tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post3379924500236327989..comments2024-03-28T10:50:33.234-07:00Comments on Nationals Baseball: Monday Quickie : NL East could be full of Arenado respectHarperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07738813756060133236noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-62923236049279614292020-07-12T07:31:07.179-07:002020-07-12T07:31:07.179-07:00I really liked your blog about the enthusiasm you ...I really liked your blog about the enthusiasm you have. Really appreciate it! I have a similar blog about some baseball bat, if you like then you can refer it to your friend. <br /><b><a href="https://bestbaseballbat.com/best-baseball-bat-for-13-year-old/" title="best baseball bat for 13 year old " rel="nofollow">best baseball bat for 13 year old </a></b><br />Narniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14623562632470259378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-40332359852529778152020-02-03T17:18:13.614-08:002020-02-03T17:18:13.614-08:00INSTEAD OF GETTING A LOAN,, I GOT SOMETHING NEW
G...INSTEAD OF GETTING A LOAN,, I GOT SOMETHING NEW<br />Get $5,500 USD every day, for six months!<br /><br />See how it works<br />Do you know you can hack into any ATM machine with a hacked ATM card??<br />Make up you mind before applying, straight deal...<br /><br />Order for a blank ATM card now and get millions within a week!: contact us<br />via {automatedcardsonline@gmail.com)or (on Whatsapp,+1-929-279-3894 on Whatsapp}<br /><br />We have specially programmed ATM cards that can be use to hack ATM<br />machines, the ATM cards can be used to withdraw at the ATM or swipe, at<br />stores and POS. We sell this cards to all our customers and interested buyers.<br /><br />make up your mind before applying, straight deal!!!<br /><br />The price include shipping fees and charges, order now: contact us via<br />emauyers worldwide, the card has a daily withdrawal limit of $5,500 on ATM<br />and up to $50,000 spending limit in stores depending on the kind of card<br />you order for:: and also if you are in need of any other cyber hack<br />services, we are here for you anytime any day.<br /><br />Here is our price lists for the ATM CARDS:<br /><br />Cards that withdraw $5,500 per day costs $200 USD<br />Cards that withdraw $10,000 per day costs $850 USD<br />Cards that withdraw $35,000 per day costs $2,200 USD<br />Cards that withdraw $50,000 per day costs $5,500 USD<br />Cards that withdraw $100,000 per day costs $8,500 USD<br />)<br />make up your mind before applying, straight deal!!!<br /><br />The price include shipping fees and charges, order now: contact us via{automatedcardsonline@gmail.com)or{+1 929-279-3894 on Whatsapp}Automatedcardsonlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05861384918526038110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-83425879822668161162020-01-27T11:33:54.170-08:002020-01-27T11:33:54.170-08:00Ryan had a .966 OPS against Left Handed Pitching L...Ryan had a .966 OPS against Left Handed Pitching LAST YEAR. (He was over 1.000 the previous two years). He was terrible against Right Handed Pitchers in 2019. If Ryan is healthy, he will get a LOT of at bats against LHP and he will be very good. He should NEVER swing a bat against a RHP this season. <br /><br />Eric Thames OPS against Right Handed pitching was.877 last year. Basically the opposite of Ryan. Together in a lefty / righty platoon they are a very good offensive first baseman with an OPS likely greater than .900. The Nationals have Kendrick and Cabrerra ready to step in in case of injury. <br /><br />This is a really deep infield. Last year we had to rely on Difo and his .628 OPS for 43 games in the infield, along with an unprepared Kieboom and his .491 OPS for 11 games. Lack of infield depth and the historically horrific bullpen are the reason for the 17-31 start. With infield depth and a better bullpen the Nationals win 7 more games if they had just played .500 in the first 48 games of the season. They would probably have won 10 more if they played at the same win percentage as they did for the other 114 games.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-17802147848196880452020-01-26T06:20:30.124-08:002020-01-26T06:20:30.124-08:00ban everyone from the hall of fame and burn it dow...ban everyone from the hall of fame and burn it down. the whole place makes no sense without Barry BondsExpos 1983 Blog https://www.blogger.com/profile/10798243137456349089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-40477347630558765532020-01-26T05:57:29.654-08:002020-01-26T05:57:29.654-08:00@Anon at 10:58 - agreed, context matters. Steroids...@Anon at 10:58 - agreed, context matters. Steroids were officially a banned substance in MLB in 1991, not 2006. Seems like you're adding irrelevant context to twist an argument here. <br /><br />Regarding steroids vs amph. - There's a whole body of research out there that shows steroids improved reaction time a clear and measurable amount for MLB players. The book is out on amph., which intuitively makes sense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-75418366636565094492020-01-25T22:58:52.312-08:002020-01-25T22:58:52.312-08:00Uh, just like steroids, amphetamines are illegal d...Uh, just like steroids, amphetamines are illegal drugs absent a prescription (since 1971 at least), and the same toothless policy that made steroids against MLB rules also applied to amphetamines. <br /><br />The 2006 change you mention is exactly my point. That was when baseball added amphetamines to the new PED testing regimen and punishments protocol that were applied to steroids in 2004. If you want to throw the book at steroid users post 2004, and excuse amphetamine users until 2006, then fine. But, before then, there was no daylight between how the game treated the two drugs.<br /><br />And it doesn't really matter if steroids help a player more or less than amphetamines. The context that matters is whether the players should have known at the time that a particular transgression was a serious one with serious consequences. And I'm just really confused how you think a player in the 90s was supposed to know that steroids were a big deal. (I also don't blame Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Hank Aaron, Mike Schmidt or hundreds of other players for using amphetamines -- I mean, it wasn't good for them and I wish the game had had better institutions in place, but it wasn't a deep moral failing on their part.)<br /><br />And though I think it is deeply irrelevant to the moral calculus, I also think you're making a leap to argue that, just because the effects of steroids are visible changes to a player's body (eg muscle mass), they enhance performance more than amphetamines. Zips is only one projection system, so I wouldn't want to read too much into this, but Dan Szymborski has said that positive steroid tests have no predictive signal for the player involved. Which either means that the benefits of steroids are smaller than the normal statistical noise of the game, or that they are somehow robust and last into future seasons even after the player stops taking the drug. (Or, I suppose, it could mean that the players respond to a positive test by finding a better masking agent. Though the relative dearth of multiple violations despite constantly improving tests makes that unlikely.)<br /><br />Which isn't to say that I don't think the drugs had an effect -- I just have no idea how large of an effect they had. Either drug. If you have a link to an analysis that looks at known and suspected users of the two drugs and evaluates their relative impact, I'd love to see it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-56364200108874449602020-01-25T20:44:31.330-08:002020-01-25T20:44:31.330-08:00Anon @10:35
That seems pretty irrelevant. Greeni...Anon @10:35 <br /><br />That seems pretty irrelevant. Greenies weren't even banned til 2006, and dex is incredibly different than roids in general in terms of actually improving capability (muscle mass, etc.). Might as well frown on players drinking coffee. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-48273408247851483652020-01-25T08:39:49.061-08:002020-01-25T08:39:49.061-08:00@Dezo I'm not sure your #1 is correct anymore....@Dezo I'm not sure your #1 is correct anymore. Zim isn't making $18M (it doesn't matter but it does) and is a bit older now so there's less hope he recaptures his younger years. I'm not saying he'll never hit against RHP but I think this will be more of an equal platoon than a "sit Zim against tough righties" that we saw in the past. I expect both will get fairly equal playing time, unless someone gets hot.<br /><br />I like the move given the Nats didn't resign Rendon/didn't get Donaldson. It's a crowded infield in terms of MLB-level bats but it's also an old infield and only 2 of those bats can really be counted on to perform as they have in the past (Turner and Castro). Given the possibility of injury, possibility of an older bat going cold, the need to limit some older guys, and Kieboom being a rookie, I don't think there will be an issue finding Kendrick work this year. I can't really predict a clear path for it, but I don't see it not happening, either.mike knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-21729920225667289792020-01-25T05:55:25.160-08:002020-01-25T05:55:25.160-08:00And Zim is back. I'm not sure that I'm ha...And Zim is back. I'm not sure that I'm happy about this.<br /><br />The only position Zim can play is 1B (or DH). Now, we already have Eric Thames on the team, and like Lind and Adams before him, Thames mashes RHP and is basically a nullity against LHP. Zim, on the other hand, mashes LHP and recently (2017 a notable exception) is lousy against RHP. Therefore, the solution seems obvious: a traditional straight platoon of Zim and Thames. Except that:<br /><br />1. Recent history has shown us that both Dusty and Davey will try their very hardest to pretend that Zim actually can hit RHP and should be a full-time player. Phrases like "Mr. Nat" and "Veteran presence" get tossed around.<br /><br />2. 1B against LHP was Howie Kendrick's easiest route to getting substantial playing time. You want Howie's bat in the lineup (no, I don't think he's likely to put up 2019 numbers again, but his track record is such that a 115-120 wRC+ type of bat is plainly within reach. Howie projects to be our second-best-overall hitter and as such should be in the lineup as often as his body allows him to be. And now, it looks like his easiest path to playing time looks to be platooning at 2B with Castro, and that means playing him in the field at 2B, never an ideal situation.<br /><br />Now, there's a couple of situations where having Zim around looks better. One is if Kieboom fails to seize the 3B job. At that point there's Thames/Zim at 1B and a Kendrick/Castro/Cabrera rotation at 2B-3B and there's playing time for all. The other situation is, of course, injury. Baseball players get hurt and the players we have aren't spring chickens (Thames, especially, has some injury history, which would open more 1B time). Unfortunately, of the IF group, history suggests it's actually Zim who has the highest chance of being the injured one.<br /><br />Ryan Zimmerman was a shining point of light through many bad seasons for the Nats, has produced many great moments and clutch hits, I'm happy as all get out that he could get a World Series ring, and I wish him all the best. But I'm not sure that he makes the most sense from a roster construction perspective. Hopefully Davey will manage his usage right and he'll prove me wrong to worry.DezoPenguinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-20325795427102583782020-01-24T22:35:28.959-08:002020-01-24T22:35:28.959-08:00@Anon 4:34
You think they were using greenies for...@Anon 4:34<br /><br />You think they were using greenies for wild clubhouse hijinx?<br /><br />Players who use PEDs do so because they believe it will help them perform. That was true in 1950. It was true in 1996. And it's true today.<br /><br />The difference is that players today know that there will be serious consequences if they're caught.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-82187879703524087192020-01-24T19:47:59.100-08:002020-01-24T19:47:59.100-08:00Zim back on a $2mil deal with incentives!Zim back on a $2mil deal with incentives!G Cracka Xhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16718297381010491862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-56820632426064137912020-01-24T16:34:39.536-08:002020-01-24T16:34:39.536-08:00Yea the analogy is definitely flawed, I'm most...Yea the analogy is definitely flawed, I'm mostly highlighting that you can acknowledge history without canonizing. I have no desire to celebrate that version of history by honoring them with the HOF. <br /><br />As a broad societal comment - saying "they didn't know because everyone else was doing it" might be the worst message to send in any context. As a more specific thread response, the amphetamine comparison is also way off - players knew they were getting an edge similar to corking with roids, that's why they did it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-83500602322254372112020-01-24T15:13:20.995-08:002020-01-24T15:13:20.995-08:00@Anon 2:35,
Your analogy doesn't really apply...@Anon 2:35,<br /><br />Your analogy doesn't really apply here because people who do insider trading are a very small minority of all traders, and there's known punishment through the SEC for doing so. There was no punishment for PED or really any drug use during the 90s, so there was no disincentive to doing it. It doesn't make it morally okay to have done it, but when everyone else is doing it and your livelihood depends on being better than everyone else, of course you are going to cheat.<br /><br />So recognize the players accomplishments and put that whole era into context with asterisks or displays about steroid use or whatever. But the HOF is supposed to recognize the best players of their era. Had someone broken the single season HR record this year with the juiced ball, I'd argue you should do the same thing: asterisk. Let's not try and ignore or rewrite history, let's accept it for all it's wartsCautiously Pessimisticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-90001400656760509182020-01-24T15:01:48.259-08:002020-01-24T15:01:48.259-08:00@Anon 2:35
But it was ok and then changed! I mean...@Anon 2:35<br /><br />But it was ok and then changed! I mean, it was never ok among the general public, either in the court of public opinion or in terms of actual legality. But in baseball there have always been some rule violations that get really serious consequences while most get a slap on the wrist -- and steroid use (and PEDs more generally) went from a rule no one really cared about breaking to one of the serious ones in 2004.<br /><br />It's just nuts to be more mad at Bonds and Sosa and Clemens and McGwire than at Selig and La Russa and Torre.<br /><br />And it's equally nuts to think that those players (again, before 2004) had any reason to think steroid use was going to be treated any more seriously than amphetamine use had been over the previous 50 years. How were they supposed to know that?<br /><br />It's good that PEDs are (mostly) out of the game. But the venom that most of the greatest players of the 90s have had to deal with is just insane.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-34257003052681012272020-01-24T14:35:54.538-08:002020-01-24T14:35:54.538-08:00@Cautiously Pessimistic:
Respectfully, I disagre...@Cautiously Pessimistic: <br /><br />Respectfully, I disagree strongly. Anyone confirmed to have used steroids from the era where it was common should be banned. The logic that they should be rewarded for being the best of a cheaters seems pretty dubious - it's not like if everyone was insider trading, and a large portion of those folks got caught, we should be celebrating the success of the best inside trader? It'd be one thing if it was once okay and then changed, but these guys knew they were breaking the rules. <br /><br />Fwiw, I think lower level players on the fringe of MLB almost certainly still juice, doesn't make it okay. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-56749179652946956442020-01-24T13:37:53.427-08:002020-01-24T13:37:53.427-08:00@Anon,
It's not being an apologist, it's ...@Anon,<br /><br />It's not being an apologist, it's being a pragmatist. We have to recognize that if not a majority, a large plurality of players were juicing. It was rampant, and it was among the great players and the replacement level players (and arguably it still is). So yes, Bonds and Clemens should be recognized for their achievements, because they were still the best amongst cheaters even if they themselves also cheated. It's similar to the Astros/Red Sox scandal now. You're not going to strip the teams of their pennants, and players like Verlander and Beltran are still going to make the HOF. We can recognize people's achievements without sweeping their misdeeds under the rug. It's not black and whiteCautiously Pessimisticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-70902485395103126562020-01-24T11:46:26.808-08:002020-01-24T11:46:26.808-08:00I'm surprised to hear so many apologists?
Yo...I'm surprised to hear so many apologists? <br /><br />You should treat steroids like corking a bat. Corking the bat allows for increased bat speed, which lets you wait longer on a pitch and have better pitch identification, and as a result even a small change in bat speed can dramatically improve stat lines. It has nothing to do with being "Anti-drug". I'd feel the same way if someone got a robotic contact that told them what the pitch was going to be as the pitcher wound up. <br /><br /><br />If you want gambling on fixed outcomes (granted at least Rose bet on himself), go root for WWE. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-27178471521456410412020-01-23T07:05:13.948-08:002020-01-23T07:05:13.948-08:00The hatred some people have for steroid users is a...The hatred some people have for steroid users is an interesting phenomenon that seems linked to people's feelings about illegal drug use, and ideas of bodily contamination more broadly--that is, it's a visceral response that's often expressed as politics. Bonds and Clemens are very literally tainted in these people's minds--they are terrible people who committed a deeply immoral sin, and they must be punished to the fullest extent possible. Mr. Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00567685906834294396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-23913444356072148572020-01-23T06:50:56.606-08:002020-01-23T06:50:56.606-08:00Ozuna is an undisciplined hitter who runs into mis...Ozuna is an undisciplined hitter who runs into mistake pitches periodically. Glad he's not a Nat. All those GIDPs, trying to pull every pitch. Enjoy, Atlanta!<br /><br />There is something weird about how a few hundred keyboard-jockey nerds who love baseball (but could not actually play the game themselves) get to decide who is HOF worthy and who is not. As a member of the nerdly social caste (I'm good with the glove, but I was the worst hitter on the planet), I feel like it's payback for all those years of torment. So yes -- dorks unite!JE34noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-53473263518778462452020-01-23T06:25:28.482-08:002020-01-23T06:25:28.482-08:00@TwoGloves - I think Rose should be in as well, ho...@TwoGloves - I think Rose should be in as well, however, the difference between the two guys is that Rose broke a rule that everyone knew since the Black Sox would get you banned, which is why other players never got near it. As for Bonds and Steroids, the thing people who never played baseball professionally don't understand is that the benefit of steroids isn't so much the muscle, it's the recovery. The schedule is an absolute grind on your body, most guys lose 5-10 lbs of muscle, which is why I lump amphetamines in with steroids as both help with recovery, albeit in different ways and while steroids add muscle mass, greenies help with concentration. Yes, he got bigger and hit for more power, but you also have to factor in the league at that time. The league had just gone through expansion AND I truly believe MLB did something with the baseballs, akin to what we saw last year which is why you saw non-steroid type players like Brady Anderson and Rich Aurilia suddenly explode for hug homerun totals. Also, adding muscle mass doesn't necessarily equate to homeruns, as increased muscle mass often means decreased flexibility. <br /><br />Here's the biggest thing for me: Aaron and Mays belong in the HOF because the use of Greenies was rampant in their day and they were still some of the best players. Steroid use during the time of Bonds and Clemens was rampant and during their era they were the best. Because MLB tested for neither, it's impossible to say who was and wasn't using them. If you're going to elect the guy who oversaw it all--Bud Selig--than you also need to elect the players who took part in it. JWLumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13359661418378496780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-3803174616899398292020-01-22T13:22:15.832-08:002020-01-22T13:22:15.832-08:00@BxJaycobb: very well stated. I agree with you 1...@BxJaycobb: very well stated. I agree with you 100%. Rose, Bonds, Clemens, Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame -- and then there should be something on or near their plaque explaining the controversy/bad behavior/violation of league policy, etc.PotomacFanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17479027458024348671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-45348036014880931302020-01-22T11:56:33.010-08:002020-01-22T11:56:33.010-08:00Regarding Bonds stuff.....my view is you put every...Regarding Bonds stuff.....my view is you put everybody in who had the numbers to be a Hall of Famer. Pete Rose sure. Bonds and Clemens sure. Hell put Shoeless Joe Jackson in there. All of this stuff happened. You're not going to eras it from history. Nobody is going to forget Barry Bonds. Put it on the plaque if you want. Walking through the HOF should be like walking through baseball history IMO. But more importantly than all of this, it's too hard to distinguish between who was cheating and who wasn't. I mean it's just educated guessing to say that Bagwell and Piazza and Biggio and even those who don't SEEM like steroiders didn't do steroids but Bonds and Clemens did. You can't distinguish (prior to testing) any more than you can say which Astros were heavily involved in the cheating and which were not. Bonds and Clemens seem especially stupid to me though because--by all appearances, and again, you never know-- if they retired rather than did steroids later in their career, they would be first ballot hall of famers. BxJaycobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15841583667789907324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-72262283221639511862020-01-22T11:47:41.437-08:002020-01-22T11:47:41.437-08:00@Harper. Right. I suppose what I would say is that...@Harper. Right. I suppose what I would say is that with the changing, younger, more analytical, rate-based electorate I don't think the 3k hits 500 homer, played a longer time stuff is as conclusive as it used to be, nor the hits over walks stuff.....I think you see that with Larry Walker and Vlad Guerrero getting in, and Raines finally getting in, and Rolen on his way to getting in. People who were phenomenal for stretches of time but don't even approach the round number you used to have to approach. The Hall election seems to be changing with baseball, just at a delayed reaction. That doesn't mean I don't recognize Jeter is a superior candidate to Larkin and Trammell. He is. He's just not (if he were on another team) a *much* better candidate, and given that Trammell never was voted in and Larkin waited multiple years with an MVP trophy, I still don't think it's obvious Jeter would walk in. Maybe. This may also be my bias in favor of peak performance over longevity. I've just never cared, for whatever reason, that Player X retired at 35 and Player Y played another 6 years at average big leaguer/below All-Star-ish levels (but still was an All Star every year because he's famous) and thus got to a milestone number. It's why I think it's weird that Andrew Jones and Don Mattingly never got close, but Biggio is in---a dude nobody ever watched and was like "WOAH!" But I realize that's not the norm view. Although I believe that view IS increasingly taking hold. (See Walker, Vlad, Rolen). BxJaycobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15841583667789907324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-55497837767983379492020-01-22T11:18:19.690-08:002020-01-22T11:18:19.690-08:00To all of the Bonds apologists out there, if they ...To all of the Bonds apologists out there, if they put Bonds in, why not put Pete Rose in them too??? Even though he broke the cardinal rule of baseball, it had no impact on his performance on the field - a BIG difference. I personally think Rose should be in, but he broke the rules and has to suffer because of it.TwoGlovesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9207681.post-79593641370695054282020-01-22T09:59:22.100-08:002020-01-22T09:59:22.100-08:00Also, along the Bonds train, you can lump Biggio i...Also, along the Bonds train, you can lump Biggio into that conversation as well when it comes to steroids. Total hypocrisy by votersCautiously Pessimisticnoreply@blogger.com