|
At the risk of stepping into a minefield, I have a question about Steroids/HGH/what have you: My understanding is that while steroids will not magically turn you into a grotesque bag of muscles, they have been proven to help speed rehab/recovery from an injury, or to prevent certain injuries/wear and tear from happening. Is this completely off base? And if not, isn't that a huuuge advantage for prolonging a career/a player's peak? I understand that players always have and always will do whatever they possibly can to get any sort of advantage, but it seems like this would be a particularly useful tool to stay better for longer. e: Also, while taking steroids won't spontaneously start muscle growth, doesn't it become easier to gain more muscle mass given an intense workout regimen? gimme the lute fucked around with this message at Mar 8, 2011 around 03:17 |
| # ¿ Mar 8, 2011 03:13 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2013 07:13 |
|
|
I know this is a touchy subject so I'll stop making GBS threads up the thread after this post, but here goes:Nodoze posted:Steroids don't keep you from getting hurt at all Scoobi posted:Steroids are mostly used to allow for more strenuous workouts and faster recovery time. HGH is used for healing faster from injury. Neither will let you hit a fastball any better than you currently do. But, more importantly, I disagree that playing more isn't an advantage. Again, given that you're incredibly good, isn't reducing injury time (especially if you're injured in your peak years) one of the best ways to accumulate more counting stats and be a better player than you otherwise would have been? OdinsBeard posted:Power isn't entirely a function of strength, but you'd have to be a delusional not to deny that it helps. e: I feel the need to defend myself: I know that this whole issue was blown way out of proportion in the sports media world and in the court of public opinion. Barry Bonds was superhuman with or without steroids, and Joe Schmo the AAAA former prospect was more likely to use PEDs than any star player. But still, there has to be some measurable advantage to all this crap or it wouldn't have been so common, right? gimme the lute fucked around with this message at Mar 8, 2011 around 03:38 |
| # ¿ Mar 8, 2011 03:36 |
|
|
Quick Stop posted:Also the GM is not allowed to come talk to the pitcher during a game (it's the manager) Just to elaborate on that a bit more for anyone that may be too embarrassed to ask: The Manager is the guy responsible for what goes on day-to-day with the major league team. He's the one that sets the lineup, sits in the dugout, calls relievers in, etc. He also has a lot to do with who makes the major league team in the first place, but that's usually in collaboration with other advisors and the GM. The General Manager is responsible for the overall organization from scouting and drafting, through all levels of the minors, to free agent signings. He's the guy that goes to the winter meetings, works with player's agents, and assures the owners that their money is being well spent. This is my understanding, but there's also quite a bit of overlap and variation between organizations.
|
| # ¿ Apr 2, 2011 22:47 |
|
|
iirc, it varies between ~70% and ~90%, depending on the game situation. The closer the game, later the inning, and more outs recorded, the higher it has to be.
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2011 02:54 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:At any rate you're not going to succeed by being outstanding at one of command/movement/velo and terrible at the other three. You have to at least be competent in the other two areas. or you can learn to pitch a knuckleball really well, but that's a whole different skill unto itself.
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2011 19:02 |
|
|
Is there any reason why some bullpens are fenced off from the field while others aren't? I know some old stadiums also had bullpens in the far corners of the outfield (in the field of play), are there any current stadiums like this?
|
| # ¿ May 31, 2011 18:26 |
|
|
Otep posted:I finally went to an baseball game for the first time in my life and it was Angels game. Why are they so obsessed over the rally monkey and why did it keep coming out on the huge screen? I don't think anyone can answer your question. Most people find the rally monkey somewhere between "sort of annoying" and "outright obnoxious". Also, there's a distinct anti-Angels vibe in SAS because they seemed to consistently win in the most frustrating way imaginable for the better part of the last ~12 years.
|
| # ¿ Jul 7, 2011 19:55 |
|
|
CraigK posted:Active, it's probably Vladimir Guerrero, who's gotten base hits off of pitches that have hit the ground and bounced in front of home plate. Is this still true though? I Vaguely remember "VladZone" segments on SportsCenter ~6 years ago showing terrible pitches that he absolutely nailed, but is he still the best in the league at hitting terrible pitches?
|
| # ¿ Jul 10, 2011 05:26 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2013 07:13 |
|
|
As for the Royals, here is one of the greatest baseball articles of the past few years to explain.
|
| # ¿ Dec 13, 2011 21:01 |
|
