Jump to content

2020 MLB Discussion

5fouls

By 5fouls
in All Baseball

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
slojoe

slojoe

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

Tough loss for Cubs last night. One bad pitch to Yelich and he made Mills pay for it. Really strong outing again just left a change over the plate. I know the Cubs are 13-4 but some of our guys can start hitting. 

Baez-.221

Rizzo-.224

Schwarber-.232

Bryant-.196

I hear you S6.  I always thought this team would eventually become known for its offense, but that hasn't happened.

Schwarber and Baez couldn't even get the ball in play with the bases loaded and 1 out.

Happ having a break out year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Just the way the year is going to be. All MLB wants to do is get to the postseason. I think I heard postseason in baseball is worth around $800 Million in TV. 

The thing is that starting next week the Reds start playing the Cardinals.  If the Reds virus spreads then that means the Cardinals will miss more games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

I think it's mandatory the Cubs give up 3 run dongs to the worst Brewer players each series. Started 3-0 up now down 5-3....Urias and Arcia suck vs everybody else except Cubs. Just knew that Friday night dong gave the Brewers confidence. 

Cry me a river, Bub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeking6

Seeking6

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, rico said:

Cry me a river, Bub.

I will. 15 strikeouts for Cub hitters today. 4 when they started out 2-0 on counts. Haha. I didn't expect to play .750 ball but man these couple vs Brewers have been tough. Hat tip to them. Will be a tight division no matter what the starts are like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

His name is Jordan Baker Cubs fans. Home plate ump today. What he did in the 9th is the reason robo umps will happen. 

I agree the umps this year has not been good but some of that is that some of the veterans opted out and not working this year.  I will never want to see a robot making calls on the field.  I don't know where it started but why does everything has to be just perfect and nothing can have a human element to the game.  The game is played by humans and should be refed by humans.  I feel the same way about replays because I think that people want everything just perfect and now it leads to using replays on to many things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeking6

Seeking6

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I agree the umps this year has not been good but some of that is that some of the veterans opted out and not working this year.  I will never want to see a robot making calls on the field.  I don't know where it started but why does everything has to be just perfect and nothing can have a human element to the game.  The game is played by humans and should be refed by humans.  I feel the same way about replays because I think that people want everything just perfect and now it leads to using replays on to many things.

Honest answer. Stakes are higher. I don't accept the excuse or thought process of mistakes happen. In this case when an umpire's zone is consistently 3-4 inches off each side of plate...up/down...from inning to inning it means he's not good at his job. In the real world if you aren't good at your job you fire yourself by being bad at your craft. In MLB they cruise onto the next series and keep making the same mistakes time and time again. 

Consistency is all I ask. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rico

rico

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Honest answer. Stakes are higher. I don't accept the excuse or thought process of mistakes happen. In this case when an umpire's zone is consistently 3-4 inches off each side of plate...up/down...from inning to inning it means he's not good at his job. In the real world if you aren't good at your job you fire yourself by being bad at your craft. In MLB they cruise onto the next series and keep making the same mistakes time and time again. 

Consistency is all I ask. 

You know as well as I....there is no whining about balls and strikes in baseball.  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeking6

Seeking6

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Ross HAS to get Bryant out of the leadoff spot...Heck. put Happ in there...

And the way Bryant has looked so far, he's not helping his FA status...I hope the Cubs tread carefully on giving him a big contract...

Tough one for sure. Could have our guy for the next decade or not. I trust Theo but either Bryant is dealing with an injury or just like anything...he's got a little in between the ears right now. I'm a Bryant guy and fan but I also don't want to give $300M for .196 average. Catch 22 (or Catch 18 if you prefer) for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

Honest answer. Stakes are higher. I don't accept the excuse or thought process of mistakes happen. In this case when an umpire's zone is consistently 3-4 inches off each side of plate...up/down...from inning to inning it means he's not good at his job. In the real world if you aren't good at your job you fire yourself by being bad at your craft. In MLB they cruise onto the next series and keep making the same mistakes time and time again. 

Consistency is all I ask. 

I am just tired of of things being so robotic and every decision is based on analytics.  To me it is making sports way less interesting and sports are getting to sterile,  To me everything is just a like and their is np personality left in sports.  Like in baseball they have taken some fun things at least to me about baseball like the ump and manager arguments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

Tough one for sure. Could have our guy for the next decade or not. I trust Theo but either Bryant is dealing with an injury or just like anything...he's got a little in between the ears right now. I'm a Bryant guy and fan but I also don't want to give $300M for .196 average. Catch 22 (or Catch 18 if you prefer) for sure.

I don't know why they have him in the lead off spot in the first place.  Maybe he is worrying to much about OBP than being aggressive and hitting the first good pitch you see.  To me there are certain type of players who should be in the  1 and 2  hole of your lineup but Bryant is not that player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeking6

Seeking6

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I don't know why they have him in the lead off spot in the first place.  Maybe he is worrying to much about OBP than being aggressive and hitting the first good pitch you see.  To me there are certain type of players who should be in the  1 and 2  hole of your lineup but Bryant is not that player.

I think we've discussed a few times over the years....and not that I agree or disagree. Guys hitting lead-off get about 50 at bats on average per season (normal times). In a division like ours. 50 at bats during 162 games to your best or one of your best players could mean 3-4 wins by those at bats. 

I'm not that guy. I'd prefer Bryant at 2.....but the numbers are hard to argue. This isn't 1984 where lead-off guy gets a walk. Steals second. Sacrificed to third.....and sac fly in to score a run. Not saying I don't respect or understand both sides but the numbers are the numbers. More at bats for your best players mean better chance for production which means typically more wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

I think we've discussed a few times over the years....and not that I agree or disagree. Guys hitting lead-off get about 50 at bats on average per season (normal times). In a division like ours. 50 at bats during 162 games to your best or one of your best players could mean 3-4 wins by those at bats. 

I'm not that guy. I'd prefer Bryant at 2.....but the numbers are hard to argue. This isn't 1984 where lead-off guy gets a walk. Steals second. Sacrificed to third.....and sac fly in to score a run. Not saying I don't respect or understand both sides but the numbers are the numbers. More at bats for your best players mean better chance for production which means typically more wins.

I rather have my best players having more at bats with runners on.  Especially in the NL where the pitchers bat and even the 8th place hitters are not that good. With that one of your best hitters at bats will be with no one and more than likely one or two outs.  To me I would think it would be best to have Bryant 3, Rizzo 4. Baez 5.  They show that they get 50 more at bats  but how productive are those extra at bats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeking6

Seeking6

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I rather have my best players having more at bats with runners on.  Especially in the NL where the pitchers bat and even the 8th place hitters are not that good. With that one of your best hitters at bats will be with no one and more than likely one or two outs.  To me I would think it would be best to have Bryant 3, Rizzo 4. Baez 5.  They show that they get 50 more at bats  but how productive are those extra at bats.

Agree all day. Just was pointing out the metrics crowd....to me Bryant 2 Rizzo 3 Baez 4 Schwarber 5 is the lineup. RLRL....but what the heck do I know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IU Scott

IU Scott

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

I think we've discussed a few times over the years....and not that I agree or disagree. Guys hitting lead-off get about 50 at bats on average per season (normal times). In a division like ours. 50 at bats during 162 games to your best or one of your best players could mean 3-4 wins by those at bats. 

I'm not that guy. I'd prefer Bryant at 2.....but the numbers are hard to argue. This isn't 1984 where lead-off guy gets a walk. Steals second. Sacrificed to third.....and sac fly in to score a run. Not saying I don't respect or understand both sides but the numbers are the numbers. More at bats for your best players mean better chance for production which means typically more wins.

I feel that the use of analytics in baseball is hurting the game just like basketball...I just don't see how taking away the speed element in the game is a good thing..Doing the fundamentals of the game like bunting or stealing a base makes more ways to score.  Right now it is walking, strikeouts and home runs so if that is not working you have no other way to score runs. Just like the experts think shooting 3's or layups is the most effecient offense even though shooting a d scoring are down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FritzIam4IU

FritzIam4IU

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, IUFLA said:

Ross HAS to get Bryant out of the leadoff spot...Heck. put Happ in there...

And the way Bryant has looked so far, he's not helping his FA status...I hope the Cubs tread carefully on giving him a big contract...

I might be in the minority, but I was actually hoping they could pull off a trade for Bryant in the offseason. Something just seems a little "off" with him. I have no idea if it is mental or injury, but I don't want the cubs to give him massive deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...