I told you guys they were going to shut down Strasburg no matter what. Now they have a date for when he will be shut down and won’t finish the season off.
What game between tha phillies and braves last night. 3-run game winning hr by Chipper, how can you not root for the guy?
I believe a few of us (raj?) had the NAtional s wining the a wild card slit, but I don’t think anyone saw them running away from the Braves and Phillies in that division and challenging for the best record in baseball. Just a shame Strasburg is going to be shut down, oh well.
I did pick the Nationals.
Unfortunately I also picked the Phillies 
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
Cool photos therajraj! That was an amazing deal for the ticket behind the plate.[/quote]
Thanks.
Also if you guys are visiting your homes parks snap a pic of your view + food.
Love to see what it’s like at other parks.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I did pick the Nationals.
Unfortunately I also picked the Phillies :P[/quote]
Same here, and I also had the Royals and Twins finishing ahead of the White Sox lol.
Oh how sweet it would be if both the Dodgers and the Yankees didn’t make the playoffs.
The Orioles are in 1st place in freaking september.
I still have trouble giving them credit it’s been basically the slew of injuries throughout the division.
The Yankees have played .500 ball since the ASG
[quote]therajraj wrote:
The Orioles are in 1st place in freaking september.
I still have trouble giving them credit it’s been basically the slew of injuries throughout the division.
The Yankees have played .500 ball since the ASG[/quote]
Yeah the Rays and Orioles just seem like they are in a much better place than the Yankees. Healthier, better pitching, and just flat out playing better baseball. I can definitely see the Yankees missing the playoffs when they have to rely on Garcia and Phil Hughes, and with Pettite questionable. C.C. more than ever needs to have an exceptional september.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
The Orioles are in 1st place in freaking september.
I still have trouble giving them credit it’s been basically the slew of injuries throughout the division.
The Yankees have played .500 ball since the ASG[/quote]
Yeah the Rays and Orioles just seem like they are in a much better place than the Yankees. Healthier, better pitching, and just flat out playing better baseball. I can definitely see the Yankees missing the playoffs when they have to rely on Garcia and Phil Hughes, and with Pettite questionable. C.C. more than ever needs to have an exceptional september.[/quote]
I agree except I would say the Rays were hit badly with injury too. While not as many physical bodies lost, they didn’t have Longoria for 85+ games. They are offense poor and basically lost the only player they couldnt afford to lose.
Barring major changes I’d still pick the O’s to finish last in 2013.
Padres taking 2 out of 3 against the Dodgers in their ballpark, hahaha.
Cabrera triple crown alert: T-1st in BA and RBI, 4th in Hrs (4 behind leader.) It’s time to give this man an MVP.
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Gotta agree w db on bautista. In this day in age, it almost naive not to atleast suspect bautista has used. Reminds me of luis gonzales. 16 Hr guy then bam 50. [/quote]
I always think of Brady Anderson’s 50 HRs or whatever… from the leadoff spot.
[/quote]
So I was hanging recently with some buddies who, unlike myself, are actually knowledgeable and they were quick to cite the “juiced ball” era and not rampant PEDs use re: 1996
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I hold off on saying Hanley is back just yet. He’s been terrible for 2 straight years[/quote]
I suspect SF fans can sense the writing on the wall and are already resigning themselves to wild-card race.
[/quote]
And on this note, I’ve gotta quit posting in this thread…
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Gotta agree w db on bautista. In this day in age, it almost naive not to atleast suspect bautista has used. Reminds me of luis gonzales. 16 Hr guy then bam 50. [/quote]
I always think of Brady Anderson’s 50 HRs or whatever… from the leadoff spot.
[/quote]
So I was hanging recently with some buddies who, unlike myself, are actually knowledgeable and they were quick to cite the “juiced ball” era and not rampant PEDs use re: 1996
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I hold off on saying Hanley is back just yet. He’s been terrible for 2 straight years[/quote]
I suspect SF fans can sense the writing on the wall and are already resigning themselves to wild-card race.
[/quote]
And on this note, I’ve gotta quit posting in this thread…
[/quote]
That juiced ball theory is still around? I thought that was only for the hardcore deniers, most of whom were/are Barry Bonds fans desperately trying to validate that fucking fraud.
As far as I know the ball hasn’t been changed at all recently. It certainly hasn’t been changed in the last ten years, but steroid use has ostensibly gone down since testing was instituted. So I tend to suspect that since home run totals have gone way down since testing, and the ball hasn’t changed since testing was being considered about ten years ago, the ball is/was not a factor in the offensive explosion. There simply isn’t any correlation.
Shit, I remember there were some people who were legitimately trying to argue that the economy in the DR or wherever the fuck they stitch those balls had gotten a lot better during the 90’s. So an improved economy meant more money for the ball-stitchers, who were naturally motivated to work harder given the larger incentive, so the balls were sewn together tighter by these eager workers and hence, the tighter the ball the farther it goes.
Next year jays will play the Padres and Giants.
Will be good for an avatar bet
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Next year jays will play the Padres and Giants.
Will be good for an avatar bet[/quote]
I’d easily take that bet if they were playing right now!
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Gotta agree w db on bautista. In this day in age, it almost naive not to atleast suspect bautista has used. Reminds me of luis gonzales. 16 Hr guy then bam 50. [/quote]
I always think of Brady Anderson’s 50 HRs or whatever… from the leadoff spot.
[/quote]
So I was hanging recently with some buddies who, unlike myself, are actually knowledgeable and they were quick to cite the “juiced ball” era and not rampant PEDs use re: 1996
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I hold off on saying Hanley is back just yet. He’s been terrible for 2 straight years[/quote]
I suspect SF fans can sense the writing on the wall and are already resigning themselves to wild-card race.
[/quote]
And on this note, I’ve gotta quit posting in this thread…
[/quote]
That juiced ball theory is still around? I thought that was only for the hardcore deniers, most of whom were/are Barry Bonds fans desperately trying to validate that fucking fraud.
As far as I know the ball hasn’t been changed at all recently. It certainly hasn’t been changed in the last ten years, but steroid use has ostensibly gone down since testing was instituted. So I tend to suspect that since home run totals have gone way down since testing, and the ball hasn’t changed since testing was being considered about ten years ago, the ball is/was not a factor in the offensive explosion. There simply isn’t any correlation.
Shit, I remember there were some people who were legitimately trying to argue that the economy in the DR or wherever the fuck they stitch those balls had gotten a lot better during the 90’s. So an improved economy meant more money for the ball-stitchers, who were naturally motivated to work harder given the larger incentive, so the balls were sewn together tighter by these eager workers and hence, the tighter the ball the farther it goes.[/quote]
Haha I completely forgot about the “juiced ball.” It’s pretty mych a foregone conclusion that it was steroids that lead to the insane hr numbers and not the juiced ball. Great point about the ball not being changed since then, but hrs down now due to testing. i don’t think some people completely understand how much of a difference PEDs can make. Not only a faster more powerful swing, but also allows the hitter to wait on the ball a tiny bit longer which makes a huuuuge difference.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Gotta agree w db on bautista. In this day in age, it almost naive not to atleast suspect bautista has used. Reminds me of luis gonzales. 16 Hr guy then bam 50. [/quote]
I always think of Brady Anderson’s 50 HRs or whatever… from the leadoff spot.
[/quote]
So I was hanging recently with some buddies who, unlike myself, are actually knowledgeable and they were quick to cite the “juiced ball” era and not rampant PEDs use re: 1996
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I hold off on saying Hanley is back just yet. He’s been terrible for 2 straight years[/quote]
I suspect SF fans can sense the writing on the wall and are already resigning themselves to wild-card race.
[/quote]
And on this note, I’ve gotta quit posting in this thread…
[/quote]
That juiced ball theory is still around? I thought that was only for the hardcore deniers, most of whom were/are Barry Bonds fans desperately trying to validate that fucking fraud.
As far as I know the ball hasn’t been changed at all recently. It certainly hasn’t been changed in the last ten years, but steroid use has ostensibly gone down since testing was instituted. So I tend to suspect that since home run totals have gone way down since testing, and the ball hasn’t changed since testing was being considered about ten years ago, the ball is/was not a factor in the offensive explosion. There simply isn’t any correlation.
Shit, I remember there were some people who were legitimately trying to argue that the economy in the DR or wherever the fuck they stitch those balls had gotten a lot better during the 90’s. So an improved economy meant more money for the ball-stitchers, who were naturally motivated to work harder given the larger incentive, so the balls were sewn together tighter by these eager workers and hence, the tighter the ball the farther it goes.[/quote]
Haha I completely forgot about the “juiced ball.” It’s pretty mych a foregone conclusion that it was steroids that lead to the insane hr numbers and not the juiced ball. Great point about the ball not being changed since then, but hrs down now due to testing. i don’t think some people completely understand how much of a difference PEDs can make. Not only a faster more powerful swing, but also allows the hitter to wait on the ball a tiny bit longer which makes a huuuuge difference.
[/quote]
And in baseball, the much quicker recovery from game to game that PEDs allow is HUGE. Baseball is a fucking grind. 162 games, at an average of about 6.5 games a week, lots of traveling, mostly played in pretty fucking hot weather can really wear a player out over the course of a season. That’s why greenies were so popular at one point. They have a similar effect (just in terms of better preparation, not from a purely physiological standpoint obviously) it’s just that one is taken prior to a game and one is taken after the game.
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Next year jays will play the Padres and Giants.
Will be good for an avatar bet[/quote]
I’d easily take that bet if they were playing right now![/quote]
You’d probably win too.
For the first time in ~ 5 1/2 weeks the Jays are fielding 7 regular Major League players.
Sooooo…Matt Holliday. Is he on the path to a Hall of Fame career? I was looking at his stats recently and didn’t realize that his average season in the bigs at this point is about a .315 avg with 26 HRs and 95 RBIs. Those are pretty fucking impressive numbers for someone who has evaded attention and acclaim throughout his career, All Star appearances aside.
There was talk earlier in this thread about Konerko being a possible Hall of Famer but I think Holliday, although his career is only 8 years deep right now, is looking like he’s about 4 or 5 more good years from being a very serious contender. 100 more HRs, 450 more RBIs and the same avg over the next 5 years would put him at about 330 HRs, 1300 RBIs and a .314 avg over the course of a 13-year career. If plays for 15 years or so he could easily surpass 400 HRs and 1500 RBIs while still maintaining a career avg above .300.
Matt Holliday should be in the HOF if he can put up 3-5 more good years.
He’s met the requirement of peak (amazing '07 '08 '09) just needs to satisfy the longevity criteria.