JediDefender.com Forums

Community => JD Sports Forum! => Topic started by: Jeff on January 5, 2007, 02:11 PM

Title: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on January 5, 2007, 02:11 PM
Well, it's that time of year again...  Hall of Fame reveal next week!

  - Ripken and Gwynn should be about as easy a lock as there is for first-timers

  - It will be interesting to see what happens with McGuire... I see ESPN is convinved he won't get in.  I could go either way - he probably did steroids, but at the same times there are a lot of other guys out there that did too... although they aren't hall of famers.   :-\

  - and finally, best of luck to Bert Blyleven.  Yeah, it's a total homer pick, but it's too bad with all his numbers that he isn't in the hall.  If only he had hit the magic 300 wins, I'm sure he'd be in by now.   :(


In other news, I see that DR's Yanks dumped the Big Unit.  Good move as far as I can tell (he hasn't been the same since he left AZ), plus it frees up some money to woo the Rocket, no?

Oh, and mock kudos to the Twins on signing Ponson.  Unless someone can find the 2003 Ponson hiding inside him, I think our rotation is in a lot of trouble this year...  :'(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 5, 2007, 10:34 PM
Dressel's Yankee notes:

1.  Goodbye Randy Johnson and Jaret Wright.  You both suck and we don't want you.  Take Carl Pavano with you, please.  Unless he's actually going to pitch a game having been here 3 seasons.  Then we want him.

2.  Welcome Mr. Igawa.  Although almost none of the asian pitchers have lived up to expectations, we keep hope alive that you will.  And if you don't, well, Mussina, Pettitte, and Wang will cushion that for us  :)

3.  I want Gary Sheffield  back.  I have fond memories of that line drive he hit out to second base against the Angels, just barely over the glove of a jumping Chone Figgins at the edge of the infield grass, that proceeded to accelerate in line drive fashion over the right field fence.  Never seen that before and probably never will again.  He's that damn strong.  He's a big bat and one of the most fearsome hitters in baseball.  He's gonna be missed.  Well, not if Abreu produces.  But Sheff's one of my favorite players and I'm sure you'll all exploit that fact by expecting me to take him early in our fantasy draft this year, en route to my 3rd championship in 4 seasons.

4.  Glad Joe Torre stayed. 

Other news:

1.  Mark McGwire is not going to be elected to the hall of fame after that Congress fiasco.  No.  Chance.  In.  Hell.

2.  Ripken and Gwynn are in like Flynn.  Check out my rhyme.

That's all for now I'm going to go watch Aaron Boone's 2003 homer against the Sox in the ALCS on YES.



Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on January 7, 2007, 05:47 PM
Dressel's Yankee notes:

1.  Goodbye Randy Johnson and Jaret Wright.  You both suck and we don't want you. 

I was especially impressed with Dressel's comment here. While I wasn't on JD when the Yanks picked up Johnson- I distinctly recall tons of typical Yankees fans bragging about how bad-ass their team was gonna be 'because we got Johnson now..'. Yet another owner big spending event resulting in failure, classic. Justifiable entertainment for me ;D!

DS

So, is Big MAc not getting in because of the inquiry where he said basically..Duh... or is it because he took Andro, which technically was allowed at the time he played so you cannot fault him for that though. I agree though..to be sure, and feel also he will never get in... or I'll/he will be dead if they decided to.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 7, 2007, 07:14 PM
Dressel's Yankee notes:

1.  Goodbye Randy Johnson and Jaret Wright.  You both suck and we don't want you. 

I was especially impressed with Dressel's comment here. While I wasn't on JD when the Yanks picked up Johnson- I distinctly recall tons of typical Yankees fans bragging about how bad-ass their team was gonna be 'because we got Johnson now..'. Yet another owner big spending event resulting in failure, classic. Justifiable entertainment for me ;D!

DS

And....and what?  What's your point exactly?

Yeah, we're all glad to get rid of him and yield a 5 man rotation of Mussina, Wang, Pettitte, Igawa, and Pavano.  I think it's a step up.

We got the Small Unit coming off a year where he went 245 IP, 290 K's, a 0.90 WHIP, .197 BAA and a 2.60 ERA.  After 2 years of a much lower performance than the high expectations we had, we're happy to ship him out.  Yeah, he won 17 games/year, but his ERA was 2 points higher than we thought it was going to be and his K total plummetted.  Hitters were batting .250 against him compared to the sub-Mendoza line BAA he had coming off the year when we got him.

Impressed by my comment?  I don't see your point.  Pretty standard, really.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on January 8, 2007, 04:50 AM
Dressel Rebel-- arrogance = standard


I expect my team, the Giants, to suck again this year considering how 'old' they are. Their starting pitching should be solid again this year like last even with the loss of Schmidt but they'll still lose alot of games due to an old offense and lack of upgrade to the bullpen pitching. Could see them getting on a roll occasionally but...how long can an old team stay on a roll, realistically, if last season proved anything at all for them?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on January 9, 2007, 02:16 PM
The Hall call arrives for Gwynn, Ripken (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070109&content_id=1775441&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb)

- I know, I know.  It's a big "no duh" moment as it's not a surprise to anyone that they got in on the first try.  Nice to see that they both got about as close as you can get to a unanimous pick (97.5% or higher for both) for the Hall.

- Again, another non-surprise, Big Mac got less than 25%.   :o

- Goose Gossage got 71.2%, maybe next year will be his year.  :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on January 9, 2007, 02:56 PM
I can't believe it's taken so long for Gossage :(.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on January 9, 2007, 05:41 PM
I haven't followed The Yanks'since Paul O'Neill retired :P He lives not too far from me.The Reds we're totally stupid in giving him up.Of course they do that to all their players,Sean Casey,Austin Kearns,etc,etc.Cincy has to do their best to let down their fans in football and baseball :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 9, 2007, 05:52 PM
There's usually no surprises here with the Hall.  The slam dunks always get in first ballot, Gossage will likely get in next year.  No surprise on McGwire considering the steroids, plus he only made it halfway to 3,000 hits with 1,600 and really was a one dimensional player with the HRs.  He won't be getting in anytime soon and probably never.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on January 9, 2007, 06:14 PM
I wonder if one day all the slam dunks are picked and we're left with a weird 'others' or Question marks list.
Then they would have to pick a non slam dunk over some steroid abusers or other troubled guys. I really hope I'm not alive to witness this :P.

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on January 9, 2007, 06:18 PM
Like last year I think the person really getting the shaft is Jack Morris, he's one of the most dominant pitchers of the 80's and won 3 rings, yeah his stats aren't there but he'd be on everyone's short list if you ahd one game to win and had to hand the ball to someone
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on January 9, 2007, 06:29 PM
Here's results over last year...

Doesn't look good for Rice, Bert, Lee Smith and Jack

Rich Gossage  64.6% to 71.2% 
Jim Rice  64.8% to 63.5%
Andre Dawson  309  56.7% to 61.0%
Bert Blyleven  260  53.3% to 47.7% 
Lee Smith  217  45% to 39.8% 
Jack Morris  202  41.2% to 37.1% 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 9, 2007, 06:35 PM
Like last year I think the person really getting the shaft is Jack Morris, he's one of the most dominant pitchers of the 80's and won 3 rings, yeah his stats aren't there but he'd be on everyone's short list if you ahd one game to win and had to hand the ball to someone

Interesting you brought that up, I was talking about that earlier today.  He's got 250 wins roughly with a career ERA of 3.90, but he was pitching before this generation of inflated offensive stats, so 3.90 really wasn't that great for his era of pitchers.  Someone who gets close to 300 wins today with a 3.90 will probably get in, since the number of 30 HR hitters that pitchers have to face has about quadrupled since Morris' day.  Morris was 7-4 in the postseason which was good but not sparkling.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on January 9, 2007, 10:18 PM
Yeah...but you through out the last two years and last two with Detroit and look at his stats (I realize you can't do that but those were some bad teams he was on in Detroit and he plain just lost it after '92)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/morrija02.shtml

From '83 to '88 he was probably the best pitcher in baseball.  I know Clemens, Gooden, Scott and Ryan et al are there but he also won a World Series and a got the Tigers to the Playoffs a couple of times.

I also love the compare stats feature at baseball-reference...he compares pretty favorably to a lot of Hall of Famers

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp2.cgi?I=morrija02:Jack+Morris&st=career

As far as McGwire goes.  I'd vote for him.  He hasn't be proven guilty of anything and you can speculate all you want...but then you have to start speculating about everyone.  Especially Pitchers who have basically gotten off the whole investigation of Steroids because they don't hit Home Runs...he admitted taking Andro back in '98.  It wasn't banned at the time and was a legal substance.  Did he take other steroids?    Probably but nobody will ever prove it one way or another.  So you are going to leave out the 7th leading HR hitter of all time.  The guy who brought back baseball from the Strike of '94...he deserves to be there.

The real question with him is if Bonds gets in...then what?  How about Palmerio?  How about Sosa?  Sure they MAY have cheated but we have no proof and they are some of the best players of the 90's.  What about Schilling and Clemens and Johnson...you have proof they didn't take steroids, too?  Its a damn mess and I don't see why he should be the fall guy for Bud Selig and MLB having their heads up their ******** for as long as they did
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 9, 2007, 10:29 PM


The real question with him is if Bonds gets in...then what?  

I doubt he will ever see the inside of the Hall without a visitor's ticket.  In fact, he'll be lucky if the vote comes around without him having seen the inside of the Big House.



How about Palmerio?  How about Sosa?  Sure they MAY have cheated but we have no proof and they are some of the best players of the 90's. 

I heard on the radio a few days ago that a list of 200 someodd names of + steroid tests that baseball never divulged was ordered to be turned over to the court or something.  But for now, we do know that Palmeiro tested positive.  Stick a fork in him for sure.  Congress was looking into bringing him up on perjury charges for the false finger-wagging testimony he gave on the Hill.

A little story that's relevant here.  One of my patients was a starting pitcher in MLB in the 90's and pitched for the NY Yankees for a couple of years.  I asked him one day during an appointment, "Who was the most fearsome hitter that you ever had to face in MLB?"  He said (paraphrased), "I remember pitching to Rafael Palmeiro, and when the ball came off his bat I was sure I had the out on a routine fly ball.  It landed 10 rows back over the outfield fence.  Now I know why."
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on January 11, 2007, 12:03 PM
I remember in the late eighties when Canseco was one of the hottest players in the majors (at least to a bunch of 10 year olds)...and he got what, 1% of the votes for the HOF?

I think it's great that the stand up players (those who act professional on AND off the field) get rewarded with HOF inductions over those who only wish to break HR records and bicep sizes.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on January 11, 2007, 10:43 PM
 ???Yeah,but are they real or are they steriods? :P
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 11, 2007, 11:18 PM
I remember in the late eighties when Canseco was one of the hottest players in the majors (at least to a bunch of 10 year olds)

I was one of those 10 year olds.  Worshipped the guy.  Then it changed.  See below.


???Yeah,but are they real or are they steriods? :P

Canseco admitted it.  He juiced.  But he did it at a time when there were no rules in MLB against steroid use.  Of course, the laws of the United States of America always prohibited this behavior.  So, in essence, if MLB obeys the law it goes without saying that steroids were illegal in MLB as well.

Canseco is just a bitch though.  He stabbed all of his colleagues in the back for money.  He ran into money problems and sold off his MVP and World Series rings for money.  He wrote the book to snitch on all his friends for money.  He's been arrested multiple times for assault.  Illegal gun possession.  Criminal recklessness with an automobile.  He's just a big *******.

I had an autographed framed photo of him in my collection and I've taken it off the wall because I can't stand to look at him.  He's a disgrace.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on January 12, 2007, 10:31 AM
sold off his MVP and World Series rings for money. 

No ****?   Things must have been bad for him to have to do that...
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on January 12, 2007, 10:33 AM
sold off his MVP and World Series rings for money. 

No ****?   Things must have been bad for him to have to do that...

Canseco "rids himself of everything that reminds him of baseball" (http://www.latinosportslegends.com/2005/canseco_sells_worldseries_ring-022305.htm)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on January 16, 2007, 10:13 PM
???Yeah,but are they real or are they steriods? :P

And speaking of steroids, I heard today that Sammy Sosa was working out with the Texas Rangers...  I haven't seen a photo of him since he left baseball in 2005, but I can't imagine what taking a year+ off to get the roids out of his system has done to his physique.  I just hope he's not back to being as small as he was during his first stint with the Rangers!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Broem on January 24, 2007, 04:11 PM
I heard that Sosa was hitting quite well though.  Of course it's the minor leaguers I'd assume.  The thing is baseball never really had a strict policy on steroids so I can see why a lot of guys did it. 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on February 20, 2007, 09:17 PM
New caps!

MLB doffs wool caps, adopts new synthetic material (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/4567950.html)

Quote
Retail price set at $32 for New Era's new model

BUFFALO, N.Y. — One question facing baseball this season: Will cooler heads prevail?

On opening day, the sport will doff the traditional wool cap in favor of a new polyester blend model designed to wick away sweat before it can stream down a player's face.

The change is part of commissioner Bud Selig's focus on boosting player performance, a Major League Baseball official said, and follows a general trend toward moisture-managing "performance" materials in sports apparel.

"We started to think, 'How can those developments be applied to our headwear?'" said John DeWaal, vice president of brand communications at New Era Cap Co., the Buffalo-based manufacturer that holds the cap contract.

Among early supporters of the new cap is AL Rookie of the Year Justin Verlander, who got a preview while shooting a commercial for New Era during the offseason in New York.

"They look exactly the same, they breathe more and they won't shrink," Verlander said. "The best thing is, when it rains, the hats won't stink like the wool ones did."

In broaching the change, New Era was well aware of the 100 percent wool cap's long-standing place in baseball history, DeWaal said. Aside from tweaks here and there — a switch from leather sweatbands to cloth in the 1980s, for example — this is the first major overhaul of the baseball cap since the current, six-panel model was adopted in 1954, he said.


"There's a lot of tradition in baseball and we couldn't completely go against that tradition so we always had that as a parameter," DeWaal said, "but we wanted to take as open-minded a look at this as possible."

Watching Street sweat

Steve Vucinich, equipment manager of the Oakland A's, didn't think there was anything wrong with the old caps when he began testing the new ones with the team's pitchers about a year ago.

"This one is just so much better," he said after putting it through its paces atop Dan Haren, Joe Blanton, former UT star Huston Street and others.

The key is the new cap's ability to absorb sweat so that it can quickly evaporate.

"The heat is from the inside of the cap where your head is," Vucinich explained. "Before, it would just sweat to the band and it would drip kind of towards the bill but drip off there. Now the sweat goes out of the cap, even on top, and then it dries naturally."

And even though the new caps — minus the sweat rings — look and even feel just like the old ones, they are also designed to shrink less and fade less.


"If you watch a lot of baseball, you'll notice a number of different things on the players as the season progresses," said Steve Armus, vice president of consumer products at Major League Baseball. "Sweat stains, and you can't see it but they start to smell a bit, and also with certain colors they tend to bleed when the players sweat, so if you watch the Cardinals or teams that wear red caps, occasionally you'll see red bleeding into the white on logos.

"With these caps ... the water's not going to be absorbed into the headwear the way it is now," he said.

There are also some changes to the cap's underside. The piece under the visor, for example, has gone from gray to black to reduce reflection and glare from the sun and stadium lights. The sweat band, now of the new "performance" material, has gone from white to black for no other reason than it simply hides dirt better.


A batting practice cap teams are wearing for spring training also features "vapor management technology" to guard against odor, New Era said.

"By revolutionizing the cap, we're ensuring the players headwear provides the best performance while they play," New Era Chief Executive Officer Christopher Koch said.

Vucinich, for one, isn't worried about breaking with tradition.

"Uniforms have changed over the course of the years, not only just colors, but materials," he said. "They've been made more comfortable, lighter. ... As far as tradition and wool? It doesn't matter."

Nor is Detroit pitcher Joel Zumaya losing any sleep over the change.

"I didn't know about it, and I don't really care," he said. "I'd pitch without a hat."

$32 worth of comfort

Armus said the league is excited about the switch.

"We're proud to enact the commissioner's initiatives to bring performance to the field in a major way and really to make our players more comfortable," he said. "It's all about the performance initiative and this is the first major step in a lot of things that are going to be seen throughout the season which are really going to revolutionize our field."

But for the fan who might have trouble letting go, New Era will continue to produce wool models, though of the fashion variety, in non-authentic colors and styles.

The new caps will retail at about $32, up from the current $29, DeWaal said.

As someone who has worn New Era Authentic MLB ball caps almost exclusively for the past twenty years, I must say I'm awfully curious about these new caps.  In fact, my current cap that I've had for about two years now has developed quite an unsightly sweat stain above the visor.  Can't say I'm thrilled about the price bump, but if these new hats don't shrink, stain, and stink like the old ones, then I guess it's worth it.

Anyone seen them in person or tried them on yet?

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on February 23, 2007, 01:24 AM
Am I the only one who gives a **** about these hats?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on February 23, 2007, 09:09 AM
Sorry Matt, I've been away for a few days.

I have to say that this is the first I've heard of this and I am curious about how the general public will react.  I have an extensive White Sox hat collection and I'm not looking forward to having to replace these with new ones...

However, this is about the players, isn't it?!  Because when you're making millions of dollars a year, you're worried about how your hat absorbs sweat and the odor it gives off.  That is, unless you're sweaty Freddy Garcia.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on February 23, 2007, 09:26 AM

I have to say that this is the first I've heard of this and I am curious about how the general public will react.  I have an extensive White Sox hat collection and I'm not looking forward to having to replace these with new ones...


Just wait until the end of October, after the Yankees win the World Series all of the other teams hats will be 1/2 off on clearance.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on February 23, 2007, 11:04 AM
Just wait until the end of October, after the Yankees win the World Series all of the other teams hats will be 1/2 off on clearance.

Ah, Spring Training isn't even in full 'swing' and the trash talking is already starting...  I'm going to have to remember this post 7 months from now, but then again, I'm sure if they do end up winning, you'll remind us all about the prediction  ;D

I say good luck to all the teams and their fans.  Can't wait for the start of the season!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on February 23, 2007, 11:10 AM
Nah, in reality I know that chances are they probably won't win.  But, there's no denying that they go into the season the favorite every year.  The chances aren't so great, but they still have the best chance of anybody.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on February 23, 2007, 11:41 AM

I have to say that this is the first I've heard of this and I am curious about how the general public will react.  I have an extensive White Sox hat collection and I'm not looking forward to having to replace these with new ones...


Just wait until the end of October, after the Yankees win the World Series all of the other teams hats will be 1/2 off on clearance.

With or without ARod?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on February 23, 2007, 12:35 PM
I think ARod will be a Yankee all year, but if they don't win the World Series, or if they get bounced from the playoffs and he stinks it up, he'll opt out of his contract and hit the free agent market for 2008.

If he has an amazing playoff stretched, and the Yanks don't win the WS, I don't know what will happen then.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on February 23, 2007, 01:14 PM
He and Jeter getting along?  Still see snipes to that effect. 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on February 23, 2007, 01:21 PM
He and Jeter getting along?  Still see snipes to that effect. 

It's true.  The story resurfaces every time there's nothing else to talk about in the baseball world.  Namely in Spring Training.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on February 23, 2007, 02:25 PM
The story resurfaces every time there's nothing else to talk about in the baseball world. 

And A-Rod is happy to talk about it this year... keeping the reporters focused on that trivial stuff keeps them from asking him about his contract and escape clauses and such.   ;)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Broem on February 27, 2007, 02:15 PM
Ahhh...I see nobody made it to the veteran's HOF this year.  Baseball.  You have to love their HOF entrance requirements.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on March 5, 2007, 01:59 PM
Oh good, it's starting already (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/spring2007/news/story?id=2787719).

I was hoping we could get at least get through 2007 before worrying about whether or not Johan will be here in 2009.    ::)

I guess he's right though.  The Twins are better off hoping he'll take a 4-year, $70mil extension now than waiting for him to hit the free agent market in 2009 and having to pay $20+mil a year...  :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on March 5, 2007, 04:48 PM
 ;D Cincinnati Reds are 4-0 so far,but THIS IS Spring Training :-\ :P
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on March 5, 2007, 05:00 PM
;D Cincinnati Reds are 4-0 so far,but THIS IS Spring Training :-\ :P

The NL central is going to be tight.  The Cubs are improved with Soriano, the World Champion Cardinals who were only a .500 team to start with are weakened, the Astros got Carlos Lee, the Brewers could be good with Capuano/Sheets healthy, and the Reds could have a great pitching staff this year.  I definitely think Harang/Arroyo could be even better.  That division is gonna be a rat race right to the end and anyone could win it.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on March 5, 2007, 05:01 PM
Oh good, it's starting already (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/spring2007/news/story?id=2787719).

I was hoping we could get at least get through 2007 before worrying about whether or not Johan will be here in 2009.    ::)

I guess he's right though.  The Twins are better off hoping he'll take a 4-year, $70mil extension now than waiting for him to hit the free agent market in 2009 and having to pay $20+mil a year...  :-\


I heard that his Yankee uniform is already in production.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on March 5, 2007, 09:16 PM
But leave it to the Reds to find some way to screw it up ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on March 13, 2007, 12:38 AM
Am I the only one who gives a **** about these hats?

I know that a lot of you are still terribly concerned about these new ballcaps.  But instead of responding to each PM and e-mail individually, I thought it might be easier to just make a quick update here.

Still curious about the new caps, I stopped in my local haberdashery the other day to try one out for myself.  And with my keen eye for detail, I was pleased to discover that, outside of a few aforementioned chromatic differences to the underbelly of the cap, that there are no discernible differences between these new polyester-blend caps and the woolen caps of yesteryear.

Of course, the real selling point of the "synthetics" is not what they look like brand-new; it's what they look (and smell) like at the end of the summer, after gallons and gallons of sweat have been, er, sweated into them.  So, I'm afraid we won't know the results of this multi-million dollar experiment for some time to come.

But, in the immortal words of Lieutenant Pete Mitchell, it's looking good so far.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on March 13, 2007, 01:02 AM
I need a new Twinkies cap, perhaps I shall purchase one to test it out.  I expect they haven't made it north of the border just yet ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on March 13, 2007, 10:56 AM
I expect they haven't made it north of the border just yet ::)

Well, I was at a mall on Saturday, so I stopped into a sports haberdashery to check out the new caps. 

Unfortunately, all they had in-stock were the old 100% wool caps, so I guess they haven't even made it up this far north yet...  I'm interested to see what they look/feel like for myself. 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on March 13, 2007, 11:47 AM
Interesting.  At my head shop (is that the correct term?), they only had the new hats for one team, and they mentioned that even that was a derelict shipment, and they weren't supposed to get the rest of the new ones in until April.  So, not to fret, gentlemen:  It's not so much that Canada and Minnesota are "behind the times" (well, I mean, they are, just not in regards to these new caps); it's more like that Oklahoma is just incredibly-progressive when it comes to this particular issue (but, for that matter, all other issues, too).

Of course, all this begs the question:

Have Hostess and the Minnesota Twins ever teamed up for a Bill Veeck-like promotion?  Because, to me, that seems like a natural partnership.

And according to my research, they have!

Metrodome To Be Renamed “Twinkie Stadium” (http://www.realgmbaseball.com/src_feature/78/20050606/metrodome_to_be_renamed_%E2%80%9Ctwinkie_stadium%E2%80%9D/)

Quote
6th June, 2005 - 10:02 pm

Buster Gunning, heir to the Hostess Twinkie fortune, takes us into detail about the new Minnesota Twins/Twinkie partnership, a story that hits close to home for our surly reporter.

The Hostess Company, makers of the indestructible “Twinkie”, have sealed a deal with the Minnesota Twins to buy the stadium naming rights to the Metrodome.

The new name will be displayed as soon as Hostess can put the finishing touches on a giant 50-foot Twinkie replica that will hang above the stadiums entrance and is rumored to contain the actual filling present in all store-bought Twinkies.

Hostess representative Sam Puckett (no relation to twins star Kirby Puckett) was very excited about the partnership calling it a great revenue source for both the Twins and Hostess.

“It is widely known that many Twins fans around the area, some as far away as Minot, North Dakota, lovingly refer to the Twins as “the Twinkies.” This creates the perfect opportunity for our two businesses to create an advertising relationship. We at Hostess truly believe that the name ‘Twinkie Stadium’ is a perfect fit for our fabulous Minnesota Twins.

Details of the arrangement were not known at this time, however, as part of the contract Hostess will covert the concessions entirely to Twinkies and Twinkie related products. There is even talk of some kind of alcohol Twinkie concoction.

“I won’t go into too much detail about our new alcoholic Twinkie as I do not want to ruin the surprise,” said Puckett. “What I can tell you is that the cup will be actual Twinkie breading and the alcohol will take the place of the filling. Delicious!”

The preceeding article is a piece of satirical fiction.

Please, pay no attention to the last sentence of the article.

Free alcoholic Twinkies for everybody!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on March 13, 2007, 11:50 AM
I did come across these when I was out last week.  I don't view the changes as anything that I need to update my collection over, so I'm sticking with the wool ones for now.  At least one company won't be getting houndreds of my dollars this year...
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on March 13, 2007, 03:11 PM
Interesting.  At my head shop (is that the correct term?), they only had the new hats for one team...

I never bought any hats at my head shop, only water pipes for uh, um tobacco.


Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on March 13, 2007, 03:28 PM
I never bought any hats at my head shop, only water pipes for uh, um tobacco.

I dig.

So that's why everybody always looks at me funny when I ask to go there.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on March 30, 2007, 05:26 PM
NL East - Philly
NL Central - Da Cubs
NL West - Trollydodgers
NL Wild Card - Cards

AL East - Damn Yankees
AL Central - Motor City Kitties
AL West - Halos
AL Wild Card - BoSox
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on March 30, 2007, 07:31 PM
NL East - Phillies
NL Central - Cardinals
NL West - D' Backs
Wild Card - Mets

AL East - Yankees by a landslide
AL Central - Twins
AL West - A's
Wild Card - Red Sox

World Series - Yankees over the Phillies.

(http://images.sportsnetwork.com/baseball/mlb/allsport/nyyankees/ws_yankees.jpg)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on March 30, 2007, 09:43 PM
My Reds look to have pitching problems-AGAIN! Milton-Trade him.Griffey will play a few games and end up once again as the muti-million bench-warmer ::) :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on March 31, 2007, 09:44 AM
My Reds look to have pitching problems-AGAIN! Milton-Trade him.Griffey will play a few games and end up once again as the muti-million bench-warmer ::) :-\

Well, the NL Central is tough.  But, the Reds do have 2 quasi-studs at the top, which is more than most other teams have.  Arroyo and Harang is a pretty damn decent 1-2.  Look at the rest of that division.  Astros have just Oswalt.  Cubs have Zambrano though I think Rich Hill is going to emerge big time.  Pittsburgh has got dick.  Milwaukee has Sheets/Capuano which is equal to the Reds.  St. Louis has got nothing after Carpenter.

So, I think the Reds actually are tied for the best starting staff in the division with the Cubs and Brewers.

Bullpen is another story.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on March 31, 2007, 10:22 AM
Picking up Soriano was soooo huge for the Cubs that I think with Lee back they are going to contend again.  And if they get a healthy Prior back...watch out
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on March 31, 2007, 10:44 PM
That last preformance by Harang has my doubts :-\  >:(Then they get beat again today :P
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on April 2, 2007, 12:02 AM
(http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/frick_bios/images/carneal_herb.jpg)

One of the great voices of the game has died today...Hall of Fame Twins radio announcer Herb CarnealRIP Herb (http://www.startribune.com/509/story/1093520.html) :'(

http://www.startribune.com/10061/rich_media/1093866.html

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on April 2, 2007, 04:40 PM
 ;D Well so far so good! Reds lead the Cubs 1-5 in the 8th Thanks to Mr. Dunn ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 6, 2007, 10:15 AM
I'm gonna have to see Dice-K abuse someone other than the Royals before I board his bandwagon.  Once you get by Mark Teahen there's nobody even remotely challenging in that lineup.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on April 6, 2007, 10:33 AM
I'm gonna have to see Dice-K abuse someone other than the Royals before I board his bandwagon. 

Yeah... ooooh, he managed to beat the Royals.  Big friggin' deal.   He looked good, but I've seen a lot of bad pitchers (*cough* Carlos Silva *cough*) look great against the Royals.  It will be interesting to see how he fares in that first trip to Yankee Stadium, that's for sure.  ;)


I'm fairly positive about my Twins so far... but now we see the ugly side.  Silva and Ponson vs. the White Sox this weekend?  I have a feeling we're going to lose a LOT of games at the back end of the rotation this year if we're force to stick with those two.   :-\

I miss Liriano...  :'(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on April 6, 2007, 11:37 AM
I know I'm biased here, but I liked what I saw - bad opposition or not.  The Royals are still a major league baseball team and they did slap around Schilling three nights before.  He had good command, his pitches had excellent movement and he didn't seem to be phased by nerves, hordes of media and the immense pressure Boston (both fans and media) puts on the Red Sox.  I'm not ready to annoint him the next Cy Young, but for a first MLB start he looked great.  Like Jeff said, the true test will be when he faces the Yankees and some of the other power line ups in the AL like Toronto, Cleveland, White Sox and Detroit.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 20, 2007, 08:49 PM
ARod just took Schilling deep for the 2nd time tonight  :o

There's no doubt ARod is having the best April of any MLB player in the entire history of the sport.

After 2 weeks of April baseball, Arod stands at .367 12 HR 30 RBI and 19 Runs scored.  1 swiped bag.

Those numbers ought to look even scarier at the end of the month.

Whew!

Dice-K actually gasped in horror at ARod's blast, LOL:

(http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/getty/55/fullj.getty-73394835eg011_new_york_yank_8_25_52_pm.jpg)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 20, 2007, 11:16 PM
Does anybody know what on God's green earth happened to Brad Lidge? 

He literally has not been the same since this moment:

(http://blog.kir.com/archives/pujols%20and%20Lidge.jpg)

He was one of the top 3 closers in baseball 13 months ago, and since that time has an ERA 5.00+ and a WHIP at 1.40.

This is the same guy who was good for a 2.00 ERA and a 1.10 WHIP.  He racked up K's like a starter for ****'s sake.

He must be trying to pitch through injury, but this really has gone on long enough already.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on April 21, 2007, 07:29 AM

Dice-K actually gasped in horror at ARod's blast, LOL:



Did you have the same reaction when the Yanks bullpen blew a 4 run lead in the bottom of the eighth? LOL:

Looks like ARod is playing for a new contract next season.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on April 21, 2007, 10:52 AM
What!? the **** happen to the Reds! They can't even beat a 4-10 team! then blow a 6-1 lead in the 8th inning! MORONS! >:( :P :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 23, 2007, 11:11 AM
Pandemonium for a Yank-Hatah

Yankees swept at Boston-first since 1990   yeSSSSS!

Tooo bad all those ARod homers couldn't even help them; he's steamrolling now!

L DukAY hammered lately! yeSSSS

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 23, 2007, 11:58 AM
Pandemonium for a Yank-Hatah

Yankees swept at Boston-first since 1990   yeSSSSS!

Tooo bad all those ARod homers couldn't even help them; he's steamrolling now!

L DukAY hammered lately! yeSSSS

DS

Go away.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on April 23, 2007, 03:29 PM
 >:(that's nothing The Moron Reds were swept by a 4-10 team.They looked horrible. :P :-[ :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 23, 2007, 04:02 PM
No sympathy.....I tolled through my team has looked like ass for the first couple weeks.
This weekend however, they completed their second consecutive sweep at home, and they don't look so bad now, especially the pitching rotation!

Couple that with my most hated team sucking, along with their closer with the ridiculous nickname getting lit up.. I feel all  :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)s

 ;D
DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 23, 2007, 04:06 PM
No sympathy.....I tolled through my team has looked like ass for the first couple weeks.
This weekend however, they completed their second consecutive sweep at home, and they don't look so bad now, especially the pitching rotation!

Couple that with my most hated team sucking, along with their closer with the ridiculous nickname getting lit up.. I feel all  :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)s

 ;D
DS

Oh big woop.  He gave up a run scoring triple down the right field foul line where Doug Mientkiewicz and his super nifty glove that we haven't seen yet should have been playing in the first place to protect against precisely that play.

Your team doesn't even have a closer and our's has a good chance of converting the next 40 save opportunities in flawless fashion like he normally does year after year.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 23, 2007, 06:04 PM
Your team doesn't even have a closer and our's has a good chance of converting the next 40 save opportunities in flawless fashion like he normally does year after year.

Oh yeah, well, my dad is bigger than your..dads and... ::)
-win hard and lose hard-at least you're consistent ;D ;D ;D :-*

*you are right though my team closer has converted 4 out of 4 chances, so I guess we don't have a closer

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 23, 2007, 06:58 PM

*you are right though my team closer has converted 4 out of 4 chances, so I guess we don't have a closer

DS

Not without drama my friend.  He gave up 2 ER in one of his 4 saves and put 2 runners on base in each of his last 2 saves.  Not exactly stellar.  And please, don't even try to compare Armando Benitez to Mariano Rivera.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 23, 2007, 10:43 PM

*you are right though my team closer has converted 4 out of 4 chances, so I guess we don't have a closer

DS

Not without drama my friend.  He gave up 2 ER in one of his 4 saves and put 2 runners on base in each of his last 2 saves.  Not exactly stellar.  And please, don't even try to compare Armando Benitez to Mariano Rivera.

I wouldn't dare because at the season to this point your guy is obviously better ::)
It's a world of ..what have you done for me lately, haven't you learned that yet?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Rob on April 24, 2007, 12:30 AM
Is Alex Rodriguez really on pace to hit 126 HR's 18 games into the season?

Insane.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on April 24, 2007, 12:39 AM
Is Alex Rodriguez really on pace to hit 126 HR's 18 games into the season?

Insane.

He can opt out of his contract with the Yankees at the end of the year and get more money, if I'm not mistaken.  When you can, always draft a guy in a pre-contract year.  Not that I follow my own advice, but Pujols is starting to come around ;)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 24, 2007, 10:19 AM

It's a world of ..what have you done for me lately, haven't you learned that yet?


In the 16 game NFL season it is.  In MLB's 162 game season it is not.  It is a game of averages.  Earned Run Average.  Batting Average.  Things tend to average out over a baseball season, managers don't crucify their players over April baseball.  April baseball is one of the biggest aberrations in any sport, but the cream does rise to the top by October.  On average  ;)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 24, 2007, 11:52 AM
Your speaking in alot of future tongues...well at least your confident in them.

Personally for me, I think 'El Turd' will start to decline now-just a hope-filled feeling.

Meanwhile, with what Rob said..yeah, A-Rod's pace...unreal. No person, however has been able to maintain a pace like it through a season. In the past mind you- I'm not predicting the future saying he can't either-but, wow.

It's sad that all he's doing isn't helping his team lately...is he the only one playing? That's alot of runs NY pitching gave up to. . . . .TB?! Can someone tell me why NYY seems to annually struggle against this team?(I know someone is too prideful to refuse ;))


DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 25, 2007, 10:50 AM
Go Giants...keep going! ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 25, 2007, 12:05 PM
Go Giants...keep going! ;D

They stink and they've got no shot.  They'll probably only outperform the Rockies in their division.  And Barry Zito is the posterchild for an overpaid free agent pitcher without all that much dominance or talent.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 25, 2007, 03:08 PM
 ;D ;D ;D

C'mon you really meant the Yanks with that statement right? 'Cause they smell pretty bad right now.

...and who really cares about where they might 'end up'(since no person can know that)
-- right now the Giants are doing well and the Yanks are not--like previous years I'd bet the Yanks losses to TB will hurt them later-but who really cares since that's all speculation(in the future) right?

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on April 25, 2007, 03:28 PM
 :o :o :o Finally!!The Reds won one! :P
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 25, 2007, 04:29 PM
;D ;D ;D

C'mon you really meant the Yanks with that statement right? 'Cause they smell pretty bad right now.

...and who really cares about where they might 'end up'(since no person can know that)
-- right now the Giants are doing well and the Yanks are not--like previous years I'd bet the Yanks losses to TB will hurt them later-but who really cares since that's all speculation(in the future) right?

DS

The Yanks will wind up with 10 more wins than the SF Giants.

Don't let a 5 game skid in April lead you to break the cardinal rule in sports:

Thou Shalt Not Ever Bet Against The Yankees.

And dude, the Giants suck.  They have viturally no good players.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 25, 2007, 05:22 PM
;D ;D ;D

C'mon you really meant the Yanks with that statement right? 'Cause they smell pretty bad right now.

...and who really cares about where they might 'end up'(since no person can know that)
-- right now the Giants are doing well and the Yanks are not--like previous years I'd bet the Yanks losses to TB will hurt them later-but who really cares since that's all speculation(in the future) right?

DS

The Yanks will wind up with 10 more wins than the SF Giants.

Don't let a 5 game skid in April lead you to break the cardinal rule in sports:

Thou Shalt Not Ever Bet Against The Yankees.


So bold, then yet only pick 10 wins more??
Hillarious ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 25, 2007, 05:27 PM
I don't know what sport you follow, but in MLB 10 wins is a monster lead.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on April 25, 2007, 10:36 PM
 >:(The Reds are on the Stupid side again :P :(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 26, 2007, 01:52 AM
 
Go Giants Go!!!!!   Go Giants Go!!!! Go GIANTS Go!!!!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on April 26, 2007, 10:36 AM
Go Giants Go!!!!!   Go Giants Go!!!! Go GIANTS Go!!!!

I agree.

(http://artfiles.art.com/images/-/Eli-Manning-0405-passing-acton-Photofile-Photograph-C10201681.jpeg)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 26, 2007, 10:43 AM
'I don't know what sport you follow' but this is a MLB thread. So that means you can put your NY Giants aren't-gonna-do-****-this-year pics in that nfl thread.


 ::)


garlic fries, baby
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on April 27, 2007, 01:51 AM
GO GIANTS GO!!!!!       GO GIANTS GO!!!!!      GO GIANTS GO!!!!!

 ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 3, 2007, 04:11 PM
Why do I get the feeling that ..in the unlikely event the Yanks lose this double header today that Joe will be underservingly fired by their impatient owner?

Honestly, if only the team owner listened to Drebbel than he would be enlightened that it was only April right? ::)

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on May 5, 2007, 12:45 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=A9G_e8CfCjxGNjoB9AURvLYF?slug=ap-cardinals-hancock&prov=ap&type=lgns

Wow.  What a dumbass.  Suddenly I feel sick that I even mourned his death.  At least in his negligence it was only him that died.

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on May 6, 2007, 10:09 AM
The Reds :( >:( :P :-X :-X :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jayson on May 6, 2007, 03:48 PM
Clemens back with the Yankees (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18520880/)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 6, 2007, 04:24 PM
I noticed that this afternoon


 ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 6, 2007, 05:02 PM
Oh hell yeah.  Here we come baby!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 8, 2007, 12:18 PM
C'mon Giants! ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 11, 2007, 09:26 AM
(http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20070510/capt.3be3d8425c7e4f6eba22a42a9ab48a94.rangers_yankees_baseball_nyy116.jpg)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on May 11, 2007, 04:10 PM
 >:( REDS=Last place :P No Surprise there! :( :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 18, 2007, 08:03 PM
Thanks to a local friend in NYS politics and a small contribution to Rudy For President 2008, I'll be at the Mets/Yankees Subway Series this weekend and having cocktails with Giuliani before the game.  It should be one of my cooler MLB experiences.

 :D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 19, 2007, 03:40 PM
....even cooler if your team won 1 game in the series?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 19, 2007, 05:08 PM
....even cooler if your team won 1 game in the series?

I'd have thought you would have learned your lesson by now in backing off the Yankee mud slinging in April and May.

I got news for you, it doesn't matter yet!  Sure as **** when October rolls around the Yanks will be one of the hottest teams, and in the playoffs, and the San Francisco Giants will be nothing as usual.

You can take it to the bank Slothus.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on May 19, 2007, 11:40 PM
The Reds are so bad!! I'm not even going to comment :P >:( :-\ :'(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 21, 2007, 10:58 AM
....even cooler if your team won 1 game in the series?

I'd have thought you would have learned your lesson by now in backing off the Yankee mud slinging in April and May.

I got news for you, it doesn't matter yet!  Sure as **** when October rolls around the Yanks will be one of the hottest teams, and in the playoffs, and the San Francisco Giants will be nothing as usual.

You can take it to the bank Slothus.

You are as arrogant and foolish as the Yankee management; it will be the Yanks who are nothing this year....that 10 games is looking really tough too now BTW.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on May 21, 2007, 11:17 AM
I'd have thought you would have learned your lesson by now in backing off the Yankee mud slinging in April and May.

I got news for you, it doesn't matter yet!  Sure as **** when October rolls around the Yanks will be one of the hottest teams, and in the playoffs, and the San Francisco Giants will be nothing as usual.

You can take it to the bank Slothus.

Totally correct, as usual.

It's kind of like, in years past, when you've talked up the Yanks around here all Spring (and Summer) long, but everything still went to **** when they got to the post-season.

So yeah--still a long season ahead of us.  Anything can happen.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 23, 2007, 10:16 AM
Alright Giants!!!  -good job RSox ;)-

DS ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 24, 2007, 01:35 AM
They might be Giants??! ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 24, 2007, 09:22 PM
They might be Giants??! ;D

The late May/early June shift to normalcy is already under way.  The Yanks are emerging, the Giants will be fading, the laws of probability take over, and all will be right with MLB.  The Yanks will continue their success.

That's right, success.  They averaged 100 wins/year over the past 3 seasons.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on May 24, 2007, 10:20 PM
The late May/early June shift to normalcy is already under way.  The Yanks are emerging, the Giants will be fading, the laws of probability take over, and all will be right with MLB.  The Yanks will continue their success.

That's right, success.  They averaged 100 wins/year over the past 3 seasons.

I remember the days when "success" for the Yankees meant winning a World Series.  Now it's just based on how many wins they can accumulate.  My, how things have changed. . .
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 24, 2007, 10:26 PM
The late May/early June shift to normalcy is already under way.  The Yanks are emerging, the Giants will be fading, the laws of probability take over, and all will be right with MLB.  The Yanks will continue their success.

That's right, success.  They averaged 100 wins/year over the past 3 seasons.

I remember the days when "success" for the Yankees meant winning a World Series.  Now it's just based on how many wins they can accumulate.  My, how things have changed. . .

Well maybe sometime in the next few hundred years another team will have reached 26 World Championships and we'll have to revisit that benchmark to redefine our success.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 24, 2007, 10:28 PM
-good job RSox ;)-

DS ;D

I agree.  Dropping 2 out of 3 to the Yankees is always most welcome.

You're not so bad, Slothus.  I don't care what they say.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on May 24, 2007, 11:31 PM
If you don't mind me interrupting this never-ending 2-way "Yankees Suck" "Giants Suck" banter, let me just say one word.

Whore (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ag14MUwGN3IgIcmJL3AeIxYRvLYF?slug=ap-hancock-lawsuit&prov=ap&type=lgns)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 24, 2007, 11:32 PM
-good job RSox ;)-

DS ;D

I agree.  Dropping 2 out of 3 to the Yankees is always most welcome.


At the position they're in it certainly is welcome(they'll take anything they can get), they were skillful in gaining 1 game back, I'll give them that. Noted Clemens looked old and ****** on TV- I guess that expensive project isn't starting soon.

Important tip for you--  I don't care what they say either about me ::)

S
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 24, 2007, 11:34 PM
Whore (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ag14MUwGN3IgIcmJL3AeIxYRvLYF?slug=ap-hancock-lawsuit&prov=ap&type=lgns)

Yeah, not so surprising in this day and age is it?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 25, 2007, 12:12 AM
If you don't mind me interrupting this never-ending 2-way "Yankees Suck" "Giants Suck" banter, let me just say one word.

Whore (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ag14MUwGN3IgIcmJL3AeIxYRvLYF?slug=ap-hancock-lawsuit&prov=ap&type=lgns)

If a judge gets a hold of this who shares my concept of "personal accountability," a cornerstone of my Conservative Principles, this lawsuit will be dismissed faster than a rabbit gets ******.

There's only 1 person responsible for Hancock's death.  And that person is Hancock himself.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Kenobi on May 25, 2007, 02:09 PM
Just read that story and can't believe that the case will go to trial.  The only one who was responsbile for the untimely death of Hancock was himself.  Trying to sue the owner of a disable car, the tow truck company and driver are a poor excuse for a case.  Just a bunch of money hungry lawyers who want to get richer.  I'm glad the idiot didn't kill anyone else as usually the case.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Deanna Rash on May 26, 2007, 12:30 AM
Reds totally SUCK this year! :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 27, 2007, 12:46 PM


At the position they're in it certainly is welcome(they'll take anything they can get

The position that they're in?  You mean their May position?

2005: 11-19 start.  Won the division.

You can expect more of the same this year.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jesse James on May 28, 2007, 02:28 AM
Food for thought, they're below the Pirates...  I don't care for baseball myself, but even I know that's ugly. :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 28, 2007, 04:28 PM
Ouch...just like the NYY, the Giants just got swept at home, being under 500 hurts. At least they're(SFG) still under 5 games back though :-\.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 28, 2007, 09:02 PM
I am not backing off my prediction that the Yankees are going to turn this around and still get into the playoffs, but I can't shake the feeling that the Yanks are a couple losses away from Cashman's head rolling.

It's gonna be Cashman, not Torre.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 29, 2007, 02:57 PM
I am not backing off my prediction that the Yankees are going to turn this around and still get into the playoffs

No doubt, I wouldn't expect you to even if it were late August and the team were in the same position then.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 29, 2007, 02:59 PM
I am not backing off my prediction that the Yankees are going to turn this around and still get into the playoffs

No doubt, I wouldn't expect you to even if it were late August and the team were in the same position then.

Yeahhhhh sure, if it were late August, with 1 month to play and the Yanks were 6 games under .500, I'd be the first to wave the white flag.  That's checkmate. 

6 games under .500 in May is not.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on May 29, 2007, 03:23 PM
6 games under .500 in May is not.

Well, even though I am definitely not a fan of the Yankees, I am a fan of a different team who found themselves in a similar situation last year...

2006 AL Central Champion MN Twins
as of May 30th, 2006 - 23-28 (4th place, 11.5 games back)
at the end of the year - 96-66 (1st place)

So yeah, I agree that 5 or 6 games below .500 (and 10+ games out of first) in late May is no big deal...  :D

Baseball is funny like that.  Teams get hot and cold at different times of the year, it's really too early to write them off just yet.  Now, if the Yankees are still below .500 after the All-Star break, we can start talking bad about them.  ;)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 29, 2007, 03:40 PM
6 games under .500 in May is not.

Well, even though I am definitely not a fan of the Yankees, I am a fan of a different team who found themselves in a similar situation last year...

2006 AL Central Champion MN Twins
as of May 30th, 2006 - 23-28 (4th place, 11.5 games back)
at the end of the year - 96-66 (1st place)

So yeah, I agree that 5 or 6 games below .500 (and 10+ games out of first) in late May is no big deal...  :D


There's another parallel there too Jeff.  Clemens is about to emerge about the same time that Liriano did for the Twins last year.  Liriano's emergence basically coincided with the improvement in the standings.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 29, 2007, 05:25 PM
Somehow I don't see the same Cinderella story with Clemens. Contact me in August for an update to see if I'm wrong about that.

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on May 29, 2007, 05:26 PM
Somehow I don't see the same Cinderella story with Clemens. Contact me in August for an update to see if I'm wrong about that.

DS

Be careful I might be contacting you after every Clemens start between now and then.

 :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on May 29, 2007, 06:13 PM
Nothing to be careful about; I expect it from you-as long as you do it for all types of starts ;). I'm sure everyone else will appreciate you doing that too :P.

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on June 5, 2007, 01:22 PM
Let the elimination #'s begin

Yankees @ 100  :)
Giants @ 100  :(
Reds at ....something bad  :-\

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Angry Ewok on June 7, 2007, 03:08 PM
The Braves are sucking so, so bad this year. The pitching is weak, the hitting is nonexistent... Andruw Jones is not helping to carry the team the way he used to... I hate to say it, but I'm wondering if the Braves might be able to trade him for something else.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on June 7, 2007, 03:28 PM
What??? I know about Andru's problems..but this is what, his first bad year? I thought they were a pretty good team until a few weeks ago when they started sliding. They should be alright considering the Mets are sliding lately too-however they are getting some of their injured back and this looks to change.

My team has been crippled in 1 and 2 run games this year :(

DS 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on June 14, 2007, 01:31 PM
So yeah, I agree that 5 or 6 games below .500 (and 10+ games out of first) in late May is no big deal...  :D

See?  Just two weeks later and our two most-discussed teams are back over .500:  32-31  :)

As DR pointed out, this is the span where Liriano became a stud and the Twins rolled off 19 wins in 20 games.  I don't think that's in the cards for us this year, but at least I'm in the AL Central so I don't have to give up hope yet.  :D


The Braves are sucking so, so bad this year.

Indeed.  They appear to be just what my team needed to get the bats going again.  :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on June 14, 2007, 02:01 PM
Let's talk about the Yankees 8 game winning streak.  Soon to be 9 as they're winning today too.  Let's talk about Mariano Rivera's 7 mph he added to his cutter pushing it to 95 this month.  And let's talk about Abreu and Cano getting out of their slumps.  And let's talk Clemens.  And let's talk about the healthy pitching staff of Clemens-Pettitte-Mussina-Wang that has replaced DeSalvo, Wright, and Karstens.  Yanks are back baby, the AL East ain't over yet.  We made up 6 games in the standings in 9 days.  Expect 90+ wins still, now that they're out of their slumps and their pitching staff isn't ravaged by injuries.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on June 14, 2007, 02:40 PM
Let's talk about the Yankees. . .  Let's talk about Mariano Rivera. . .  And let's talk about Abreu and Cano. . .  And let's talk Clemens. . .  And let's talk about the healthy pitching staff. . .

Yes, let's talk about all of those things.  The Yankees get far too little attention around these parts.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on June 14, 2007, 03:15 PM
Let's talk about the Yankees 8 game winning streak.  Soon to be 9 as they're winning today too.  Let's talk  about Mariano Rivera's 7 mph he added to his cutter pushing it to 95 this month.  And let's talk  about Abreu and Cano getting out of their slumps.  And let's talk  Clemens.  And let's talk  about the healthy pitching staff of Clemens-Pettitte-Mussina-Wang that has replaced DeSalvo, Wright, and Karstens.  Yanks are back baby, the AL East ain't over yet.  We made up 6 games in the standings in 9 days.  Expect 90+ wins still, now that they're out of their slumps and their pitching staff isn't ravaged by injuries.

Yeah, let's talk about them...NOT! Something tells me you would be one doing the most typing,promoting,arrogance-bragging, sore winnerisms and whatever else you're entitled too. My team is sucking now, they had an 8 game winning streak awhile back that put them 4 games over 500 and since they dropped back-sure, I got excited too but I refrained from making any season predictions like division winning ect. The Yanks are back??! Really? They are in position to make playoffs if they started today? I'm in denial because I hate them and their arrogant fans. 'How many championships did you're team win, baby?'= Typical BS. The Yankees Baby...NO.

DS   
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on June 14, 2007, 04:22 PM
9
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on June 24, 2007, 07:33 PM
Wow my lowly favorite team has won a whole 2 in a row :P. To think we get congratulated by the visiting Pads this week ::). Going to the game tommorrow-hope it's a sunny day for a splashdown!

Can't wait for the All Star Game... I hope there's some splashdowns in it and the home run derby too.

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on July 12, 2007, 11:08 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ApcKoZBEB1NKxHOWPpm2ocARvLYF?slug=ap-all-stars-pujolsupset&prov=ap&type=lgns

When did Pujols become such a bitch?  He whined and cried about not winning the MVP last year, too.  I don't remember him being such a whiner, but maybe I just hadn't seen it until the MVP thing.

And on the subject, am I the only person that's become increasingly bored of the All-star game?  And even more so the home run derby?  I didn't watch a moment of either of them this year.

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on July 12, 2007, 12:54 PM

When did Pujols become such a bitch?  He whined and cried about not winning the MVP last year, too.  I don't remember him being such a whiner, but maybe I just hadn't seen it until the MVP thing.


Not to mentioned he certainly hasn't lived up to the #1 pick overall in fantasy baseball.  Bastard.


And on the subject, am I the only person that's become increasingly bored of the All-star game?  And even more so the home run derby?  I didn't watch a moment of either of them this year.

John

Nope.  I watched a bit of the homerun derby but between Berman's "backbackback" and lame ass nicknames and Joe Morgan just speaking, I turned it off pretty quickly.

I had the ASG on in the background and paid attention when the Sox representatives were up or pitching, but other than that, I had no interest really. 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on July 12, 2007, 01:25 PM
. . .Berman's "backbackback". . .

I'm glad I'm not the only one annoyed with that.  I caught just a little of the HRD (most of Pujols' last appearance), and Berman did the backbackback thing at least two or three times for Pujols alone.  No telling how many times he did it throughout the whole thing.  In a game situation, fine, but in the HRD, when there's no outfielder chasing it down?  Shaddup.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on July 12, 2007, 01:38 PM

When did Pujols become such a bitch?  He whined and cried about not winning the MVP last year, too.  I don't remember him being such a whiner, but maybe I just hadn't seen it until the MVP thing.


Not to mentioned he certainly hasn't lived up to the #1 pick overall in fantasy baseball.  Bastard.


He's at .310  15 HR  52 RBI and 50 R, which obviously isn't bad, but I can't remember the last time a #1 fantasy pick was actually the #1 fantasy player in baseball.  Maybe Bonds a bunch of years ago in the glory years or ARod with Texas. 

Anyhow, Pujols probably should never be #1 just because he's a first baseman.  There's a ton of them who do, or are, putting up very good numbers.  Howard.  Ortiz.  Berkman.  Fielder.  Hafner.  Morneau.  Sheffield.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on July 12, 2007, 03:06 PM
Personally for me... I think Peter Gammons represents MLB for ESPN. I really dislike the fact that Berman(ESPN posterboy) gets to bump Gammons annually for these events.

Berman is their guy though. He pretty much gets to bump anyone and be on most televised ESPN sporting events. I do get annoyed with Chris' nicknames and backbackback, he-could-go-all-the-way ect's
- come up with some new material already and mix it up-it makes it old and boring for me.

IMO Gammons seems to know his baseball stuff/while Morgan really becomes too opinionated at times and is mostly boring to listen to. My personal opinions of course.

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on July 21, 2007, 03:38 PM
Scott Olsen:

(http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20070721/capt.247902c46a214f35914181eb6cbdf591.marlins_olsen_baseball_flad101.jpg)


Eminem:

(http://www.nndb.com/people/538/000024466/eminem-msht.jpg)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on August 1, 2007, 12:51 PM
8 homers by the Yankees yesterday.

Though I hate them, that IS impressive teamwork.
I wonder as to what was going through the opponents minds at that point...

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on August 2, 2007, 12:55 PM
It's not right.  Bonds breaking Aaron's record.

"I had a little kid come up to me and tell me he'd give the ball back to me," Bonds said with a laugh. "I said, 'Are you stupid? You'd have more money than your parents.'" (http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/mlb?cnn=yes)

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on August 3, 2007, 12:00 AM
It's not right.  Bonds breaking Aaron's record.

"I had a little kid come up to me and tell me he'd give the ball back to me," Bonds said with a laugh. "I said, 'Are you stupid? You'd have more money than your parents.'" (http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/mlb?cnn=yes)



Methinks Barry is overestimating the value of that ball.  Unless of course he's planning on buying it back so he can keep it ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: stormie on August 3, 2007, 12:24 PM
"I had a little kid come up to me and tell me he'd give the ball back to me," Bonds said with a laugh. "I said, 'Are you stupid? You'd have more money than your parents.'" (http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/mlb?cnn=yes)

Though I'm no advocate of calling little kids stupid, and I'll certainly agree that Bonds has displayed more than his fair share of arrogant prickiness, I think his statement has some merit. Even if it has no possibility of fetching "McFarlane money," that ball's gotta be worth at least $50,000 to someone, probably more, and that's definitely more money than I have. That sure would buy a kid a relatively nice education.

Of course, I'll have to recuse myself from having any objective opinion, since I live and work just south of the Giants' ballpark.  :P
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: jadesfire on August 8, 2007, 12:07 PM
I stayed up again last night to watch and see if Bonds broke the record....not disappointed this time.  I love baseball and am glad I got to watch it 'live'.  I am not, however, a Bonds fan (never was) and only wish Junior would have been healthy - I truely believe he would have broken the record first - hell, everyone still would be trying to chase him. 

As for the pre-recorded message from Hank Aaron - class act all the way.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on August 8, 2007, 12:44 PM
As for the pre-recorded message from Hank Aaron - class act all the way.

I agree, that was the only good thing about it.  I managed to click to the game just in time to see the HR, dumb luck I guess.  I still hate the way Bonds got to the record, but at least he won't hold the record for long... as long as A-rod stays healthy that is.  ;)

If Barry sticks around to hit another 150 HRs, then I might forgive the "cream and clear" years.  :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on August 8, 2007, 04:59 PM
I hate the fact that Bonds now holds the records for most home runs in a season as well as the overall home run record.  They are both amazing accomplishments, I just don't like that it's his name in the books.  There are very few baseball players that I dislike, but Bonds is at the top of the list.  IMO, I don't think that there has been one positive thing that he has contributed to the game.  Well, at least nothing that has ever been proven positive...

I can't wait until A-Rod blows the overall record away.  Hopefully I won't be waiting too long, especially at his current pace.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on August 8, 2007, 07:24 PM


I can't wait until A-Rod blows the overall record away.  Hopefully I won't be waiting too long, especially at his current pace.

If he averages 40 HR a year from here on out (and he's 32 now), it'd take 6 1/2 seasons of perfect health.

It's possible, but these records endure for so long because it's hard for people to stay that healthy for that long.

I'd say he's got a 50-50 shot though.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: I Am Sith on August 8, 2007, 08:59 PM
Yeah, I know that it's going to be hard for him to do if he stays healthy and even harder if he gets injured.  But you never know, he could end up playing the field for a few more years and then go the Frank Thomas route and end up a DH when he's no longer able to make a contribution on the field.  Either way, I think he has the best chance of any active player.

For a long time I thought that Jr. was going to be the one that broke the record, but that was before the dark times... Before the NL...  Now I think that he's the perfect candidate for an AL DH...
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on August 18, 2007, 08:56 AM
**** off, Gagne.   >:(

On a happier note, the NESN/WEEI telethon that ran the last two days raised over $3.6 million for the Jimmy Fund and the Dana Farber Cancer Institute and that's 1,000 times more important than any baseball game.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Neal on August 22, 2007, 10:23 PM
HOLY ****!!!

Rangers' 30 runs sets AL record in rout of Orioles (http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=270822201)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Rob on August 23, 2007, 02:30 AM
Here in Dallas our sports radio station is called The Ticket.  The 12:00 - 3:00 show is called BAD Radio (Bob And Dan Radio).

Today I was driving around on my lunch break and they were completely going off on the Rangers road batting average.  They had some stats about how since 2000 the Rangers have the worst road BA in all of baseball.  They were saying that Rudy Jaramillo flat out sucks as a hitting coach but that everyone loves him and he's the longest tenured hitting coach in the league and yadda yadda yadda.  They were basically saying he should be fired.

Then the Rangers go out, that very night and put up 30.


I'd be willing to bet someone played that audio for them. 

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on August 31, 2007, 10:19 PM
OK, we all know I'm a Royals fan, but it was *painful* watching Baker walk John Buck to lead off the 9th.   :-\  You want to see a perfect game get broken up by a legitmate hit, not a walk or cheapo.

And now the no-no is gone.  I was kind of hoping to see my first no-hitter ever.

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on September 14, 2007, 11:25 AM
Goodbye Terry Ryan... 

I'm assuming that he's stepping down as the Twins' GM because he doesn't want to be the guy who let Torii Hunter go and/or the guy who traded Johan Santana.   :-X

Something tells me this off-season is really, really going to suck for my club.  :'(


And, as we head into the last couple weeks I have to say I'm pretty shocked by some teams and their performances these last few weeks.  Seattle  and Toronto have tanked it, pretty much killing any chance they had at Wild Card runs.  Really looks like it's just the Yanks and Detroit left to battle it out.  Over in the NL, I'm surprise to see that the NL Central is still up for grabs and even the St. Louis HGH Squad still has an outside chance there.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on September 30, 2007, 11:22 AM
If the Mets and Phillies both win today and the Padres lose, each team will have a 89-73 record.  The Mets and Phils will be tied for 1st in the NL East and the three teams will have an identical record as far as the Wild Card is concerned.  How is this handled in MLB?  Will the Mets and Phils do a 1-game playoff?  If so, how is the Wild Card then handled?

And on an unrelated note, am I the only person here that thinks Saves are the most overrated statistic in baseball?  I was at the Royals/Indians game on Sunday and Borowski reminded me of why I feel this way.  He came in with a 2-run lead, let two runners get on but still managed to hold the lead.  The guy's got more saves this season than anyone in the AL yet his ERA is better than 5.00.  Not to downplay the significance of having a solid closer, but the stat is just way too inconsistent.  A guy can come in with a three run lead, give up two runs and still be the hero as far as stats are concerned.  But the guy that comes in with a 1-run lead, the bases loaded with nobody out and subsequently retires three batters in order gets the Hold (a stat that was only developed to make middle relievers feel important).  Personally I find a save in baseball to be synonymous with a Hold.

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 1, 2007, 07:48 AM
If the Mets and Phillies both win today and the Padres lose, each team will have a 89-73 record.  The Mets and Phils will be tied for 1st in the NL East and the three teams will have an identical record as far as the Wild Card is concerned.  How is this handled in MLB?  Will the Mets and Phils do a 1-game playoff?  If so, how is the Wild Card then handled?


Not that it matters much now with the Mets losing completely ******** the bed, but if the Mets had won yesterday, then the Mets and Phils would have played today (in Philly) to decide the NL East.  The loser would then fight it out with the Padres and Rockies over the next few days to determine the wild card. I think it went NL East loser to play Padres and then that winner to play the Rockies for the final playoff spot.

As it stands, we're only getting one "play in" game today between the Padres and Rockies.  The winner takes the NL Wild Card and opens on the road against the Phillies.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on October 7, 2007, 10:18 AM
So Boston and Cleveland each go for the sweep today.  Does anyone know ever there's ever been a four-team sweep in the first round of the playoffs like there could be after today?

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on October 9, 2007, 02:23 AM

I have to say that this is the first I've heard of this and I am curious about how the general public will react.  I have an extensive White Sox hat collection and I'm not looking forward to having to replace these with new ones...


Just wait until the end of October, after the Yankees win the World Series all of the other teams hats will be 1/2 off on clearance.

 :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on October 9, 2007, 09:10 AM
It was nice knowin' ya Joe.

 :-*
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on October 9, 2007, 11:40 AM
It was nice knowin' ya Joe.

 :-*

Don't be quite so sure just yet.

He managed the Yankees to within 2 wins of the best record in baseball with multiple injuries, and his "ace" Chien-Ming Wang lost 2 games in Round 1 with an ERA of 19.00

It's hard to blame that on Joe.

At this point it's about 50-50.

He does not deserve to be let go.  By the way, there is no way to fire him.  His contract is up.  He simply wouldn't be offered a new deal.  A technicality for sure, but he can't be "fired".

The Yanks lost this series because they were unlucky, not because of managerial mistakes.  They hit almost as well as Cleveland, except Cleveland hit about .500 with RISP, and the Yankees' hits came with nobody on base.  It's baseball, it happens.  No matter who the manager is, the Yankees still come into next year the favorite to win the World Series.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on October 9, 2007, 11:47 AM
With all the money they've spent, he does deserve to go 'unsigned.'

Big deal, they were two games off of the best record in baseball - they didn't win the World Series. 

Isn't that what counts?

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on October 9, 2007, 11:54 AM
No matter who the manager is, the Yankees still come into next year the favorite to win the World Series.

I won't make them my favorite in 2008, but they are in the top five for sure... 

Once they sign Torii Hunter and then trade for Santana, then I'll let you call them the favorites.   :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 9, 2007, 12:43 PM
No matter who the manager is, the Yankees still come into next year the favorite to win the World Series.

Just like they were in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.

But I'm sure next year will be different.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on October 9, 2007, 12:44 PM
With all the money they've spent, he does deserve to go 'unsigned.'

Big deal, they were two games off of the best record in baseball - they didn't win the World Series. 

Isn't that what counts?



In my opinion, the longer the series of games you have to examine, the less luck factors into your performance in that block of games.

Let's look at Torre's record over a HUGE block of games:

13 consecutive playoff appearances
4 World Series championships
1235 - 871 record (rough estimate, unconfirmed but based on average of 95 W's per season)

You can't just fire him because his ace Wang blew his 2 starts against the Indians in a short 5 games series.  The laws of probability have no chance to work and even the playing field over 5 games.  Anything can happen.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on October 9, 2007, 12:46 PM
No matter who the manager is, the Yankees still come into next year the favorite to win the World Series.

Just like they were in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.

But I'm sure next year will be different.

Oh look who's here.  I knew it wouldn't be long until "He who has no favorite team" showed up.  That train's never late!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 9, 2007, 12:47 PM
Oh look who's here.  I knew it wouldn't be long until "He who has no favorite team" showed up.  That train's never late!

(http://images.dvdtalk.com/images/smilies/wavey.gif)

Enjoying your annual mid-October bowl of sour grapes, there, "Dressel?"
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on October 9, 2007, 01:34 PM

In my opinion, the longer the series of games you have to examine, the less luck factors into your performance in that block of games.


You call it luck.

I call it choking, as in the Bills choked last night.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 9, 2007, 02:35 PM

You can't just fire him because his ace Wang blew his 2 starts against the Indians in a short 5 games series.  

How about 14 losses in his team's last 17 playoff games?  Is that a fireable offense? 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Darth Slothus on October 9, 2007, 05:21 PM
No, just timely bad 'LUCK' in the playoffs....    ;) ::).

DS
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 11, 2007, 07:57 AM
So, any predictions for the upcoming LCS's and World Series?

I think both series pit two very evenly matched teams and could go either way.  I don't think either one is going to be a short series.

Sox over Tribe in 7 (shocking, I know)
D'backs over Rockies in 7

WS Champs - Red Sox
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: stormie on October 11, 2007, 11:36 AM
The Red Sox look unstoppable, but anything could happen. The Rockies also look pretty damn good, though.

ALCS:
Boston over Cleveland 4-1

NLCS:
Colorado over Arizona 4-2

WS:
Boston over Colorado 4-3
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on October 12, 2007, 06:49 PM
Cleveland over Boston 4-3
Colorado over Arizona 4-2
Cleveland over Colorado 4-1
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 18, 2007, 04:49 PM
Maybe this belongs in the Hot Stove League thread, seeing as how the Yanks have been out of the running in the 2007 season for a week or two now.  Oh well:

Torre turns down offer to return as Yanks' skipper (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3069115)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on October 18, 2007, 05:04 PM
I wonder where Torre will end up...  certainly somebody will end up signing him someplace.  I could even see the White Sox dumping controversial Ozzie for Torre. 

I also wonder how this will affect the A-Rod situation.  I heard/read something earlier in the week that they Yankees told Boras that if A-Rod opts out, then the Yanks wouldn't be a bidder in Free Acency or soemthing like that... sure would be interesting to see if he opts out where he ends up.  I'd imagine Boston, White Soxx, Detroit, and LA/Anaheim/California (whatever the hell they are called these days) all wouldn't hesitate to lineup to bid on A-Rod.


And, on a WS note - I'm all about the Rockies.  How can you not love a team that is on a streak like they are?  Plus, there is the fact that they ponied up some playoff cash (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=3049576) for the widow and kids of the coach who was killed by the stray foul earlier in the year.  Very classy move.

Normally, I'd cheer for the AL, but I hate Cleveland.   >:(

And, on the off chance the Red Sox get past Cleveland, I can't cheer for them since I'm jealous of all the cash they burned to get to the world series.  (lots of irony to me that they essentially are now pretty much the same as the "evil empire" they claimed to hate  :-X) 


So, Go Rockies!  :)


ps.
I really hate Cleveland.   >:(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 18, 2007, 05:14 PM
I like to see teams who haven't won in a while win the whole thing.  Indians haven't won in sixty years, Rockies have never been there, period.  So I'm happy either way (provided, of course, the BoSox don't pull off another miracle comeback).  I am looking forward to seeing Grady Sizemore in the Series.

What's ****** up is that the Series won't start until next Wednesday night, no matter if the Indians win tonight or not.  So I'm kind of hoping that the Sox can win a couple--not only to make things more interesting, but also to avoid having this huge gap in between baseball games.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 18, 2007, 05:59 PM
Boy, Manny Ramirez sure is a winner (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ti-mannytoo101707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns).  ::)

I'd love to see the Sox go down this series. Then the Rocks finish their playoff sweep as the roll over the Indians. :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 18, 2007, 06:20 PM
Boy, Manny Ramirez sure is a winner (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ti-mannytoo101707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns).  ::)

I love how the media presents things just to have **** to talk about.  Here's the full quote if you or anyone else cares:

Quote
"We're confident every day," said Ramirez. "It doesn't matter how things go for you. We're not going to give up. We're just going to go and play the game, like I've said, and move on. If it doesn't happen, so who cares? There's always next year. It's not like the end of the world or something. Why should we panic?"

I don't have a problem with what Manny said.  What I do have a problem with is him showboating after the third back to back to back homerun, while still being down four.

(provided, of course, the BoSox don't pull off another miracle comeback). 

Not going to happen.  Do I want it to happen?  Absolutely, but I'm also a realist.  Other than Papi, Manny and Lowell, they aren't hitting and pretty much batters 6 to 9 are automatic outs.  Add to that that the starting pitchers can't get out of the fifth inning and it's a recipe for disaster.  These ain't the 2004 Red Sox. 

Torre turns down offer to return as Yanks' skipper (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3069115)

Good for him.  Torre is and always has been a class act and didn't deserve the way Yankees upper management treated him.  It'll be interesting to see where he ends up.  It'll also be interesting to see how this affects some of the Yanks big free agents - Pettite, Posada and Rivera.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on October 18, 2007, 06:49 PM
Quote
It'll be interesting to see where he ends up.
Kansas City. :P  As much as I'd love to see it it's about as likely as them signing Alex Rodriguez (but I'd take Torre over A-Rod any day of the week).

It's a shame that it came down to this for Torre.  The guy's a class act and a great manager that happens to work for a bunch of idiots.  Sorry, but if you win 1/3 of the championships over a 12 year stretch there's no room for an insecure future and/or a pay cut.  As much as I loathe the Yankees, the simple truth is they made it to the playoffs damn near every year and Torre didn't deserve the way management treated him.  I hope he finds a secure position in a good organization.

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Neal on October 18, 2007, 07:57 PM
As much as I loathe the Yankees, the simple truth is they made it to the playoffs damn near every year and Torre didn't deserve the way management treated him. 

Not "damn near" every year ... EVERY year.  The Yanks were in the playoffs every one of the twelve years that Torre managed them.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 20, 2007, 10:01 PM
(provided, of course, the BoSox don't pull off another miracle comeback). 

Not going to happen.

You sure?

 :o
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 21, 2007, 11:41 PM
The ALCS is all but over.   

Nice comeback by the Sox, but, I gotta say, go Rox!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Carpeteria3000 on October 22, 2007, 12:07 AM
Not going to happen. 

oops! go Sox!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on October 22, 2007, 12:14 AM
****.  When Cleveland lost to send the series back to Boston I figured they'd be in trouble.

When they got their asses handed to them yesterday I knew they were done.  Double ****.  :(

Definitely shooting for the Rockies now that the Indians are out of it.  I'd root for anyone over Boston though (and yes, that includes the Yankees).

John
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 22, 2007, 01:51 AM
I'm going to try my luck at getting some WS tickets tomorrow. Go Rockies! :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt Carroll on October 22, 2007, 02:09 AM
I'm going to try my luck at getting some WS tickets tomorrow. Go Rockies! :)

Yeah, I am going to try to get tickets for a game as well tomorrow. I'm not expecting much luck, but hey, you never know!  :D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 22, 2007, 07:50 AM


Quote
Not going to happen.

You sure?

 :o

I've never been so happy being so wrong.  Those automatic outs I was talking about actually started hitting and showing up and the pitchers actually made it to at least the fifth inning the last few games.  Now that I think about it, it's not surprising.  The Sox have been up and down all season, so it just stands to reason that the trend would continue in the playoffs.

I'm going to try my luck at getting some WS tickets tomorrow. Go Rockies! :)

Good luck.  I can't even get tickets to a regular season game, so I know the WS is out of the question (unless I want to take out a second mortgage).  I'll be content to sit home, watch the games in HD and get blitzed.

Go Sox!!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt_Fury on October 22, 2007, 12:24 PM
I'm going to try my luck at getting some WS tickets tomorrow. Go Rockies! :)

I think it's easier to get an exclusive from GG or Sideshow than get these tickets!
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 22, 2007, 02:19 PM
I'm going to try my luck at getting some WS tickets tomorrow. Go Rockies! :)

I think it's easier to get an exclusive from GG or Sideshow than get these tickets!

Sure as hell seems like it so far... I've been trying for almost 2 and a half hours and haven't been able to get through yet...
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt_Fury on October 22, 2007, 03:39 PM
Now there's a message saying that the site is down.  Supposedly no one has been able to get tickets from what I've heard.  I think there are also people starting to line up at Coors Field.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 22, 2007, 04:14 PM
Over 8 million hits on the Rockies site in the first hour alone... :o

Four hours online now and still no luck. On the plus side the queue page did change for me, maybe the server is getting close to working.

Now there's a message saying that the site is down.  Supposedly no one has been able to get tickets from what I've heard.  I think there are also people starting to line up at Coors Field.

That's what I heard as well. The news hasn't been able to confirm anyone who has actually been able to purchase them.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 22, 2007, 06:02 PM
Over 8 million hits on the Rockies site in the first hour alone... :o

Four hours online now and still no luck. On the plus side the queue page did change for me, maybe the server is getting close to working.


Or not... (http://colorado.rockies.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20071022&content_id=2276226&vkey=pr_col&fext=.jsp&c_id=col)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt_Fury on October 22, 2007, 07:08 PM
Still...that's kind of a good thing as most of the tickets are still available and perhaps we still have a good chance of snagging some.

Maybe I'll see you in the Rock Pile Ryan!   ;D
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 22, 2007, 07:26 PM
What game are you looking for? I'm going to try for game 4, in anticipation of another sweep (knock on wood). :)

I'm pretty sure I'll be Rock Pile unless I decide to pony up some big bucks for better seats, $130 for two Rock Pile seats is already pretty expensive though.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt Carroll on October 22, 2007, 10:37 PM
Hmm, looks like they just announced the tickets will go back up tomorrow at noon. I hope this works out this time around. :)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 23, 2007, 12:19 AM
Hmm, looks like they just announced the tickets will go back up tomorrow at noon. I hope this works out this time around. :)

Time to skip another class looking for tickets... Nice avatar BTW. ;)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 23, 2007, 07:54 AM
Serious question.  Why did the Rockies wait until after the ALCS to put tickets up for sale?  It's not like they didn't know when they were playing, just who they'd be playing.  I'd think they would want to limit the chances of the other team's fans trying to get tickets, especially if it's the Red Sox, a team who's fans are known to travel well.  So why wait a week?  Tickets should have been for sale the day after the Rockies clinched the League Championship.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 23, 2007, 01:46 PM
Serious question.  Why did the Rockies wait until after the ALCS to put tickets up for sale?  It's not like they didn't know when they were playing, just who they'd be playing.  I'd think they would want to limit the chances of the other team's fans trying to get tickets, especially if it's the Red Sox, a team who's fans are known to travel well.  So why wait a week?  Tickets should have been for sale the day after the Rockies clinched the League Championship.

If that is indeed the case maybe it is to try and help Rockies fans get tickets? I really think they should have had a local lottery here to let people in Colorado get first crack and then they could have still sold some online to anyone. By putting these up online only we are going to have to be dealing with scalpers that aren't even in CO buying this **** and immediately putting them on EvilBay. Not to mention we have to deal with all the frat-boy, bandwagon Boston fans. The Red Sox are easily my least favorite team in baseball (sorry Mikey ;) ).

EDIT: God damn this is such a cluster****. Supposedly tickets are selling but it going slow. I've been online for an hour now tryign to get tickets, no luck so far... :-\
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 23, 2007, 03:33 PM
Not to mention we have to deal with all the frat-boy, bandwagon Boston fans. The Red Sox are easily my least favorite team in baseball (sorry Mikey ;) ).


I know them well.  We call them "pink hats" around here - fans, most likely women, who jumped aboard the 2004 Sox and have a tendency to wear pink (or green for the men) hats.  Real Sox fans wear blue hats only and those are most likely old, dirty and the edge of the brim is ripped.  Mine got so bad from the sweat and dirt that it turned a bluish grey and made my wife to tell me to buy a new one.  Still have that crusty old hat, though.  No way I can get rid of it.



Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt_Fury on October 25, 2007, 04:15 PM
The Rockies had better start playing.   >:(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Ryan on October 25, 2007, 04:56 PM
To me if looked like the layoff certainly had an adverse affect, particularly on the pitching. Beckett is amazing there is no question about that. I didn't think Francis did that bad of a job. He only let in 4 runs, granted against a guy like Beckett that is too many. Morales let them blow it wide open on him. The defense actually played fairly solid I thought. It is tough when the opposing team is getting so many good base hits in the gaps, that falls on the pitching and not the defense. The offense needs to show up though. Even if you are playing against a guy like Beckett, one run just isn't going to cut it. The Rockies did seem to knock off some of the rust and really started playing much better towards the end of the game though. They really only had two or three really bad innings there. I expect game 2 will be much better than the first one.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on October 29, 2007, 01:50 AM
Looks like that 8-day layoff killed the Rockies' momentum, while the ass-whooping of Cleveland restored the Red Sox confidence.

Congrats to the Sox and their fans (except Mikey and the rest of his pink hats), my condolences to the Rockies fans.   :'(


ps.
Did I hear right - during the broadcast, it sounded like they were saying that Boras said that A-Rod is opting out of his contract.   ???
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Matt on October 29, 2007, 04:10 AM
The Red Sox are the new Yankees.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Mikey D on October 29, 2007, 09:22 AM
Boston Red Sox - World Series Champions!! (I waited three long years to write that  :P).

Even though it was a sweep, the Rockies didn't give up and you have to respect that.  Other than the Game 1 thumping, the other games were tense, excitement filled games.  Ryan and Matt, you have a good young team who should be competing for years.  Congrats to a great season.

Congrats to the Sox and their fans (except Mikey and the rest of his pink hats),

I'm buying a new one soon, one can never have enough pink hats. Have to catch up on my sleep first.

Seriously though, I do need to go T-shirt shopping.  Wouldn't mind having the official WS champions hat, either.  I'm going to wait a few days, the stores are going to be absolutely mobbed today.


ps.
Did I hear right - during the broadcast, it sounded like they were saying that Boras said that A-Rod is opting out of his contract.   ???

Way to wait until after the World Series before announcing your intentions, ****head.  The ******bag always has to be in the spotlight.  What a joke.  I really, really, really hope the Sox don't sign him.  Great player, yes, but the baggage (not to mention the insane price tag) just isn't worth it.  I'd love to see Mikey Lowell come back for a few more years, but you know his price tag just went through the roof with the season and post season he just had.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on October 29, 2007, 09:44 AM
Yeah, the gang on Baseball Tonight ripped A-Rod pretty good for making his announcement then of all days and trying to steal some of the spotlight.  Peter Gammons pointed out that it's a pretty good indicator of what you can expect from A-Rod if you sign him - A-Rod first, team second.   :P

I'd love to see Mikey Lowell come back for a few more years, but you know his price tag just went through the roof with the season and post season he just had.

Yeah, that WS MVP trophy is a pretty good way to send yourself into free agency.  I'm sure he'll have plenty of offers on the table.  It would be nice to see Boston keep him, but I guess I won't be surprised to see him go and maybe end up as A-Rod's replacement at 3rd in NY.  :-X
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on October 29, 2007, 10:40 AM
Yeah, the gang on Baseball Tonight ripped A-Rod pretty good for making his announcement then of all days and trying to steal some of the spotlight.  Peter Gammons pointed out that it's a pretty good indicator of what you can expect from A-Rod if you sign him - A-Rod first, team second.   :P

I'd like to see A-Rod play WR2 on the Cowboys opposite TO and let them fight over the spotlight.  That'd be fun.




Yeah, that WS MVP trophy is a pretty good way to send yourself into free agency.  I'm sure he'll have plenty of offers on the table.  It would be nice to see Boston keep him, but I guess I won't be surprised to see him go and maybe end up as A-Rod's replacement at 3rd in NY.  :-X

There is no replacement for A-Rod at 3rd base.  Period.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: ruiner on October 29, 2007, 12:56 PM
It'd be cool if the Cubs snagged him.

Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on October 29, 2007, 07:52 PM
It'd be cool if the Cubs snagged him.



Letting him go with no counter offer is setting a place at the table for Johan Santana, I feel it in my bones.  We won 4 championships in 5 years with pitching, time to get back to that.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: stormie on November 9, 2007, 04:15 PM
In ho-hum news, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays officially changed their nickname from Devil Rays to Rays, as well as redoing their uniforms and color scheme. Personally, I much prefer the sound of Tampa Bay Devil Rays rather than Tampa Bay Rays. It sounds a lot like Tampa Bayrays. Just doesn't sound poetic enough. However, considering their on-field product, maybe it's fitting.

But maybe I'm thinking about it too much.

In other news, Giants resigned Vizquel to a one-year deal.  ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on November 14, 2007, 05:25 PM
ARod.  Yankee once again.  You heard it here first.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on November 22, 2007, 11:55 AM
The dismantling of the Twins begins in earnest: bye bye Hunter (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ApGeiKmA2hO7HLnuGs_8D4qFCLcF?slug=txangelshunter&prov=st&type=lgns).  I think I read that Santana turned down 19 million per season (that's what a 5 year extension amounted to) ::)  Because who could raise a family on 19 million dollars a year? 
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on November 22, 2007, 12:20 PM
The dismantling of the Twins begins in earnest: bye bye Hunter (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ApGeiKmA2hO7HLnuGs_8D4qFCLcF?slug=txangelshunter&prov=st&type=lgns).  I think I read that Santana turned down 19 million per season (that's what a 5 year extension amounted to) ::)  Because who could raise a family on 19 million dollars a year? 

I'd be shocked if Santana doesn't get $25 - 28 million/year when he signs with the Yankees next year.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on November 27, 2007, 05:43 PM
Johan, baby.

It's heating up.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on November 27, 2007, 06:43 PM
Johan, baby.

It's heating up.

 >:(

 :'(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on November 27, 2007, 10:48 PM
Johan, baby.

It's heating up.

It's all about greed baby.  Where have the Kirby Puckett's of the world gone?
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on November 27, 2007, 11:07 PM
That goes both ways...

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/54/richlist07_Carl-Pohlad_75UU.html

$3.1 BILLION...can't afford to pay his payroll...the state builds him a stadium (Mr 3 time billionaire) and they refuse to pay anyone any money...if I were Santana, Mauer and Morneau I'd get the hell out of here too.  Look through the thread we've had here, I've said it once or twice before...**** You Mister Pohlad...**** You right in your 3 Billion Dollar Wallet
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Morgbug on November 27, 2007, 11:40 PM
There you go, it is ALL about greed.  Didn't realize the Twinkies owner was milking it quite like that though.  Sigh.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on December 1, 2007, 05:26 PM
It's looking like:

Twins get:

Phil Hughes
Melky Cabrera
And a mid-level prospect to be named

Yankees get:

Johan Santana
A world series championship


If the Red Sox won't give up Jacoby Ellsbury (instead of Coco Crisp) and Jon Lester, the Yankees should have Santana within the week.

If you ask me, and this is a Yankee fan talking here, the Sox ought to give up Ellsbury right now.  Geez, that'd give Santana, Beckett, Dice-K, and Schilling along with that offense, they'd easily be the favorites to win the World Series for the next few years.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on December 3, 2007, 03:53 PM
Hmmm...  sounds like the BoSox are now willing to offer either Ellsbury, Lester, or Buchholz in a deal, but not more than one.  So, we've got:

Phil Hughes
Melky Cabrera
And a mid-level prospect to be named

or

Jacoby Ellsbury (or Lester or Buchholz)
Jed Lowrie
a minor league pitcher to be named

Obviously, both Ellsbury and either Lester/Buchholz would have been a great deal better than the couple sandwich draft picks we'd get if Santana just left us at the end of 2008, but I'm not sure which deal I like if we only get one young "A-level" pick from Boston. :-\


In other "dismantling the Twins" news, from what I am reading and hearing around here it's really begining to sound like if Santana is indeed traded, it's only a matter of time before closer Joe Nathan is traded as well for a 3B prospect and more young pitching...  :'(
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on December 4, 2007, 10:54 PM
Man, I knew Cabrera was on the market, but I didn't think they'd send Dontrell Willis with him.   :o

Tigers send top prospects to Marlins for Cabrera, Willis (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3141703)

If Willis returns to form (and we trade Santana), that Tigers rotation is probably the strongest in the AL Central.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on December 5, 2007, 03:59 AM
Man, I knew Cabrera was on the market, but I didn't think they'd send Dontrell Willis with him.   :o

Tigers send top prospects to Marlins for Cabrera, Willis (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3141703)

If Willis returns to form (and we trade Santana), that Tigers rotation is probably the strongest in the AL Central.

Miguel Cabrera is a total stud muffin.  But Dontrelle Willis sucks.  He's one of the most overrated pitchers on this side of Andy Pettitte.  Think of it this way, if Willis' ERA and WHIP have inflated so woefully over the past 2 years in the NL, imagine how ugly he's gonna be in the AL where ERA's tend to rise 1.00 and K's/9 tend to drop 2/game?

Lucky for him, his W-L will still be decent most likely because of the lineup he'll have behind him with Sheffield, Ordonez, Cabrera and the rest of that Detroit lineup.

But Willis totally sucks man.  Last year he was 10-15 in 35 starts, 205 IP, 5.17 ERA, 1.60 WHIP.  Opponents hit .294 against him on the season.  And this is in the NL, and with Miguel Cabrera and Hanley Ramirez run support.


About this Santana thing, from what I'm hearing the Twins have requested the medical records of Jon Lester.  IMO, the medical records of that Twins GM should have been requested instead, what the HELL are they doing?  The Yankees package of Hughes, Cabrera etc. is way better than Lester, Crisp etc.  I heard that the Twins tried to fleece the Yanks to include Ian Kennedy as well and they drew the line.  But the Yanks simply cannot allow Boston to get Santana.  This is madness.

I'm going to go have my **** fit now.  But before I do, I have to say, the Twins really need to just resign Santana.  Seriously, if you don't want the hands-down-best pitcher in baseball, who came up with your team since day 1, then what on Earth do you have a baseball team for?  Sell to someone who wants to run this thing right.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on December 5, 2007, 11:05 AM
I'm going to go have my **** fit now.  But before I do, I have to say, the Twins really need to just resign Santana.  Seriously, if you don't want the hands-down-best pitcher in baseball, who came up with your team since day 1, then what on Earth do you have a baseball team for?  Sell to someone who wants to run this thing right.

Exactly...how do you even think about trading the best pitcher in baseball?  Pay the guy and move on...I hate you Pohlad, I hate you so so much
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jeff on December 5, 2007, 11:21 AM
Think of it this way, if Willis' ERA and WHIP have inflated so woefully over the past 2 years in the NL, imagine how ugly he's gonna be in the AL where ERA's tend to rise 1.00 and K's/9 tend to drop 2/game?

Yeah, that's why I threw the "if he returns to form" bit in there.  He's had a few bad years, but the potential is there.  Plus, like you say, he should get plenty of run support and having 3-4 starts each against KC and a Santana-less Twins should help him as well.   :P

Exactly...how do you even think about trading the best pitcher in baseball?  Pay the guy and move on...I hate you Pohlad, I hate you so so much

Amen.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Jayson on December 13, 2007, 12:10 PM
Mitchell's Steroid List Leaked, Disputed By MLB (http://www.wnbc.com/sports/14845845/detail.html)

The list includes former MVP's Barry Bonds, Albert Pujols, Jason Giambi and Ivan Rodriguez. Former sluggers Juan Gonzalez, Albert Belle and Jeff Bagwell. The list contains two sets of brothers: Jose and Ozzie Canseco and Aaron and Bret Boone. The list includes several heralded pitchers, including Cy Young award winner Roger Clemens.

Brady Anderson
Manny Alexander
Rick Ankiel
Jeff Bagwell
Barry Bonds
Aaron Boone
Rafael Bettancourt
Bret Boone
Milton Bradley
David Bell
Dante Bichette
Albert Belle
Paul Byrd
Wil Cordero
Ken Caminiti
Mike Cameron
Ramon Castro
Jose Canseco
Ozzie Canseco
Roger Clemens
Paxton Crawford
Wilson Delgado
Lenny Dykstra
Johnny Damon
Carl Everett
Kyle Farnsworth
Ryan Franklin
Troy Glaus
Rich Garces
Jason Grimsley
Juan Gonzalez
Eric Gagne
Nomar Garciaparra
Jason Giambi
Jeremy Giambi
Jose Guillen
Jay Gibbons
Juan Gonzalez
Clay Hensley
Jerry Hairston
Felix Heredia, Jr.
Darren Holmes
Wally Joyner
Darryl Kile
Matt Lawton
Raul Mondesi
Mark McGwire
Guillermo Mota
Robert Machado
Damian Moss
Abraham Nunez
Trot Nixon
Jose Offerman
Andy Pettitte
Mark Prior
Neifi Perez
Rafael Palmiero
Albert Pujols
Brian Roberts
Juan Rincon
John Rocker
Pudge Rodriguez
Sammy Sosa
Scott Sc hoenweiis
David Segui
Alex Sanchez
Gary Sheffield
Miguel Tejada
Julian Tavarez
Fernando Tatis
Maurice Vaughn
Jason Varitek
Ismael Valdez
Matt Williams
Kerry Wood
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Scott on December 13, 2007, 12:16 PM
Sure seems to be a lot of former/current Yankees on that list ::)
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: Dressel Rebel on December 13, 2007, 12:31 PM
Sure seems to be a lot of former/current Yankees on that list ::)

Lots of Red Sox too! Nixon, Clemens, Nomar, Vaughn, Damon, Offerman, Varitek.

Anyhow, I couldn't care less about these findings.  Big ****.

One interesting note though, with both pitchers and hitters on the list, I think excluding players from the HOF for being implicated in steroids is bogus.  Hitters faced juiced pitchers, and vice versa.

Just let them in if they have the numbers.
Title: Re: MLB 2007
Post by: JohnH on December 13, 2007, 11:35 PM
It's sick that I can no longer look at a singler player's accomplishments without wondering they were obtained legitimately.  20Ks in a game?  Who knows.  73 home runs?  Probably not.  40/40 seasons?  Hard to say.  It's a good thing I love the game of baseball so much...between this whole ongoing debacle and the stupid money owners are throwing at players, my love for the game itself it the only thing that keeps me going back.

********.

John