobby Bonds. It's easy to forget that Bonds was a freak of nature. He had five 30-30 seasons in the 1970s for five teams (he split one of the seasons between the Rangers and the White Sox). For San Francisco, Bonds came within a homer of a 40-40 season in '73, 24 years before his son did it.

So up to June 11, 1986, Bonds was the the most perfect version of the power-speed guy anyone could imagine.

Davis changed everything. In 1987, four players, including Davis and Strawberry (along with Joe Carter and Howard Johnson), had 30-30 seasons. Jose Canseco did it the next year. Then came Barry Bonds and Ron Gant.

Back to Davis. On June 13, he stole a base as a pinch-runner. The next day, Davis singled as a pinch-hitter. Rose started him on June 15, and he hit a three-run homer. The next day, Davis started again and stole a base. The day after that, he stole two bases. The next day, Davis homered again.

Looking back, it's not easy to tell when people began to realize that Davis was, as the 1980s expression goes, tilting the pinball machine. Maybe it was June 23 when he stole three bases. Maybe it was July 4, when Davis homered and stole a base for the second time in a week. Maybe it was July 10, when he hit what Rose would call the longest opposite-field home run he ever saw in Montreal.

Then maybe it wasn't until that game in San Francisco on Sept. 10. Nobody who was there will ever forget it. Not many were there. The official count was 5,571 in Candlestick Park, but there probably weren't even that many there. These were two middling teams, the Reds and the Giants, both hovering around .500, both on the fringe of being contenders. Nobody really cared.

Davis was hitting cleanup, and he came up with a man on in the first inning against Giants starter Vida Blue. He homered. In the bottom of the inning, Davis ran to the wall, leaped and stole a home run from San Francisco's Rick Lancellotti.

Davis came up again in the third, and he homered again. In the fifth, he singled, stole second and came around to score. In the seventh, Davis reached on an error (his speed spooked defenders) and came around to score. In the eighth, he hit a monstrous opposite-field home run off Mark Davis.

That's a 4-for-5 night with three homers, five runs, four RBIs, a stolen base and a stolen homer.

Rose then took Davis out of the game, taking away his chances to hit four homers. Rose admitted that he didn't think his spot in the lineup would come up again (it did in the ninth with the bases loaded). Davis shrugged. There would be other opportunities.

"I was fortunate to see great players like Mays and Aaron, but I've said this before -- he's the only guy in the league who can hit fourth and lead the league in stolen bases," Rose said.

"He reminds me of Hank Aaron," Giants manager Roger Craig said, "except that he can run better than Aaron."

"I don't remind myself of anybody," Davis said.

Davis, absurdly, was even better in 1987. On Opening Day, he went 3-for-3 with two walks, a homer and two stolen bases. Ten games into the season, Davis was hitting .526 with four homers and eight stolen bases. On May 1, he hit two home runs, including a grand slam. Two days later, Davis hit three more runs -- one to left, one to center and one to right. One of those was a grand slam, too. He also stole a base.

"Nothing surprises me anymore," Rose said. "He can be as good as he wants to be."

Later in the month, Davis hit his third grand slam, becoming the first to hit three in one month.

OK, we've waited long enough. Do you want to see the 162-game numbers for Davis, starting June 11, 1986 and ending July 4, 1987? Get ready for it, because it will not disappoint:

Davis played in 162 games, starting 152. He got 659 plate appearances. It is basically a full year.

Over that stretch, Davis hit .308/.406/.622 with 47 homers, 149 runs, 123 RBIs and 98 stolen bases (getting caught just 12 times).

In the equivalent of one year of baseball, Davis just about had a 50-100 … 50 homers and 100 stolen bases. It's almost laughable. It looks like a baseball video game on cheat mode. You can look and look through the history of baseball. You will not find anything quite like that.

What happened to Davis after that is, well, hard and cold reality … and one of the greatest anticlimaxes in baseball history. In 1987, Davis crashed into the wall at Wrigley Field going after a fly ball and slowed. He still finished with a 30-30 season … actually it was a 37-homer, 50-stolen-base season. That '87 season remains unique in this way. Nobody else who has hit 37 homers in a season has stolen 50 bases.

Davis continued to play wonderful baseball, but the injuries took their toll. He never played 140 games in a season. Davis ran less (after 1987, he never again stole 40 bases in a season). He hit 34 home runs in '89 and never again hit 30. The batting averages started to tumble. The body started to break down.

In 1995, Davis missed the entire season as he battled colon cancer. It looked like his career was done. But Davis refused to stop. In '96, even though he was 34, he flashed some of the old magic. Davis hit .287/.394/.523 with 26 homers and 23 stolen bases, and he was the runaway pick for Comeback Player of the Year.

At 36 years old, in Baltimore, Davis hit .327 with 28 home runs and actually received an American League Most Valuable Player Award vote in 1998. He then kicked around with the Cardinals and Giants at the end. and he retired at 39.

It was, in the end, a very nice career complete with three Gold Glove Awards, and even with all the injuries, Davis remains one of just 23 players with 250 homers and 250 stolen bases in his career. The list includes some all-time greats like Mays and Joe Morgan, Ryne Sandberg and Derek Jeter. It also includes some names that might surprise you, like Steve Finley, Hanley Ramirez and Reggie Sanders.

But, sure, we all thought it would be better. "The greatest player on earth," one magazine story called Davis after that 1987 season, and that's sure how it felt. You know, three people voted him for the Hall of Fame in 2007. Davis did not have quite a Hall of Fame career, not when you look at the totality of it, but when I asked one of the people who voted for him why, he said something interesting: "Yeah, but he was the best player I ever saw."

Well, Davis was that. For one year, Eric the Red just might have been the best player any of us ever saw.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...