• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

2014 MLB Season: How Many Pitchers Will Die For Our Sins?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe the Yankees have to sweep the Orioles in this 3 game st starting tonight to have a chance to make the play-offs.

I think the Yankees have already lost the division (their run differential is just terrible and it's going to get worse given the pitching problems; now that Baltimore's bats are starting to warm up again, I just don't think the Yankees will catch up to them) but they still have a pretty good shot at one of the wild cards -- one of them is going to come out of the West, be it the Angels or the Mariners, but I think the other wild card is going to be the Yankees, Royals or Blue Jays, and the Yankees have a shit-ton of remaining games against Kansas City and especially Toronto. They don't exactly control their own destiny but even a marginal improvement in their pitching would give them a healthy shot.

That's why I didn't say "division".

Tar baby returns and pitches wednesday... McCann and tex were warming up, but they are now on the DL.

It seems like everytime we get "it" going, something happens.

With all the injuries we've sustained, I can't believe we still have a shot.

It can be done, but if we tank against the Orioles I think we are done.

Right, but what I was saying that how the Yankees perform against the O's for the rest of the run doesn't mean jack -- they need to worry about how they perform against Toronto and Kansas City.

In other news, Verlander left last night's game with shoulder soreness and he was only throwing topping out around 88.

DJDokvw.png


Whoops. I bet they'd like to have Fister back right about now.
 
Last edited:
From a fan perspective, the Red Sox' current philosophy about not giving long-term deals to players over 30, and particularly pitchers, is infuriating. From a numbers perspective, though, seems like it just keeps proving itself a smart idea.

What was the last time there was a 100M+ deal for a player over 30 that worked out for the signing team? Having a hard time coming up with one. It's how you get the star players, but just doesn't seem to be a good business decision. You're paying for several years you'll never get, and more and more frequently post-PEDs, those bad years are starting sooner than they used to. In deals like the Carl Crawford or Josh Hamilton ones, you don't get ANY good years before decline.

Only 140M plus whatever the buyout is on the Verlander deal, and at the time, most people would have made it without blinking. maybe he rehabs, or maybe he doesn't pitch until 2016. And who knows what you get back in 2016, but likely not the guy you had in 2013...
 
From a fan perspective, the Red Sox' current philosophy about not giving long-term deals to players over 30, and particularly pitchers, is infuriating. From a numbers perspective, though, seems like it just keeps proving itself a smart idea.

What was the last time there was a 100M+ deal for a player over 30 that worked out for the signing team?

Todd Helton is the first name that comes to mind, as his decline didn't get genuinely bad until his age 38 / 39 seasons. Jason Giambi hit like a moon monster until his contract expired in 2008 (his $120 million deal ran from 2002 - 08, if memory serves, so that would have been his age 31 - 38 seasons), too.
 
I'd have to dig deeper into Helton, but know his last few years were rough/expensive.

Giambi would have to get an asterisk at best, as there are obvious reasons why he was doing so well and avoiding decline. He didn't say what he appologized for, but he's real sorry for it ;)
 
This makes me sad, the Royals who just moved into first place added Josh Willingham to the roster. Really Royals, that's the best you could do in your first Pennant race in like forever.
 
Okay, so tonight's Yanks/O's game got rained out. Fine, I get it. But why does it take a whole month to make up the game? Tomorrow is a night game, why can't they do a doubleheader then? Get it over with earlier. :shrug:
 
Okay, so tonight's Yanks/O's game got rained out. Fine, I get it. But why does it take a whole month to make up the game? Tomorrow is a night game, why can't they do a doubleheader then? Get it over with earlier. :shrug:

Normally it would be made up with a day-night doubleheader tomorrow, yes -- but both teams consented to move the game to New York's final trip to Camden next month, probably because the O's would like to have Machado in the lineup in case the Yankees are nipping at their heels, and I'm sure the Yankees would love to get some of their injured bats and arms to Baltimore for September, too. Also, it's coming to the end of the season, and I'm sure neither team wanted to play a doubleheader if they didn't have to.
 
Team owners are currently meeting in Baltimore; tomorrow they vote on Selig's successor (and I'll bet money that it'll be Rob Manfred
emot-suicide-1.gif
).
 
Team owners are currently meeting in Baltimore; tomorrow they vote on Selig's successor (and I'll bet money that it'll be Rob Manfred
emot-suicide-1.gif
).

Not a lot of great choices in the finalists that's for sure, but Tim Brosnan seems to be the best of the lot.
 
There was talk that Disney CEO Bob Iger was in the mix, but I guess that he was dropped. I think he would have been the best choice.
 
Team owners are currently meeting in Baltimore; tomorrow they vote on Selig's successor (and I'll bet money that it'll be Rob Manfred
emot-suicide-1.gif
).

Not a lot of great choices in the finalists that's for sure, but Tim Brosnan seems to be the best of the lot.

Yeah, the whole field is basically "pick the least shitty guy in a field of shitty guys."

Edit: Brosnan has withdrawn from consideration.
 
Last edited:
Team owners are currently meeting in Baltimore; tomorrow they vote on Selig's successor (and I'll bet money that it'll be Rob Manfred
emot-suicide-1.gif
).

Not a lot of great choices in the finalists that's for sure, but Tim Brosnan seems to be the best of the lot.

Yeah, the whole field is basically "pick the least shitty guy in a field of shitty guys."

Edit: Brosnan has withdrawn from consideration.

Well that's peachy.
 
Does it really even matter who the commish is anymore? It's not like the office has any real power. They're just a puppet for the owners. The days of Judge Landis are long gone.
 
Does it really even matter who the commish is anymore? It's not like the office has any real power.

This is patently untrue. The only commissioner who wields more power over his sport is Roger Goodell. Where do you think the league's attempts at contraction came from? Or the shell game regarding the Expos / Marlins / Red Sox? Or the mammoth suspension that violated the terms of both the CBA and JDA?

They're just a puppet for the owners. The days of Judge Landis are long gone.

1) The office doesn't have to be a puppet, and it only began with Selig's tenure (after, coincidentally, he orchestrated Vincent's ouster). There's no rule saying the office of commissioner has to be "head owner speaking for the owners," only that he serves at their leisure. C'mon, Fay Vincent was a truly independent commissioner only 22 years ago.

2) I'm not sure I'd hold Judge Landis up as the example of a great commissioner, given that he was an absolutely awful person. Great, he banned the Black Sox ... too bad everything else was a black mark of racism and sexism.

Given the way Rob Manfred got the MLBPA to roll over in the last two CBA negotiations, I'm not looking forward to the negotiations in 2016.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top