Tiger337

7 hours ago, theroundsquare said:

I think of Bo Jackson

He was the most exciting athlete I ever watched.  

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

yeah, nice to see JV in the old English D again but I'd rather have a healthy Olson.

I agree, but it wasn't looking good for Olson even before we learned about the surgery today.  

15 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

but that wasn't the actually the point I was trying to make, which was about the raw visual stimuli value of watching something. If you are a baseball aficionado like us, watching  a pitcher delivery a high leverage pitch has suspense and drama value and maybe we even appreciate the movement on the ball, but there still isn't much visual stimuli value there compared to a ball in play, where people are moving around on the field, possibly athletically, and compares still less to the kaleidoscope chaos of a snap in football with 22 guys in day-glow unis going every which way at high speed. All to say that to love baseball, you have to know baseball. The entertainment value is less in what you are seeing than in your understanding of what you are seeing means at higher levels of abstraction.

Who doesn't like to watch the fist pump and strut off the mound after a strikeout.  😉

Seriously though, is watching a three-yard gain up the middle really very exciting?  

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I like it as much as they next guy, but I would rather have the league averaging 5 K/9 rather than 8-1/2 K/9.

I'd be happy with 7

58 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

You were whelmed and excited for Drew Anderson and Kenley Jansen as moves that would have put them over the top in the AL? Because the sentiment around here and with a lot of fans in general seemed to be one of an underwhelming mindset. Feel how you want to feel though. If Anderson and Jansen moved the needle for you then great. Valdez and Verlander are big time moves that give me clear optimism for winning this division now and being a top 2-3 team in the AL in a way the prior moves did not.

I think he was content with what they were doing all along.  So, his level of excitement may not have changed as much as others.  

13 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Roster move.     For Valdez they'll put Jobe on the 60 day, right?    Interesting that hasn't happened yet

    

Who is gone now?     I would think Trey Sweeney is a candidate.       They also have 4 catchers on the roster, but they aren't dumping Liranzo.  Don't know a lot about Valencia, but they'll need a third C at some point.     I think Vierling has an edge over Jahmai Jones and I don't see them cutting Trei Cruz without giving him a look at the MLB level first.  

Sweeney is in trouble with so many potential infielders   Jace, Lee, Keith, Max, Trei all in need of auditions.   

I guess some pitchers could be in trouble  like Bailey Horn or even Gipson-Long.    

Or is someone else going to the 60-day? 

I wouldn't rule out Olson to the 60 day DL.  Given how little progress he seemingly has made, they may determine that won't be able to pitch for the first two months.  

Wow, another Tigers signing I didn't hear about until I stepped into motwnforums.  If they had just signed Verlander without signing Valdez, I would have considered it a lazy move.  However, signing Valdez as the #2 and Verlander as a bottom of rotation guy is perfect.

4 hours ago, Shelton said:

I will never understand the idea that a ball in play is required to qualify as action. Who doesn’t love the art of pitching?

Right, the one on one batter/pitcher match-up is what makes baseball unique and that is where the tv cameras are usually focused. Pace of action had been a problem in baseball more than lack of action. I think the pitch clock (which is really just enforcing rules which were already in place) has made games significantly more enjoyable to watch.  I do would like to see more balls in play, but that doesn't mean pitchers pitching and batters batting is inaction.  

33 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

True, but when there is action it is a lot more exciting than baseball, plus there is a time element associated with football...towards the end one team is hurrying up, frantically trying to score. Baseball players have never in the history of baseball tried to speed anything up.  Football also does a lot better job of marketing their product.

Plus, a channel like the RedZone was ingenious.  It wouldn't work for baseball.

And football plays 17 games, so each game in football is super important.  Baseball...not so much.  Players are marketed much better in football.  Baseball...People who don't follow it might know Ohtani and Judge and not a lot of other players.

I played baseball in college and loved to play, but it isn't super exciting to watch on TV. I personally think that nba basketball is unwatchable and hockey can be tough to watch because it's hard to follow the puck sometimes.  And I watch the red zone

 

I agree with you on the part of the 17 games in football.  Each game is more important and it's easy for fans to watch one game a week.  I don't see football as having a lot of action though.  Often we sit around for a long time just to see a three-yard run up the middle.  Then when something exciting happens, there is a penalty or a challenge.  I find it to be tiring most of the game.  It's a good sport betting though.   

1 hour ago, tiger2022 said:

In about 5 years all sports will be behind a pay wall.  They are potentially locking out a whole generation of younger fans who will decide they'd rather not spend X-amount to watch sports when they can do other stuff with their time and money.  And almost anyone under 50 does not have cable or direct TV or anything like that.  

Baseball really needs to reevaluate their model for the future because it's a sport where mainly older people watch.  I know of very few young people that will watch a baseball game.  Not saying there aren't younger fans, but baseball isn't like football, hockey or even basketball.  There is a lot of standing around and doing nothing during a baseball game. 

 

There is a lot of standing around in football too.  I think that sport has benefitted from betting longer than any of the major American sports.  

5 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

of course there is an alternate view that both parties are walking dead, that 'political party' as a basic paradigm is dying and is not revivable exactly because the very people you need to be in them (the sane middle) won't go near them anymore. While I keep seeing this talked about, my question is what does it look like in practice? OK - so for starters you run ranked choice primaries and every candidate is a free agent, but how does a legislature function? Firstly, how to have stable leadership to manage an agenda if every leadership vote is an ad hoc exercise among a couple of hundred free agents? Sound like a recipe for getting even less done than the broken legislative processes we have now.

I like ranked choice, but it might be too complicated for a lot of voters.   

58 minutes ago, oblong said:

I don’t read it but i do follow on twitter but if someone gets joy and satisfaction from doing it that’s fine with me. I don’t know her circumstances. As far as I know she hasn’t asked for money. 

Blogging is fun and I appreciate the work it takes to keep one going regularly even it's just writing opinions.  I don't believe she makes any money off of it.  

I just get a little annoyed when I see certain bloggers frequently showing up on my timeline like they have inside info.  I'm not blaming her for that though.  There were probably people that didn't like me showing up on their timeline when I was blogging a lot too.  

3 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I just wanted to take another opportunity to slam Rendon because I think he's lying about the severity of his injury.  I really do.  He may have been hurt, but I just don't believe him.  The dude hates baseball.  

I mean, I know there are guys out there that are only in it for the money.   To suggest that all of these guys are Kirk Gibson-win-at-any-cost guys is silly and if teams are too stupid to dig into a player and get even a hint of their true intention, that's on them, but this guy just says it out loud and that's why I can't stand him.     The cost to take a family of four or five people to a baseball game is insane and you know what, those fans that go to the game deserve your best.     But we know guys don't always give it.  I understand that, it's a long season, it's a slog, but to be just so flippant about it when you get paid like he does - it just insults everyone.   Absolutely everyone.      Ya wonder why fans hate him?     Fake it.  

He conned the Angels.  From the start.   And the Angels have spent stupidly for a long time (gotta be tough to watch your crosstown rival these days), but there is another angle that frustrates me about this too.   You've got a guy on that ballclub who was on track to be the next superstar of the game and he can't stay healthy, but he's tried and tried.  When Mike Trout first came around we were talking comparisons to Babe Ruth and Willie Mays and now it's just trying to get 110 games out of him.  He got to 130 last year, but he struggled and you could see it when he tried to run.   His legs are betraying him and he's still only 33.   As much time as he's missed he has 404 home runs and he's still only 33.   What might have been.  If he'd have stayed healthy, he'd be challenging Barry Bonds career HR record before 2030.  He's the opposite of Rendon.    I hope the Angels to him a solid and trade him to a contender at some point, because it's not likely to be them any time soon. 

I just don't like frauds (when it comes to anything, not just baseball, believe me, plenty of frauds in the radio biz),  and he's maybe just about the biggest in baseball history and he has NO shame about it.   Screw him. 

Mike Trout was on a track to be the next superstar?  He was best player in the game for five staight years and was a top 5 player 9 times.  It's a shame that he can't stay healthy now, but he more than earned the superstar label.  

5 hours ago, Edman85 said:

The only thing I hate more than the "Give 100% of the credit for player's success to the person in charge of baseball ops at the time" take is arguing the same thing over and over again.

 

Actually I hate several things more than both: seafood for one.

Seafood is the worst.  I'm a picky eater and there are a lot of things I don't eat, but most of them are either not healthy or they can be replaced by something else which is just as healthy, so it doesn't matter.  I eat reasonably healthy, but seafood is the one big healthy food group I am lacking.  I can't even stand the smell.  I know somebody is going to suggest a seafood that isn't too bad, but I still won't eat it.   

I would have had no problem seeing Cabrera do those 7 years with another team.  Like Chas said, one awful year is OK, but 7 is way too much.  I loved to watch his great years.  He was the best Tigers hitter of my lifetime, but I really wasn't all that attached to him.  It wasn't like he was a lifetime Tiger like Kaline or Whitaker or Trammell.  In fact, he won his only World Series on another team.  His off-field activities were not very endearing either.  

7 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

 Our pitching staff may be a team strength this year.

It better be.  

I watched parts of the game only because everybody I know has been and will be talking about it.  I don't do commercials or half-time shows, so it was on mute half the time.  The superbowl is one of biggest scams we have with advertisetrs all over the country convincing us that the superbowl commercials are a must see event.  

19 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

When Trump decided to move the USFL to the fall and go up against the NFL, they had to fold operations. He put the fledging league out of business. Everything Trump touches, dies. Trump vodka, steaks, casinos, college and many other ventures. Anyway, the USFL sued the NFL and won. Their award? 3 dollars. The USFL was finished, thanks to Trump. Feel sorry for the other owners? No, lay down with dogs, wake up with fleas.

Yes, that is my first memory of Trump destroying something.  I liked the USFL and was not happy that he destroyed it.  

Trump tried to buy teams in the NFL for 35 years and was rejected every time and of course he always had a lame excuse.  He tried to buy the Colts in 1981 and the was turned down.  Then he claimed he never made an offer. 

Then he bought a team in the USFL and tried to merge the league into the USFL.  He bragged to Rozelle how great he'd be for the NFL.  The NFL was not interested.  He claimed that Rozelle had offered him a franchise. The USFL, led by Trump sued the NFL.  

He tried to buy the Patriots in the late 80s.  Again he was rejected and he claimed it was because he didn't want to take on the owners debt.  

He tried to buy the Bills in 2014 and was rejected him because he was too disruptive.  He claimed he never wanted to buy the Bills and only bid on them because he wanted them to stay in Buffalo.  

The NFL is apparently smarter than the rest of America.  

11 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Youtube TV doesn't carry MLB TV. I have a subscription and have to access it thru my Roku. 

That is what I do.  

7 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I get ESPN unlimited with my DIRECTV subscription, so I think I’m good.

I also get MLB TV with my DirecTV extra inning subscription, so I can see it on TV or online for a single subscription. 

I am seeing that ESPN Unlimited is part of the Youtube subscription, but somplace else I saw that you can watch MLB with youtube.  I probably wont know until I try to watch a game.   

58 minutes ago, chasfh said:

If this is actually true, I cannot imagine that MLB simply doesn’t care if they lose fans. 

 

Crap.  Not sure what to do with my Roku/YouTube/MLB combo now.  Baseball is getting harder to watch each year.  

That debate is over.  Harris found his balls last week and the team is all his now.

18 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Old, white racist says what?

Trump is still MAD because the NFL wouldn't let him buy a team.  

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

I have done it multiple times. I just haven’t done it on every post.

It’s emoji for when you say something controversial and follow it up with *ducks*, as in, someone is gonna throw something at you for saying it.

I didn't see anything controversial.