Tiger337

No complaints here about the Pooch Barnhart trade. He gets on base against RHP at a decent enough rate and appears to be a pretty good defender. Plus, they didn't give up anything of significance. This was probably their best case scenario at the catching position this winter.

It's still just one year. Is there some reason why they couldn't beat divisional opponents, but were able to beat better opponents? There are always weird splits that fans obsess about and then they go back to normal the next year. It's not something that concerns me at all.

I don't think the versus team records is anything to worry about. It is probably mostly random and not likely to repeat itself. If they acquire enough talent, they will win enough games.

Colt don't need no education.

They aren't really against us. They don't care about us.

I don't think the voters will look at that at all. I doubt voters from other cities even noticed.

You are right. I don't pay much attention to manager awards, so I am not surprised I am wrong. Looking back at that season, I see that the Marlins were at around .500 in still in the Wildcard race well into September, so I can imagine writers mailing in their Girardi ballots early before the Marlins cooled at the end of the season. I don't think writers will view the Tigers season as extraordinary. Even as a Tigers fan, I don't view it as extraordinary. What I do see is an organization that appears to be catching up to the rest of the league in modern anaylsis and management. Hinch is part of that, but it's more of a positive new direction than one great season.

It's because they only won 77 games. Deserved or not, nobody is going to win an award with a below .500 record.

I don't disagree. They are good at pretending to be interested in their constituents, but they are primarily interested in themselves. Another thing they are good at is taking credit for good things that happen (that have little or nothing to do with them) while blaming others for bad things that happen. Your best hope is that their self interests will help you in some indirect way.

Your hilarity threshold is low.

I never care about the country of origin of anything I buy. It's usually not a straightforward answer anyway. I just buy the best product which fits my budget. Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work?

Nothing is going to happen to Trump ever. There is a different criminal "justice" system for the rich and powerful.

He has proved his entire life that he can do anything he wants and get away with it. Not only that, but he has been made a hero by about 40% of the country. Nothing will ever happen to him. He has nothing to worry about.

His seats were in the front rowwwww!

I have to wear a mask at work and my glasses fog up all the time. On the first day of class, I gave my class a 15 minute break (it's a three hour class). I left the room, my glasses fogged up, I walked into a door and got a bloody nose. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to stop the bleeding, but I got it cleaned up and went to my car to get another mask. Additionally, I give a lab at the end of class where I walk around and help students with an assignment. It's a big lecture hall with stairs all over the place, so I have to be careful! I also hate lecturing with a mask because it muffles my voice and the voices of students asking questions.

So, he's been consistent with the bullet points.

If they love what they do and are highly competitive, then yes they can stay motivated. I think money is not that big of a motivator for competitive athletes. I know elite runners who put their entire life into the sport with no hopes of making any significant money from it. Having wealth would just give them more time to perfect their craft.

I haven't been to a gym or sat in a restaurant in two years and I don't miss them much. I work out outdoors and sometimes do takeout. Also, food shop via instacart. Covid got me into new habits and I like them.

I doubt Trump knew anything about NAFTA beyond some bullet points he was given. Opposing it was just a way to get votes.

That's like the worst think you could ever say to someone. You should apologize.

I don't think it will ever get that extreme. I think there are always going to be pitchers who are so good that teams will want to extend them at least 5-6 innings per start. I don't think there are enough good arms where it would be beneficial to completely erase the distinction between starters and relievers. I can see where teams would go to maybe three starters and let the 4th and 5th slots be bullpen games.

I couldn't find anything recent, but according to the study below, the peak for batting average occurs at age 28 on average while the peak for walk rate is 32. That is a pretty big difference and it does suggest that batters who don't make contact and don't draw walks may peak early. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/9933/how-do-baseball-players-age-investigating-the-age-27-theory/ Additionally, fielding skills drop earlier and maybe more steeply than hitting skills: https://sportsinfosolutionsblog.com/2020/05/08/a-closer-look-at-defensive-aging-curves/ Based on all of this, it seems that Baez' skill set may not age well.

I think starters pitching fewer innings and a parade of relievers will be the norm every year. I don't know how much farther they can go with it though. I don't believe there are enough good arms to make it worthwhile across the entire league.

Also, the numbers indicate that Baez has fallen far from his prime defensively. It now looks like he could be an average defensive shortstop.

If Baez plays to his career averages, he would be OK. His strikeouts are so extreme though, I could see him falling off a cliff pretty quickly. It's mostly a hunch.