EnochRoot wrote:Is it your intent to drop scorching #HotTakes? In what world would 6th All Time Hits not warrant first ballot consideration? I have no idea why you mentioned the bottom third of the HOF. Jeter's entering the HOF in rarified air. He's not bottom third, despite the incendiary nature of your take here.
Are there guys who are in the Hall that shouldn't be? Yeah. Are there guys who aren't in that probably deserve to be? You bet. But to suggest Jeter would need to wait for the right year based on the competition? That's nonsense.
Perhaps re-reading my actual comment will clarify things for you. You're replying to some things I didn't say.
But yes, I think that simply being very high in all time hits is not a factor that should necessarily make a player a first-ballot HOF choice. I think this of Pete Rose, for example, if he were to be free of his HOF ban.
EnochRoot wrote:Is it your intent to drop scorching #HotTakes? In what world would 6th All Time Hits not warrant first ballot consideration? I have no idea why you mentioned the bottom third of the HOF. Jeter's entering the HOF in rarified air. He's not bottom third, despite the incendiary nature of your take here.
Are there guys who are in the Hall that shouldn't be? Yeah. Are there guys who aren't in that probably deserve to be? You bet. But to suggest Jeter would need to wait for the right year based on the competition? That's nonsense.
Perhaps re-reading my actual comment will clarify things for you. You're replying to some things I didn't say.
But yes, I think that simply being very high in all time hits is not a factor that should necessarily make a player a first-ballot HOF choice. I think this of Pete Rose, for example, if he were to be free of his HOF ban.
You understand that baseball is a bat and ball game with a finite number of outs, and that a hit constitutes a lack of said out being recorded?
Just thought I'd point out the primordial flaw in your critical thinking that suggests Pete Rose, outside of his gambling issues wouldn't have been worthy of a first ballot selection.
EnochRoot wrote:Is it your intent to drop scorching #HotTakes? In what world would 6th All Time Hits not warrant first ballot consideration? I have no idea why you mentioned the bottom third of the HOF. Jeter's entering the HOF in rarified air. He's not bottom third, despite the incendiary nature of your take here.
Are there guys who are in the Hall that shouldn't be? Yeah. Are there guys who aren't in that probably deserve to be? You bet. But to suggest Jeter would need to wait for the right year based on the competition? That's nonsense.
Perhaps re-reading my actual comment will clarify things for you. You're replying to some things I didn't say.
But yes, I think that simply being very high in all time hits is not a factor that should necessarily make a player a first-ballot HOF choice. I think this of Pete Rose, for example, if he were to be free of his HOF ban.
You understand that baseball is a bat and ball game with a finite number of outs, and that a hit constitutes a lack of said out being recorded?
Just thought I'd point out the primordial flaw in your critical thinking that suggests Pete Rose, outside of his gambling issues wouldn't have been worthy of a first ballot selection.
FWIW, I think Rose and Jeter are both somewhat overrated and also surefire and deserving first-ballot Hall of Famers (putting aside the gambling issues). I don't really understand the impulse that a player who is obviously deserving should have to wait because he's not as good as Willie Mays or Ted Williams. I think the NBA has it right as they don't bother with that crap for their Hall. I think Yao Ming and Allen Iverson just got in on the first ballot and although both are important and influential in their own way, neither is going to make anyone's list of 25 (or even 50) best basketball players of all-time.
EnochRoot wrote:Is it your intent to drop scorching #HotTakes? In what world would 6th All Time Hits not warrant first ballot consideration? I have no idea why you mentioned the bottom third of the HOF. Jeter's entering the HOF in rarified air. He's not bottom third, despite the incendiary nature of your take here.
Are there guys who are in the Hall that shouldn't be? Yeah. Are there guys who aren't in that probably deserve to be? You bet. But to suggest Jeter would need to wait for the right year based on the competition? That's nonsense.
Perhaps re-reading my actual comment will clarify things for you. You're replying to some things I didn't say.
But yes, I think that simply being very high in all time hits is not a factor that should necessarily make a player a first-ballot HOF choice. I think this of Pete Rose, for example, if he were to be free of his HOF ban.
You understand that baseball is a bat and ball game with a finite number of outs, and that a hit constitutes a lack of said out being recorded?
Just thought I'd point out the primordial flaw in your critical thinking that suggests Pete Rose, outside of his gambling issues wouldn't have been worthy of a first ballot selection.
FWIW, I think Rose and Jeter are both somewhat overrated and also surefire and deserving first-ballot Hall of Famers (putting aside the gambling issues). I don't really understand the impulse that a player who is obviously deserving should have to wait because he's not as good as Willie Mays or Ted Williams. I think the NBA has it right as they don't bother with that crap for their Hall. I think Yao Ming and Allen Iverson just got in on the first ballot and although both are important and influential in their own way, neither is going to make anyone's list of 25 (or even 50) best basketball players of all-time.
Eh, I think 6th on the Hits list is a pretty effective mic-drop on the overrated argument.
I also think the 5 year waiting period is to prevent it from becoming the Hall of the Very Good, and also to prevent from over-representing any particular era (though the Vet Committee has seemingly overridden that safeguard at times)..
brian wrote:Not sure why it took them 100 years to finally have best record determine home-field for World Series?
Yes. I thought 'most wins' was universally understood across sports as a good way to avoid having the top teams mail it in during the final weeks. Not to mention, rewarding merit. Of course, leagues and divisions aren't equal. But rough justice might be better than whatever benefit there is from alternative approaches (e.g., getting higher ratings for the all-star game?)
Me likey. Figured he was a good target, seeing the price of Chapman soar in October. For some reason I just don't like Kenley Jansen, beyond the blue uniform. I will be glad if he leaves the Dodgers or even the division.
Who knows? Maybe, you were kidnapped, tied up, taken away and held for ransom.
Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago
Oh yeah…
I wonder which impact would've been greater, the Giants chances having Chapman, or the Cubbies chances not having him. While he was a Yankee, Cubs still looked like the strongest team around, and a hair better than the Giants in their reg season head to head.
The eleven games the Giants and Cubs played this year were some of the best, funnest baseball to watch.
Who knows? Maybe, you were kidnapped, tied up, taken away and held for ransom.
Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago
Oh yeah…
sancarlos wrote:Who knows what they could have accomplished last season, with a decent bullpen.
Thankfully, we'll never know.
You're going to be living off this for the entire off-season, aren't you? Or, more accurately, the next 11 months. Actually, probably for the rest of your life. Enjoy it, man. Feels good, doesn't it?
sancarlos wrote:Who knows what they could have accomplished last season, with a decent bullpen.
Thankfully, we'll never know.
You're going to be living off this for the entire off-season, aren't you? Or, more accurately, the next 11 months. Actually, probably for the rest of your life. Enjoy it, man. Feels good, doesn't it?
I plan to live off it for the rest of my life, unless they win another.
The Cubs were clearly better than the Giants last year on a whole-team 162-game basis, but not so much better that a series win was inevitable. I think every game they played against each other last year came down to BABIP and bullpens. As did every game in the NLDS. (8 one-run games out of 11.) So who the hell knows what happens if the Giants had Chapman.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
mister d wrote:If the White Sox properly pillage Boston, I could totally be on board with Sale going there.
mister d wrote:That works.
Two teams going in opposite directions, steering their ships towards the same goal...Think in those terms and both teams won this trade.
However, Sale was team-controlled for 3 more years at ~12m a year.
I'm not sure how or why they felt they'd never see a better offer than Moncada and the Question Marks. Kopech throws hard, but he's also wild and perhaps destined for the pen.
As a Yankee fan I will say I'm glad Moncada is no longer wearing Boston's laundry.
I wonder how much of Sale's mechanics played into the thought process for the White Sox or at least nudged them toward the "complete teardown" side of the ledger. He's been rather durable since becoming a starter, but some people view him as kind of a time bomb.
“All I'm sayin' is, he comes near me, I'll put him in the wall.”
Watching Dombrowski do the Red Sox what he did to the Tigers is just too perfect. Says here the Red Sox make the playoffs and lose in a short series because a) randomness, duh, b) older pitchers break down and c) just because.
Then in two or three years when there are no prospects left and an aging core of over-priced veterans, he can move on to the next high-paying gig.
Last I checked 70m +8m he got from the Rangers this past season is still less than the 107m he turned down from the Nationals. Regardless of where he plays in the field he'll be a liability but at least he'll hit the shit out of the ball this season...which I'm not sure the team needs.
I would like expensive whiskey.
We only have beer & wine...
What am I, 12?
And by the way, 3 years is a long-ass time to get back some of that depth*. Of course I worry that the new faces in the scouting and minor league ops can't duplicate what previous administrations pulled off, but that's much much more than Dombrowski.
*
His overall package of tools is probably not a threat to incumbent second baseman Dustin Pedroia and the infield glut of prospects – which is a great ‘problem’ for Boston to have – could push the youngster to a utlity role if he can diversify his defensive abilities and isn’t used as future trade bait.
(He) is an athletic second baseman with gap power and strong contact skills. Unfortunately, his arm will keep him out of the shortstop picture which hurts his value. I like (him) as a sleeper, but would probably have Vinicio ranked here instead. He’s younger, just as athletic and profiles as a true shortstop.
That's Mookie Betts, 3 years ago
he’s a fixbking cyborg or some shit. The
holy fuckbAllZ, what a ducking nightmare. Holy shot. Just, fuck. The
Brontoburglar wrote:Soler for Davis is perfectly fine
Yeah, I think me too. Risks on both sides. Potential reward is high for KC if Soler stays healthy.
I'll miss Soler because he was the harbinger of the things that were about to happen for the Cubs.
One thing about Soler that should give hope for the future - he still has very few professional PAs. He should get better and better. And he already had a decent eye, unlike his 2014 hot prospect counterpart, Javy Baez.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
brian wrote:Watching Dombrowski do the Red Sox what he did to the Tigers is just too perfect. Says here the Red Sox make the playoffs and lose in a short series because a) randomness, duh, b) older pitchers break down and c) just because.
Then in two or three years when there are no prospects left and an aging core of over-priced veterans, he can move on to the next high-paying gig.
Agree. Just not a Dombrowski fan. Dont see the vision or talent in overpaying guys and trading known young talent for veterans. That said, Moncada looked very overmatched in his short stint with the big club and starting pitching is pretty much all youve got to get to win.
After the last 10 years I'm just not keen on trading off big prospects or pieces until there's a glaring need and even then sparingly and only if you can try to get rid of pieces you likely won't need long-term. A lot of Dombrowski's success in Detroit was based on frankly getting lucky on a couple of the huge deals he made giving up prospects. Even the best GMs are only going to hit on 60-65 percent on those deals.
This is the kind of trade that, if I believed in the Nats front office, would make me convinced Giolito won't make 100 MLB starts. Something has to be very off here.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
mister d wrote:This is the kind of trade that, if I believed in the Nats front office, would make me convinced Giolito won't make 100 MLB starts. Something has to be very off here.
That's what I'm trying to figure out too.
I'm also looking forward to seeing the White Sox go sign a few veterans to make it seem like they're trying to contend.
"We're not the smartest people in the world. We go down the straightaway and turn left. That's literally what we do." -- Clint Bowyer
