Tiger337

Some would argue that White Leagues prior to 1947 should not be mixed in with integration era leagues beause the competition level was lower. I say put all the stats out there and let fans and researchers decide what to do. There will be American League Stats, National League stats and all the different Black leagues. If someone wants to ignore the Black leagues, they can do so. How inferior are the Black leagues? Most assume they were inferior because the population of Blacks was smaller than the population of Whites, but Black teams had a better record in exhibitions between White and Black teams. So, maybe not so inferior. Nobody really knows.

I thought they already did that. Baseball-Reference already did it like 3 years ago. It's good to see that it's official now.

Greene needs to bat clean up because he always hits home runs.

We aren't talking Tony LaRussa here!

Leyland seemed to have close relationships with players. If the players knew he disaproved a cheating scheme, they probably would have been less likely to go along with the front office and the owner. Players have a long history of labor battles with owners, so they don't automatically go along with the big boss. This is especially true of star players who can easily tell upper management to **** off if they don't like what are being told. If it's a situation where the cheating was already going on for months before Hinch even knew about, then that's on him too because he should have been more aware of what was going on fron the beginning. That kind of awareness comes from relationships with players.

They never gave up anything in their whole pathetic lives. All they do is take.

No, I meant if the Pirates tried to cheat the way the Astros did And Leyland didn't like it, would Leyland have done anything about it? The Pirates problem was cocaine - something that Chuck Tanner did not handle well,.

What about Leyland with the Pirates?

Do you think the same think would have happened to Leyland? Anderson?

I suspect most teams wanted nothing to do with him as it was which is why the lowly (at the time) Tigers franchise was able to get him.

As the manager, he is responsible for what happens on his team. Maybe he sniffs it out before it gets going, talks with upper management, talks with players. Maybe, he did all that and it didn't work. None of us know exactly what he did or whether it was possible for him to do anything more. I believe there are some managers who command so much respect from the bosses and from their players, that something like that would not happen. It was probably a difficult situation. He's the manager though. I can't just say "Nothing he could do. No fault of his whatsover". I have to question him on that. I have no problems with him as Tigers manager to this point.

Not sure where to post this but...

My concern about Hinch was about his ability to handle players after he couldn't get them to stop the cheating in Houston. The excuse his supporters gave was that it wasn't his fault and there was nothing he could do about it. I don't agree with that. I suspect Leyland, for example, could have done something about it. That being said, I have not seen any evidence that he doesn't have the respect of players in Detroit and have no complaints about his game management skills. In fact, I think his bullpen management is excellent.

Yup, I hate seeing great young players get seriously injured. This seems to be an unfortunate pattern for him.

We once had a substitute teacher in high school. He said his name was Ben Dover. Some students believed him and started calling him Mr Dover.

It's a clown show, but anyone who tells Dump to **** himself is not all bad.

I think Petry is great.

I like Petry best, but Gibson is easily better than Monroe and Jones.

Yes, I really feel for him. A teacher at the school I am at had to retire due to Parkinsons. He is brilliant and his mind is still there, but he has no energy. It is killing him that he had to retire.

I am not sure what you are are getting at. Do you think Hinch is utilizing data too much amd not paying attention to the game?

Every situation is different, but one year of data is still more predictive of future performance than the fan favorite - playing the hot hand or playing small sample splits. The players and managers may know something that the data do not show, but it is unlikely that a fan knows

It will be good if it is done quickly as it is in the minors. If it is anyhing like the replay reviews, then I would hate it.

There is also a theory if you do "too much platooning" that the opposing pitcher will get into a rhythm where he can learn how to pitch to the opposite handed hitters well enough and mininize the damage. However, if you stick one or two same handed batters in there, the pitcher has to pitch differently to them and he gets out of his rhythm. In other words, you make the rest of the line-up better, by sacrificing a same handed batter or two. Some preliminary research on this showed that there might be something to it.

But four blowouts should not override the quarter season of decent ball that came before it unless it is indicative of future failures. If the blowouts are caused by the beginning of a breakdown of an overworked pitching staff (particularly the bullpen) for example, then they should act on it. If they make changes just to appease fans,it could make things worse long term.