2008-2009 Mlb offseason

[King of Town]

Screw getting rid of teams just because they are not good RIGHT NOW. Especially the Pirates, they just built a new stadium.

I know man, i love the pirates. If they weren't in my division I would root for them. I could see rangers and mariners too. but if not on how they are doing right now then how? I nknow it's not going to happen, but I don't know how else to make things more level, and make the game better.

 

[Azale]

The Rangers are rather competitive, as are the Mariners Well, the Mariners are competitive in getting talent, not winning with it...

 

[El Justo]

heh, you guys are funny

i'm not really for contraction per se. it's just that i think it would have other benefits to it besides removing the crappy franchises. but alas, it's just a pipe dream of mine...i mean, who am i to even suggest that any franchise be axed?

 

[Azale]

I'm just defensive because the Astros would be up on the chopping block

I felt a piece of my soul left when the Supersonics went to OKC to become the Thunder. I'm just not down with relocation, removal, or contraction.

 

[cubsfan6506]

heh - that's pretty funny how we go from salary caps to contraction nice!

i'll toss a different spin on the contraction issue (although i'm opposed to it): i would like to see less teams solely b/c of the talent pool. now, this is like King's idea in terms of teams being able to bid etc. but what i would like to see would be less of the rag-armed no. 5 starters for teams like, say, the pirates or royals. i know it seems idealistic but my point is that offensive records produced nowadays (performance enhancers notwithstanding!) pale in comparison to those put up back in the day when there were only 16 teams. i mean, there were no rag-arms at the end of rotations...they were all in the back ends of BPs (if at all). my point is that the overall quality of pitching -- on the whole -- is a fraction of what it was in the 50's and before b/c of all of the extra teams and the 5 man rotations. iow, it is a dilluted player pool nowadays compared to back in the day. and maris' 61 homers are "worth more" or were harder to hit than, say, bonds', mcgwire's, or sosa's. and i ain't even goin' near the performance enhancing aspect of it...just the raw talent that's trotted out there every day on MLB pitching mounds so there's my rant on contraction and how it'd benefit

I disagree and would be willing to say that the talent pool has actually increased since say the 1950's. During the fifties baseball was primarily a american sports, you didn't get the newest hot prospect coming in from the dominican to play major league baseball. For instance imagine baseball without Albert Pujols, Calrlos Zambrano, Ichiro Suzukie, or Kusoke Fukudome (Just kidding.) who is foreign born. Also african americans weren't readily excepted into the major leagues back then so their would be a much smaller talent pool just from the american population base. In 1955 the world population was about 2.78 billion since then the world population has doubled so im just going to assume that the american population has doubled as well meaning that there are currently more people eligible to play baseball per team then in the 50's.

Baseball doesn't need a cap that will kill the game as the player's union will raise all hell about it. They need to get revenue shareing.

 

[King of Town]

Yeah but back then the best athletes also weren't going to play basketball and football like they are now. I've heard plenty of times how this WR,QB, or shooting gaurd also plays on the schools baseball team. Maybe not basketball as much, but football plenty.

 

[downtown]

Baseball is really the only sport where we can talk about contraction with a straight face. The Browns, Bengals and Lions have sucked for over a decade, but nobody would ever suggest contracting them...the Expos (and a few other teams) have actually seriously been discussed.

I think that speaks to the "system" we have set up, which puts some teams at huge competitive disadvantages. Dg mentioned the A's. Wouldn't be awfully frustrating to be an A's fan? Your competitive window is like, a season and a half. If you start slow...management is going to blow up your roster. Sure, you keep getting back talented prospects in trades...but you really can't get attached to any player on your roster, because as soon as his hits for .310 for a season and a half, he jumps out of your paygrade, and you have to send him to the Mets or something.

 

[El Justo]

@cubby
it's the pitching, mainly, that has been dilluted. successful import pitchers are more rare than postition players. understood on the population increase - nice point King's point regarding the other sports is a good one, too.

i guess the name of the game w/ the contraction is debate is money. if a franchise is flagging financially then the contraction issue is (or has) been raised. no way an nfl team faces contraction...simply b/c of the revenue it brings in, even the lousy teams.

 

[downtown]

Its also worth noting that we've made some major advances in medical training and nutrition since the 1950's. Everybody is stronger now, even without steroids. Athletes are bigger and faster in just about every sport (could you imagine Jerry West in today's NBA?). That rag arm for the Pirates in 2008 might have been the 2nd starter for the Reds in 1950.

 

[El Justo]

i disagree - no way a no.5 starter in today's game could get his slop by the likes of dimaggio, mantle, mays, et als. he'd get smoked. yes, today's athletes are stronger and faster. but no way in hell the SPs at the back ends of the crap teams today would even be in the big leagues back then. i guarantee it. it's simple math.

 

[downtown]

Well thats not a fair comparison. Of course the slop wouldn't get past Mantle. The star pitchers of that era weren't getting Mantle out either! The question is whether a pitcher like say, Zach Duke or Paul Maholm could get enough of the other guys out to hold down a 3 spot in a rotation. I have no doubt they'd at least be in the majors...they're getting enough of today's hitters out (who, you admit, are stronger than the players of yesteryear) to hold down a major league job. If you take them back in time, they're keeping the 2008 health benefits, but going against weaker dudes!

 

[El Justo]

of course it's a fair comparison. look up the era's and the avg's for pitchers back then. sure mantle and the like were having their successes. but they'd have had success in any era. they're HOFers.

you fail to see the main point: 16 teams versus 32 teams. it's simple math. the weakest of the lot (ie 4s & 5s in today's roations) would be in the minors. MLB roster spots were more difficult to get simply b/c there were fewer of them...and strength and conditioning and nutrition and all that stuff matters not here. it's the available roster spots. the maholms and dukes of the world would have never been able to crack the MLB rosters. hence the overall quality of the pitchers was superior due to less dillution.

 

[cubsfan6506]

IMO some of them perhaps wouldn't of been succesful. I think Babe Ruth would probaly not hit more then 200 homers if he were to play today. As for comparing pitchers from different eras are hard since new pitches have been invented, most notably the split finger fastball.

 

[King of Town]

I don't think bigger and stronger matter as much in baseball though. Look at someone like Andre Dawson as recently as the 80's. That dude was a bean pole comprd to now. Or tony gwynn, he was just a fat dude that knew what pitch was coming. You can still be tremendously successful without being big and strong. Maddux did it. I think there is much more skill in baseball than other sports where you can just ran past your opononent or plow through them.

Derosa traded to the indians for three relievers and the cubs sign ex-card Miles.

 

[Backwards Logic]

And the Angels landed Fuentes with a 2 year, 17.5 million dollar deal. Can't believe he ended up getting less money than Kerry Wood. While Fuentes is pretty good himself, you would have thought because of Wood's injury history Fuentes could have used his contract as leverage to get more money. Guess he really just wanted to pitch for the Angels then.

 

[King of Town]

with the stats i saw in a comparison, he looks better than frankie too. Well except with fewer saves. He had more 1-2-3 innings, better first strike percentage, and lower era I think.


edit: the MLB network begins broadcasting in like 5 minutes. they are supposed to show all markets of the game in depth with 24 hour coverage. Today they are doing a show called hot stove, as well as broadcasting don larsens perfect game. I've never seen the whole thing, I might just watch that.

edit again: There are some things about this game I never knew about. First the backdrop batters eye was removed for this game to let fans have seats to the sold out game. Also Whitey Ford was warming up late in the game even though he had a perfect game going.

Also it looks like the on deck circle isn't being used like it is these days. Someone is there but I don't know who it usually is or what they are doing besides looking at pitches. Also a lot of the players don't look like they pull their hands back before they swing. Hopefully I wasn't tought wrong, but thats how I've always done it. Campanella, snider, and slaughter all do it, but that seems to be about it. Snider almost crushes one and it looks like a modern hitter.

One more thing on this lengthy post, they don't have the centerfield camera. i kind of like it, there is no delay from the hit to what is happening on defense.

 

[El Justo]

interesting, King my dad was at that game...and i actually have the ticket stub

 

[King of Town]

Whew that yankees lineup is looking scary. My cubbies pick up the king of board games and our offense is looking as potent as ever. Will it matter though? Has anyone else in the central stepped up enough to challenge us yet?

 

[downtown]

Tribe pick up Pavano's corpse.

 

[Red Door]

Tribe pick up Pavano's corpse.

Better than Daniel Cabrera's corpse.