Post: #176

@ Rob Banks , So Hispanic players are ok as long as they speak English?

Personally, I'd rather see them play than listen to their interviews.

Post: #177

(10-17-2016 01:12 PM)dark_g Wrote:  @ Rob Banks , So Hispanic players are ok as long as they speak English?

Personally, I'd rather see them play than listen to their interviews.

I have no problem with Hispanic players. I just don't like the fact that in 10 years, probably more than 50% of the league will be Dominican- or Cuban-born Hispanic, with the vast majority of those players speaking little to no English.

If half the players were Japanese and spoke no English, I would have a problem with that, too. It has nothing to do with them being Hispanic.

Also, the Hispanic issue is not even close to being my main issue with baseball these days. In my original comment, I outlined what my issues are with MLB and why I don't watch it anymore. The Hispanic issue is not even close to being the reason why. I watched baseball for years despite the growing number of foreign-born Hispanics and I would have kept watching if the league wasn't doing all this other stuff I'm not happy about.

Post: #178

Cleveland pitcher in the bottom of the 1st is bleeding all over the damn place from his pitching hand. Besides the fricking biohazard issue I think they're running afoul of rules against discoloring the ball.

...Yep, he just got pulled.

Post: #179

(10-17-2016 09:47 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 11:18 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  Your CBA analysis is severely misguided and off the mark. The luxury tax is nearly a moot point

I was not referring to the so-called "luxury tax." That has been around since 1997, and did not prevent big-market teams from spending as much as they wanted. Teams like the Yankees and other big-market teams would just pay the luxury tax every year in order to continue spending big.

However, prior to the 2012 season, there was a new collective bargaining agreement. I'm not familiar with the details, but all I know is that around the time it was passed, there was lots of talk about "making small-market teams more competitive." And sure enough, starting with the 2012 season, the big-market teams started doing worse and worse, and tons of small-market teams that have traditionally been bad started getting good. There is no way this was a coincidence.

(10-16-2016 11:18 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  baseball has changed significantly in the past years

Largely due to the new CBA.

(10-16-2016 11:18 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  teams are wising up to the fact that spending as much as possible is not a recipe for winning.

BS. Up until the 2011 season, teams like the Yankees and Red Sox were spending as much as possible and doing quite well. In fact, in 2011 (the last season before the new CBA) the Yankees, Phillies and Red Sox had the three highest payrolls in the leage. The Phillies and Yankees finished with the two best records in the league, and the Red Sox would have had one of the best records had it not been for a late-season collapse.

If teams have "wised up" and decided that spending big is not a recipe for winning, it has everything to do with the new CBA.

By the way, big-market teams are still spending big. It's just that they're not winning anymore. I believe the new CBA included an agreement that smaller-market teams get extra draft picks, in addition to other things to help small-market teams. Again, I'm not a lawyer and I haven't read the entire CBA. I just know that it's no coincidence that baseball changed so much as soon as the new CBA went into effect.

(10-16-2016 11:18 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  I don't think the Rays ever complained to anyone about how unfair lopsided budgets are.

You're absolutely right. The Rays, however, got good before the new CBA went into effect. They made the playoffs in 2010 and 2011.

(10-16-2016 11:18 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  And what the fuck with the cheap shot at the Latin ballplayers
The game is so much better with the likes of Robinson Cano, Felix Hernandez, Adrian Beltre, etc.

And if it was just those three, I wouldn't have a problem. In fact, if 10% of the league was Hispanic, I probably wouldn't care. But it's 30%. And I wouldn't be surprised if it surpassed 50% within the next 10 years.

Close to 1 out of 3 players is Hispanic now, and most of those Hispanic players barely speak any English (or just straight up don't speak English at all). Bartolo Colon, for example, speaks no English at all. And he's certainly not the only one.

Also, if these were Hispanics that grew up in America, I wouldn't mind at all. What bothers me is that we're importing all these players from Dominican Republic and Cuba.

Major League Baseball is an American league. I want most of the players to be American and speak English. And it's not like there's a shortage of American players. I think you should have to live in America for at least 5 years before playing in the Majors.

Lots of English soccer fans are pissed about the Premier League for the same reason. Only 31% of players in that league are English! And England has some kind of anti-discrimination law that prohibits the league from establishing a minimum percentage of English players.

The bolded is classic correlation vs. causation.
The bad free agent contract hysteria was starting to rear its ugly head around this era, and is the greatest reason why teams operate their payroll and roster the way they now do. Its a lot more efficient to invest in player development, attain peak value at minimum prices, and retool every several years. It also helps that player's peak season are coming earlier and earlier. The shear quantity of players producing MVP like numbers under the age of 25 is uncharted territory, making the 30 year old Andrew McCutchens and Adam Joneses of the world much less desirable than a 23 rookie making the league's base salary.

You argue about the new CBA, but don't get the facts right about one of its most important aspects. Small market teams do not get extra draft picks from the CBA. Each team has an option to attach a qualifying offer to a potential free agent. If the player rejects the qualifying offer (15 million salary for 1 year) then the team that eventually signs him forfeits their draft pick, and the team that lost said player picks up an additional pick at the end of the 1st round. All teams use the qualifying offer to their advantage; its a new avenue for teams with excellent development systems to stock pile prospects and attain maximum value of young low cost talent.

IN addition, for someone who seems to be gung-ho about free market, capitalistic baseball, its incongruent that you would be so opposed to teams ravaging Latin America for cheap/premium talent. The crux of your argument seems to be: you like restrictions on baseball, it is just backwards in the way its done. Let teams spend as much as possible on a smaller talent pool, but restrict the size of the talent pool, cause the game needs to become more nationalistic again.

Also there is NO way in hell Bartolo Colon doesn't speak English. He's played baseball in the US for 20 years. Only an autistic neanderthal would fail to learn English after being immersed in it for so long. I don't blame Spanish speaking players for conducting interviews in Spanish. Not knowing the subtle nuances of grammar is the ideal opportunity for their words to be misconstrued and taken out of context, and then plastered over the media so the talking heads can take their pot shots.

Post: #180

The Wild Card definitely shouldn't be a series. We're more than halfway through October and the World Series is likely to go into November. Turning the Wild Card into a series and/or adding games onto the division series will make it even longer. Any team making it to the Wild Card doesn't have room to talk about fairness. If they want things to be fair, the team should win their division or there should not be 2 wild cards per league. I already think the delay caused by the Wild Card games being on 2 separate nights is too long and hurts any team with sinker-ball pitchers, who don't deserve a handicap for being winners.

Baseball is a generational game. You're seeing less American players for two reasons. The family unit is breaking down, which is more apparent in the black community. Less boys are learning the nuances of baseball from their fathers because so many aren't with their fathers. Baseball is a great sport for father-son bonding because it's just slow enough for a dad to provide context of the game to a child and then it's easy for a child to try to re-enact with the supervision of his father. Also, draft conditions are more favorable to hispanic players because a team can grab them at 15 or 16 years old, meaning they get more years of development by a team's farm system before making it to the big leagues.

Post: #181

I hear what you're saying, but I don't see why a player " not speaking English" matters, be it Spanish, japanes, Korean or whatever language. You're Watching them play, not converse. As long as I can understand the analyist, announcers and umpires I'm good.

Post: #182

Go Cleveland. I've had enough of watching Bautista, Martin, Tulo et al bitch and whine about every call they don't like. I've had enough of this team, they're impossible to watch.

Post: #183

(10-17-2016 10:12 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  The Wild Card definitely shouldn't be a series. We're more than halfway through October and the World Series is likely to go into November. Turning the Wild Card into a series and/or adding games onto the division series will make it even longer. Any team making it to the Wild Card doesn't have room to talk about fairness. If they want things to be fair, the team should win their division or there should not be 2 wild cards per league. I already think the delay caused by the Wild Card games being on 2 separate nights is too long and hurts any team with sinker-ball pitchers, who don't deserve a handicap for being winners.

Baseball is a generational game. You're seeing less American players for two reasons. The family unit is breaking down, which is more apparent in the black community. Less boys are learning the nuances of baseball from their fathers because so many aren't with their fathers . Baseball is a great sport for father-son bonding because it's just slow enough for a dad to provide context of the game to a child and then it's easy for a child to try to re-enact with the supervision of his father. Also, draft conditions are more favorable to hispanic players because a team can grab them at 15 or 16 years old, meaning they get more years of development by a team's farm system before making it to the big leagues.

Great post. I bolded the parts I'd like to expand on. For years, I've thought the decline in African Americans boys playing baseball was due to social factors like the ones you identified. Like stated, baseball is a game of nuance---Extreme nuance along multiple skill sets that a player has to possess in order to play at a high level. The most important of these is discipline.

A coach can spend can spend all practice, every practice working on swing mechanics, reminding pitchers to keep their elbow above their shoulder, or going over signs but not much of that is going to stick if the kid doesn't have a home life where consistency, though before action, and the collective over self are a part of regular life.

At higher levels, like NCAA D1 or D2 and, of course, all professional levels, a big deal is made about the mental approach to the game. For example, this means, knowing that hitters generally have an average below .100 when swinging at the first pitch. Or being able to read how a slight tilt in a pitcher's glove is a tell that a breaking ball is coming. Or understanding what constitutes an offspeed count so you, the baserunner, are prepared to take a bag on a pitch in the dirt. Or putting behind previous failures so they don't carry over to the next opportunity (like the next at-bat or chance to gun down a runner).

However, no one gets to those levels without being very dedicated and very disciplined in their approach to the game and, for the vast majority, life in general. Even some of these guys that are stupid in an academic or social setting are absolute experts when it comes to understanding the game. They had to have been students of it for years before refining their expertise and, unlike a college professor, if their research is bullshit, they're out of a job. The mental aspect of baseball is the key component and it's not developed without discipline. Fathers are the natural disciplinarians. Less paternal influence in society equals less discipline.

I played baseball at the NCAA D1 level and a season and half in the minors. The one thing that the vast majority of the guys that played at those high levels had was a stable home environment. Their fathers had been active in their lives. This is not a rule and it's only anecdotal, but becoming a good player is extremely time consuming even for a player with elite athletic ability. How many single moms are going to dedicate their time to making sure that kid has regimen to ensure success when they themselves have never had to do something similar in athletics? There are, of course, exceptions to this rule like Alex Rodriguez, but just look at how that guy is view outside of the white lines. He's a selfish manchild who happens to have 1 in 100,000,000 talent. Imagine what he could have been if he had been raised by a father like Derek Jeter's. Although Jeter had elite MLB tools on the 20-80 scale, ARod is an extremely gifted athlete whose abilities masked his mental shortcomings.

Even though Latin American countries are poor, the father is still a part of their children's lives. The father and mother might never have married or have lived together, but they live right down the street from each other and the child still has access to Dad on a daily basis. This is a marked contrast from what is happening in North America where a white kid's dad might live in another state or a black kid's dad might be in jail or had been missing since day one.

Next thing: Major League teams usually sign younger Latin players to minor league free agent contracts and set them up with a developmental regimen. Draft rules are specific about age and other factors related to academics so North American talent has to wait a few more years. Also, school's not really compulsory in some Latin baseball hotbeds so those kids focus only on the game while their North American counterparts are spending time in class.

Final point: Professional baseball is a business. The MLB supports signing foreign players in order to expand it's global presence. Expect to see more Taiwanese, Koreans, and Brazilians in affiliated baseball over the coming years (the mainland Chinese are still a couple decades away from having quality baseball even if things go according to the MLB's developmental plan but Taiwanese can help pave the way for the hype wagon). It's good business since there are over a billion ethnic Chinese and Brazil is almost 200 million and sports crazy. However, it's also an example of how baseball is not a meritocracy.

(A short aside related to the merit aspect: I'm not trying to be negative, but professional baseball is really just a good ol' boys club that is interested in picking up other members (other markets) that increase and perpetuate its power. This nepotism is also why you see some these sons of ex-major leaguers (think, Jerry Hairston Jr., Koby Clemens, or Tony Gwynn Jr.) automatically getting selected high in the draft and fast tracked for the bigs.)

There are foreign players from potential emerging markets taking up slots in A and AA and even AAA that could go to more-talented, higher-ceiling American or Dominican or Venezuelan players, but the MLB has an interest in building up support for the game in those places. Even if those guys don't make it to the show (fewer than 10% of players in class A ever make a Major League roster), they'll take their love, experience, connections, and knowledge of the game back to their home country. It's a long term strategy that is apparent to anyone who pays attention to the business aspect of the game. There have already been a few of those unworthy players from emerging baseball locations who have made it onto Major League rosters by virtue of their nationality and the hype machine (remember Hideki Irabu?).

Post: #184

(10-18-2016 03:40 AM)jdreise Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 10:12 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  The Wild Card definitely shouldn't be a series. We're more than halfway through October and the World Series is likely to go into November. Turning the Wild Card into a series and/or adding games onto the division series will make it even longer. Any team making it to the Wild Card doesn't have room to talk about fairness. If they want things to be fair, the team should win their division or there should not be 2 wild cards per league. I already think the delay caused by the Wild Card games being on 2 separate nights is too long and hurts any team with sinker-ball pitchers, who don't deserve a handicap for being winners.

Baseball is a generational game. You're seeing less American players for two reasons. The family unit is breaking down, which is more apparent in the black community. Less boys are learning the nuances of baseball from their fathers because so many aren't with their fathers . Baseball is a great sport for father-son bonding because it's just slow enough for a dad to provide context of the game to a child and then it's easy for a child to try to re-enact with the supervision of his father. Also, draft conditions are more favorable to hispanic players because a team can grab them at 15 or 16 years old, meaning they get more years of development by a team's farm system before making it to the big leagues.

Great post. I bolded the parts I'd like to expand on. For years, I've thought the decline in African Americans boys playing baseball was due to social factors like the ones you identified. Like stated, baseball is a game of nuance---Extreme nuance along multiple skill sets that a player has to possess in order to play at a high level. The most important of these is discipline.

A coach can spend can spend all practice, every practice working on swing mechanics, reminding pitchers to keep their elbow above their shoulder, or going over signs but not much of that is going to stick if the kid doesn't have a home life where consistency, though before action, and the collective over self are a part of regular life.

At higher levels, like NCAA D1 or D2 and, of course, all professional levels, a big deal is made about the mental approach to the game. For example, this means, knowing that hitters generally have an average below .100 when swinging at the first pitch. Or being able to read how a slight tilt in a pitcher's glove is a tell that a breaking ball is coming. Or understanding what constitutes an offspeed count so you, the baserunner, are prepared to take a bag on a pitch in the dirt. Or putting behind previous failures so they don't carry over to the next opportunity (like the next at-bat or chance to gun down a runner).

However, no one gets to those levels without being very dedicated and very disciplined in their approach to the game and, for the vast majority, life in general. Even some of these guys that are stupid in an academic or social setting are absolute experts when it comes to understanding the game. They had to have been students of it for years before refining their expertise and, unlike a college professor, if their research is bullshit, they're out of a job. The mental aspect of baseball is the key component and it's not developed without discipline. Fathers are the natural disciplinarians. Less paternal influence in society equals less discipline.

I played baseball at the NCAA D1 level and a season and half in the minors. The one thing that the vast majority of the guys that played at those high levels had was a stable home environment. Their fathers had been active in their lives. This is not a rule and it's only anecdotal, but becoming a good player is extremely time consuming even for a player with elite athletic ability. How many single moms are going to dedicate their time to making sure that kid has regimen to ensure success when they themselves have never had to do something similar in athletics? There are, of course, exceptions to this rule like Alex Rodriguez, but just look at how that guy is view outside of the white lines. He's a selfish manchild who happens to have 1 in 100,000,000 talent. Imagine what he could have been if he had been raised by a father like Derek Jeter's. Although Jeter had elite MLB tools on the 20-80 scale, ARod is an extremely gifted athlete whose abilities masked his mental shortcomings.

Even though Latin American countries are poor, the father is still a part of their children's lives. The father and mother might never have married or have lived together, but they live right down the street from each other and the child still has access to Dad on a daily basis. This is a marked contrast from what is happening in North America where a white kid's dad might live in another state or a black kid's dad might be in jail or had been missing since day one.

Next thing: Major League teams usually sign younger Latin players to minor league free agent contracts and set them up with a developmental regimen. Draft rules are specific about age and other factors related to academics so North American talent has to wait a few more years. Also, school's not really compulsory in some Latin baseball hotbeds so those kids focus only on the game while their North American counterparts are spending time in class.

Final point: Professional baseball is a business. The MLB supports signing foreign players in order to expand it's global presence. Expect to see more Taiwanese, Koreans, and Brazilians in affiliated baseball over the coming years (the mainland Chinese are still a couple decades away from having quality baseball even if things go according to the MLB's developmental plan but Taiwanese can help pave the way for the hype wagon). It's good business since there are over a billion ethnic Chinese and Brazil is almost 200 million and sports crazy. However, it's also an example of how baseball is not a meritocracy.

(A short aside related to the merit aspect: I'm not trying to be negative, but professional baseball is really just a good ol' boys club that is interested in picking up other members (other markets) that increase and perpetuate its power. This nepotism is also why you see some these sons of ex-major leaguers (think, Jerry Hairston Jr., Koby Clemens, or Tony Gwynn Jr.) automatically getting selected high in the draft and fast tracked for the bigs.)

There are foreign players from potential emerging markets taking up slots in A and AA and even AAA that could go to more-talented, higher-ceiling American or Dominican or Venezuelan players, but the MLB has an interest in building up support for the game in those places. Even if those guys don't make it to the show (fewer than 10% of players in class A ever make a Major League roster), they'll take their love, experience, connections, and knowledge of the game back to their home country. It's a long term strategy that is apparent to anyone who pays attention to the business aspect of the game. There have already been a few of those unworthy players from emerging baseball locations who have made it onto Major League rosters by virtue of their nationality and the hype machine (remember Hideki Irabu?).

There's something to this but there's also the money aspect. Once you get drafted out of college, you're making $600k per year immediately as a later pick, more if higher. Even an NFL practice squad is $150k a year, IIRC. (Which is why a CFL QB will always take a practice squad gig over a CFL gig if possible.)

Baseball requires refinement at really poor money in the minors and only then do you get the $510k yearly salary. You start at less, get less once you "make it", then have to wait 3 years until your first arbitration case if you're good to make real caysh.

Post: #185

(10-17-2016 09:19 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  The bolded is classic correlation vs. causation.
The bad free agent contract hysteria was starting to rear its ugly head around this era, and is the greatest reason why teams operate their payroll and roster the way they now do. Its a lot more efficient to invest in player development, attain peak value at minimum prices, and retool every several years. It also helps that player's peak season are coming earlier and earlier. The shear quantity of players producing MVP like numbers under the age of 25 is uncharted territory, making the 30 year old Andrew McCutchens and Adam Joneses of the world much less desirable than a 23 rookie making the league's base salary.

You argue about the new CBA, but don't get the facts right about one of its most important aspects. Small market teams do not get extra draft picks from the CBA. Each team has an option to attach a qualifying offer to a potential free agent. If the player rejects the qualifying offer (15 million salary for 1 year) then the team that eventually signs him forfeits their draft pick, and the team that lost said player picks up an additional pick at the end of the 1st round. All teams use the qualifying offer to their advantage; its a new avenue for teams with excellent development systems to stock pile prospects and attain maximum value of young low cost talent.

You talk about correlation vs. causation, but it seems to me that the fact that players' "peak season" comes earlier and earlier cannot be naturally-occurring. Human biological athletic development has not changed in the past few decades. We are still biologically the same, and athletes don't develop any faster than they did 10 or 20 years ago. This leads me to believe one of the following must be true:

1) The actual game on the field has changed significantly to make physical qualities such as speed and agility more important, and other qualities such as power and strength less important. This very well may be the case since the end of the steroid era, and could explain why "peak performance" is seen at a younger age.

2) Something about the way the game is managed off the field (collective bargaining agreements, player contracts, league rules, anti-steroid rule changes), that cause teams to prefer younger stars with lower price tags over older free-agent superstars who are looking for a big contract.

I believe it is a little of both. Teams are relying less and less on big older power hitters (like David Ortiz) and more and more on younger athletic types of players. On the pitching side, you're seeing a shift towards younger guys who throw close to 100 MPH and away from older, veteran guys who throw 85-90 but have good pitch placement.

On the other hand, we have also been seeing big market teams concentrating on younger home-grown players instead of signing free-agent superstars like they used to do. I don't have a problem with this at all. I am just pointing out that teams would not change their behavior like this unless there was some incentive that wasn't there before. I don't know the details of the CBA, but I did notice that big market teams stopped signing as many big name free agents once the new CBA was passed (prior to the 2012 season), and also that these same big market teams got worse while many traditionally bad teams got a lot better. This could entirely be a coincidence for all I know. Like I said, I'm not familiar with the details of the CBA. I am only speculating when it comes to that.

(10-17-2016 09:19 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  IN addition, for someone who seems to be gung-ho about free market, capitalistic baseball, its incongruent that you would be so opposed to teams ravaging Latin America for cheap/premium talent. The crux of your argument seems to be: you like restrictions on baseball, it is just backwards in the way its done. Let teams spend as much as possible on a smaller talent pool, but restrict the size of the talent pool, cause the game needs to become more nationalistic again.

It is not incongruent because you're comparing apples and oranges. Just because I favor a more capitalist system and I oppose a salary cap doesn't mean I have to be OK with an ever-increasing percentage of foreign players.

Your argument is like that of libertarians and free-market capitalists who argue that Trump is not really a true capitalist because he doesn't want open borders.

(10-17-2016 09:19 PM)Chunnel Wrote:  Also there is NO way in hell Bartolo Colon doesn't speak English. He's played baseball in the US for 20 years. Only an autistic neanderthal would fail to learn English after being immersed in it for so long. I don't blame Spanish speaking players for conducting interviews in Spanish. Not knowing the subtle nuances of grammar is the ideal opportunity for their words to be misconstrued and taken out of context, and then plastered over the media so the talking heads can take their pot shots.

You're right, he does speak English but only does interviews in Spanish. However, whether he personally understands English is not really the issue. The issue is how he presents himself to the American fans. It would be nice if these players could communicate with their English-speaking fans without having to go through an interpreter. These people are supposed to be role models after all, and we don't want our role models teaching kids that it's perfectly fine to live in America and not speak English.

It annoys me when I go to the grocery store and the employees barely speak English. Therefore, it annoys me even more when baseball players (supposedly role models) barely speak English.

It is ridiculous that professional athletes get fined and even lose their careers if they make a "racist" comment or get accused of domestic violence (because we can't have a "racist" or an "abuser" as a role model for our kids), but a large percentage of baseball players only do interviews in Spanish and that is considered A-OK. And if anybody points this out, they are "racist" or some other kind of "-ist."

Lastly, I will again point out that the Hispanic issue is not even that big an issue, in my opinion, compared with the other issued I talked about in my comment. It is just one of many things I included in my critique of today's MLB. If that was the only thing wrong with MLB, I would still be a fan and I probably wouldn't care that much.

Post: #186

(10-17-2016 10:12 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  The Wild Card definitely shouldn't be a series. We're more than halfway through October and the World Series is likely to go into November. Turning the Wild Card into a series and/or adding games onto the division series will make it even longer. Any team making it to the Wild Card doesn't have room to talk about fairness. If they want things to be fair, the team should win their division or there should not be 2 wild cards per league. I already think the delay caused by the Wild Card games being on 2 separate nights is too long and hurts any team with sinker-ball pitchers, who don't deserve a handicap for being winners.

I don't think there should be a wild card game at all. There should only be one wild card per league like there was before.

It is not fair that a team can win 97 games (or more) and finish with the second-best record in the entire league, and then have to play a one-game wild card against a team who won 88 games. Also, if the team who won 88 games has an ace on their pitching staff while the team that won 97 games has 5 reliable starters but no ace, playing a single game playoff gives the team with the ace an unfair advantage.

Now, the counter-argument I've seen a lot is "the team who won 97 games should have won their division. If they get knocked out in the one-game playoff, it's their own fault for not winning their division." Fine, but then the team with 88 wins (who also didn't win their division), should not be in the playoffs either. Winning a single game should not be enough to erase a difference of 9 games in the standings.

Baseball has traditionally always been a game played in series, whether it's the regular season or the playoffs. This is because one game is not enough to decide who is the better team. Enough random things can happen in one single game that the better team is often going to lose through sheer luck. The longer the series, the greater the chance that the better team will come out on top.

(10-17-2016 10:12 PM)Bear Hands Wrote:  Baseball is a generational game. You're seeing less American players for two reasons. The family unit is breaking down, which is more apparent in the black community. Less boys are learning the nuances of baseball from their fathers because so many aren't with their fathers. Baseball is a great sport for father-son bonding because it's just slow enough for a dad to provide context of the game to a child and then it's easy for a child to try to re-enact with the supervision of his father. Also, draft conditions are more favorable to hispanic players because a team can grab them at 15 or 16 years old, meaning they get more years of development by a team's farm system before making it to the big leagues.

This I agree with completely. What you say about the family unit and baseball being a father/son game is completely true.

Also, I'm not surprised that teams are incentivized to draft Hispanic players. America is known for holding back its own people through endless regulation while allowing foreigners to play by different rules.

Post: #187

(10-12-2016 03:06 PM)dark_g Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:55 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  How about my Cubs?

Years of pain... they are suddenly being washed away.

Bite your tongue. Don't speak too fast. The Goat may still have a big shit left inside of him.

I think hear some rumbling in the goat's belly.

Post: #188

CUBS WIN...





25 years late but better Late than never!

Post: #189

I got to admit -- I hope the Cubs lose! I want to see Cub fans crushed by some spectacular set of circumstances. I want to see tears and broken hearts. I want them to wait 100 more years for a World Series. I'm not sure what would be better, a sweep or dramatic/heartbreaking 7 games. CUBS LOSE! CUBS LOSE! CUBS LOSE!!!!!!

Post: #190

Uh....I want the Cubs to lose too, but only cause I'm an Indians fan. Man, that was dark.

I'm tired of the sportswriters and bloggers falling all over themselves to suck the Cubs' dicks about their 108 year losing streak....as if Cleveland's 68 year losing streak is no big deal?

Nobody wants the Indians to win...it's all Cubs Cubs Cubs....and not only that, butthurt SJWs are bitching and moaning about Chief Wahoo again. I even saw some jackass on yahoo only refer to them as the Cleveland Native Americans. Asshole.

Well, last time the Indians were predicted to lose this badly, Manager Lou Brown had some choice words to say...."Me, I'm for wasting sportswriters' time. So I figured we ought to hang around for a while and see if we can give 'em all a nice big shitburger to eat!"

GO TRIBE!

Post: #191

I was hoping for the Cubs to blow a lead in game 7 of the NLCS in the 9th inning to truly keep the spirit of the billy goat curse alive. Arriving at the World Series erodes the legacy of the story already.

Post: #192

I noticed the PA announcer didn't ask for the crowd to stand and remove their caps before the Anthem, surely for bullshit PC reasons.

OT, glad to see the series is on regular TV and not that FS1 -whatever that is.

Post: #193

Cubs are a romantic thing for neutrals outside of Chicago. If you're in Chicago and are neutral, or like another out-of-town team, it becomes clear very quickly that Cubs fans are total fags.

Lost out in the Cubs love-fest: Cleveland is four wins away from becoming Title Town USA, 2016.

Not even from Ohio, but GO TRIBE.

Post: #194

Cubs are taking things to the next level disappointing their fans.

There have only been four 3-1 comebacks in the World Series, and it hasn't happened since 1985. Maybe it's due to happen again.

I have no dog in this fight, but either way a long dead streak will break so that's always fun to watch.

Post: #195

The goat took some ex-lax, just a matter of time before he evacuates..

Post: #196

(10-25-2016 08:03 PM)Baldwin81 Wrote:  Lost out in the Cubs love-fest: Cleveland is four wins away from becoming Title Town USA, 2016.

Not even from Ohio, but GO TRIBE.

Now watch, the Browns will go 9-7, sneak into the playoffs, and win the Superbowl.

Post: #197

I just noticed that the indians and cubs are in the series, I live in London now so I don't hear anything about it. the media must be going nuts there, what a great match-up for both cities, indeed, it would be quite a story to have the Indians win and then the Browns ( lol, this is a looong shot, if ever)

Also for the cubs, incredible story, Joe Madden along with Theo Epstein are incredible at what they do. they will be contenders for many years to come.

Post: #198

(10-30-2016 05:26 AM)MdWanderer Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:03 PM)Baldwin81 Wrote:  Lost out in the Cubs love-fest: Cleveland is four wins away from becoming Title Town USA, 2016.

Not even from Ohio, but GO TRIBE.

Now watch, the Browns will go 9-7, sneak into the playoffs, and win the Superbowl.

Don't get out of control there. Plus it's time for the Lions to win before the Browns.

Post: #199

(10-30-2016 06:44 AM)realologist Wrote:  Don't get out of control there. Plus it's time for the Lions to win before the Browns.

Who knows, they might just face each other in the Super Bowl some day. But I would say that the Lions are a lot closer. Ironically before the Superbowl era both the Lions and Browns were among the best teams in the NFL.

Post: #200

If the Indians do beat the Cubs in the world series, ill hate them more than any other team in sports as long as I live.