Jump to content

2019 MLB Discussion


rico

Recommended Posts

Just now, Seeking6 said:

I don't like the length of games and wish there were limitations on how many pitchers could be used. With that said. I see no difference in using any and all pitchers/strategy to win a game....the very same way I don't have a problem with a coaches in basketball using timeouts, substitutions, fouls,etc....to win a game in the final minutes. 

I don't mind the length of the game but it is the pace of the game.  I just like watching great starting pitching going deep into games.  I liked it when the managers would let their pitchers battle through trouble instead of taking them out in the first sign of trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I don't mind the length of the game but it is the pace of the game.  I just like watching great starting pitching going deep into games.  I liked it when the managers would let their pitchers battle through trouble instead of taking them out in the first sign of trouble.

Trust me I get it. Maddon has the impossible task of trying to figure out a few on his staff (starting and relief) because when it goes....it goes very quickly and the game can be over. It's a tough call to let guys pitch out of problems or give up a quick 3-4 runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we are at it I wish they would get rid of the shift on defense as well.  I think this eliminates a lot of the great defensive plays we use to see by middle infielders like Ozzie Smith use to make.  With the Shift we probably would not have seen all the great defense from Book Robinson did at 3rd base.  I think the shift has caused a change on how players hit as well because now they think they have to hit the homerun to get on because a lot of the line drives are being caught by infielders that are actually playing in the outfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Seeking6 said:

Trust me I get it. Maddon has the impossible task of trying to figure out a few on his staff (starting and relief) because when it goes....it goes very quickly and the game can be over. It's a tough call to let guys pitch out of problems or give up a quick 3-4 runs.

I think that is because the pitchers today are not trained to go deep in the game and when they reach a certain pitch count they just lose it.  I think it is in their head as well because all you here about is that you don't want your pitchers to go through the lineup for a 3rd time.  We they start the 3rd time in the lineup I think it is in their head that it will be trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I think that is because the pitchers today are not trained to go deep in the game and when they reach a certain pitch count they just lose it.  I think it is in their head as well because all you here about is that you don't want your pitchers to go through the lineup for a 3rd time.  We they start the 3rd time in the lineup I think it is in their head that it will be trouble.

More because they noticed that higher pitch counts resulted in more "dead arms" as they called it back in the day.

Some of these guys are a $20 million a year investment. I don't know about anyone else, but if I have a $20 million investment in anything, I'm stocking up on pitbulls and bubble-wrap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can talk about lots of things that are wrong with the game now as opposed to the 70's and 80's.  It ain't just a baseball thing but I think free agency has affected MLB more than the NFL or the NBA.  But that is JMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

More because they noticed that higher pitch counts resulted in more "dead arms" as they called it back in the day.

Some of these guys are a $20 million a year investment. I don't know about anyone else, but if I have a $20 million investment in anything, I'm stocking up on pitbulls and bubble-wrap.

The time I remember it really irritated me was when the Nationals shut down Strasberg in the playoffs.  They said it is keep him from injuries and for the future but when you have a chance at a championship you go for it.  Even shutting him down did not prevent him from an arm injury so was it worth it to shut him down.  To me there seems to be way more ar injuries than there use to be as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

The time I remember it really irritated me was when the Nationals shut down Strasberg in the playoffs.  They said it is keep him from injuries and for the future but when you have a chance at a championship you go for it.  Even shutting him down did not prevent him from an arm injury so was it worth it to shut him down.  To me there seems to be way more ar injuries than there use to be as well.

Yeah, that made no sense to me either.  Good thing I ain't a Nats fan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, rico said:

We can talk about lots of things that are wrong with the game now as opposed to the 70's and 80's.  It ain't just a baseball thing but I think free agency has affected MLB more than the NFL or the NBA.  But that is JMO.

Follow the money...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, rico said:

Yeah, that made no sense to me either.  Good thing I ain't a Nats fan!

I agree that free agency has changed sports but I don't have a problem with it but the problem in baseball is the huge discrepancy in how much money each teams makes.  I know there are some small market teams that can do well but to me in baseball I think the market really makes a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

I agree that free agency has changed sports but I don't have a problem with it but the problem in baseball is the huge discrepancy in how much money each teams makes.  I know there are some small market teams that can do well but to me in baseball I think the market really makes a difference.

Of course it does, and until MLB negotiates real revenue sharing it'll remain that way.

Think a team situated in friggin Green Bay Wisconsin could actually compete with the New Yorks and LAs of the NFL if they didn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Of course it does, and until MLB negotiates real revenue sharing it'll remain that way.

Think a team situated in friggin Green Bay Wisconsin could actually compete with the New Yorks and LAs of the NFL if they didn't?

Real revenue sharing and hard salary caps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw where the Indians Shane Beiber got his second complete game of the year yesterday and they said that leads the league.  I just wanted to look back to see when the amount of complete games started to dwindle.  Since 2000 there has only been one time a person had double digit complete games in a year.  I started at 2018 and went down every ten years to see how many complete games it took to lead MLB.

18- 2

08- 9

98- 15

88- 15

78- 23

68- 23

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Just saw this stat about the Reds and it is hard to explain

Day games 13-30 worst in the MLB

Night games 33-24 3rd best in NL

Dang that is hard to explain.  I wonder what the list of SPs is that have started day games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...