|
code:Braves are winning the whole thing this year btw. e code box
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
cheesetriangles posted:How does MLB compare to other US sports in terms of profitability? Is attending growing/shrink/staying the same? Is there big TV deals because people actually watch baseball on TV? The chart above is a couple years old. MLB had over $8bn in revenue last year. Attendance is growing slightly, but MLB makes a ton of revenue from out of stadium streams like TV deals and their online packages.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
A big reason that RSN deals are huge is the rise of Netflix/Prime/DVRs. People still overwhelmingly watch sports live, so they can't skip ads, and thus you can be sure that your ad dollars are actually seen by eyeballs. This is the rationale, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Let's talk broadcasters. As a Brewers fan and an avid listener to the Brewers Radio Network, I'm worried this might be Uke's last season. Who the hell do you replace Bob Uecker with? I know he's been getting a little slow on his calls and such, but he's still one of the best broadcasters out there. I am legit worried for who they could ever replace Uke with. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Pete Vukovich is the only acceptable choice, meat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Why would the Angels only give Mike Trout a six year deal when they just gave Albert Pujols a ten year deal when he was like, 9 years older? I'd figure that if you're going to give anyone a ten year deal, it'd be someone that's 22. And with a six year deal, as long as Trout continues to put up numbers like he has, he's going to be a free agent at like, 29? How much money is he going to make?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
ROSS MY SALAD posted:Why would the Angels only give Mike Trout a six year deal when they just gave Albert Pujols a ten year deal when he was like, 9 years older? I'd figure that if you're going to give anyone a ten year deal, it'd be someone that's 22. And with a six year deal, as long as Trout continues to put up numbers like he has, he's going to be a free agent at like, 29? How much money is he going to make? It's because Trout wants to hit FA at 29 and make bank that he wouldn't take a longer deal, the Angels probably also want to avoid locking him up forever in case he gets injured or something. I'm sure they would prefer something longer, but this is probably a happy medium all things considered. Guys like Pujols want long deals for a lot of money because they represent security against age and decline, Trout wants security (in case he gets hurt or tanks hard for some reason) but not too much (if he keeps up at this pace he'll get one of the biggest contracts ever at 29, and probably the biggest). Idiot Wind fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
ROSS MY SALAD posted:Why would the Angels only give Mike Trout a six year deal when they just gave Albert Pujols a ten year deal when he was like, 9 years older? I'd figure that if you're going to give anyone a ten year deal, it'd be someone that's 22. And with a six year deal, as long as Trout continues to put up numbers like he has, he's going to be a free agent at like, 29? How much money is he going to make? I would suspect his agents would have prevented him from being extended any further. Players in baseball tend to peak around 30-35, so Trout will be getting paid a ton more if he breaks his deal at age 29, instead of age 31. He will be getting paid a fuckton of money unless something causes him to regress. Probably 30M AAV.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Phuzzy posted:Let's talk broadcasters. As a Brewers fan and an avid listener to the Brewers Radio Network, I'm worried this might be Uke's last season. Who the hell do you replace Bob Uecker with? I know he's been getting a little slow on his calls and such, but he's still one of the best broadcasters out there. You can't really replace Ueck. Joe loving Block is well positioned to take over, based on there not really being any better choices, even though he's pretty boring. I don't think Ueck is going anywhere unless he dies/has a major malfunction though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:I would suspect his agents would have prevented him from being extended any further. Players in baseball tend to peak around 30-35, so Trout will be getting paid a ton more if he breaks his deal at age 29, instead of age 31. The peak in baseball is ~26-28, 30-35 is all decline for most players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
I have a dumb hypothetical. Say it's the World Series, and the starting pitcher is going into the 8th pitching a perfect game. Does the manager keep him out there or do they bring in their bullpen as per standard operating procedure? And say it's game 1 so this pitcher is surely going to pitch again in the series. Do they make sure not to overwork him or do they stay with the hot hand? Do they risk an epic meltdown in the 9th? What if if it's an elimination game for said team or even game 7? What then? Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 07:22 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
I don't think any manager is gonna pull a guy working a perfect game and anyway a perfect game doesn't usually take a lot of pitches because of the whole not letting a guy on base thing. Most of the perfect games have only taken between about 100 and 115 pitches. Also maybe you get lucky and you get a hyper efficient David Cone perfecto where he only had to throw 88 pitches to get it done, with 10 strikeouts no less. Also Don Larsen actually threw a perfect game in the 1956 World series in only 97 pitches. That was game five though so there was no need to preserve him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
It actually happened in Japan. In game 5 of the 2007 Japan series, the Chunichi Dragons had a 3-1 lead in the series, and the starting pitcher Daisuke Yamai got pulled in the eighth with a perfect game and a 1-run lead. Ended up with him and the reliever getting a combined perfecto and obviously they won the game and the series so I guess it worked out. I really doubt whether it would ever happen in America, though, unless the pitcher seemed like he was completely out of gas or injured. I think it would be more likely in an elimination game than earlier in the series, but the idea of taking someone out in that situation just seems like it would be complete anathema to most managers and baseball people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
Politicalrancor posted:I don't think any manager is gonna pull a guy working a perfect game and anyway a perfect game doesn't usually take a lot of pitches because of the whole not letting a guy on base thing. Most of the perfect games have only taken between about 100 and 115 pitches. Also maybe you get lucky and you get a hyper efficient David Cone perfecto where he only had to throw 88 pitches to get it done, with 10 strikeouts no less. That's why I think a perfect game would be a no brainer for a manager in terms of leaving his starter in. The pitcher wouldn't have a high pitch count and you could have your bullpen up and ready the second he allowed a base-runner. A no hitter is, obviously, a totally different story since you can pitch a no-hitter while not pitching a great game so there would be scenarios where it would strategically make sense to pull the starter and the manager wouldn't necessarily lose face even if his team didn't win (if it were a close game). http://www.baseballnation.com/2011/5/3/2152529/francisco-liriano-no-hitter-twins-white-sox Liriano was a different scenario because it was the regular season but, in the original scenario, I wouldn't be surprised to see a pitcher come out of a game like that. tadashi fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
It would all be dependent on how a guy looks. No hitters and perfect games are cool, but if a guy is laboring or his mechanics get sloppy - probably best to pull them. Would be silly to risk injury or messing a guy up especially if he's young.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
Whats your favorite site for everyday info about games. Current lineups, starting pitchers and possibly betting lines. I mostly used CBSSports and now i hate the site, too many changes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
I'm not sure about betting lines, but for lineups and rotations I use RotoWorld. http://www.rotowire.com/baseball/daily_lineups.htm It's a clean design that loads fast. I used to use Yahoo, but they have a garbage sports design now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Watching the Nationals game I noticed Stephen Strasburg is trying out a slider. How often do established MLB pitchers add new pitches? Does it work out? It seems like it would be very tough to learn a new pitch with only a month of spring training before the games matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Is pitcher W/L record a dumb stat to care about? It seems weird how Strasburg on the Nationals started 30 games last year, but is 8-9 when it comes to W/L.
reflex fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
reflex posted:Is pitcher W/L record a dumb stat to care about? It seems weird how Stasburg on the Nationals started 30 games last year, but is 8-9 when it comes to W/L. W/L record, like RBI, tells you a lot less about an individual than about their team.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:W/L record, like RBI, tells you a lot less about an individual than about their team. Going along with this, it has 0 value in telling you if one player is better than another.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
reflex posted:Is pitcher W/L record a dumb stat to care about? It seems weird how Stasburg on the Nationals started 30 games last year, but is 8-9 when it comes to W/L. It's not important when comparing pitchers. Do you want the pitcher who strikes out many, walks few, and gives up 12 home runs per year, but is 12-14 because his team can't score; or the pitcher who strikes out fewer, walks more, and gives up a homer or two every time he pitches, but is 18-7 because plays for the late-90's Mariners and they drive in 6+ runs when he pitches?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:The peak in baseball is ~26-28, 30-35 is all decline for most players. Yeah. That was my brain slipping. He would still be getting a bigger second FA contract if he frontloads it starting at age 29, as opposed to 31. reflex posted:Is pitcher W/L record a dumb stat to care about? It seems weird how Strasburg on the Nationals started 30 games last year, but is 8-9 when it comes to W/L. Not really, but its like the only counting statistic that pitchers get, aside from K/BBs, so it gets played up a bit. OJ MIST 2 THE DICK fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
So, the Seattle Mariners, truly the greatest of teams, for the greatest of people. I'm super hyped to watch some games this year, although I am a pretty huge newbie. What can you guys tell me about the teams chances? I figure it's not good since our pitching rotation is still bad, aside from the King. We signed that one guy who's supposed to be pretty good, and we've got some pretty good young players so hey, maybe things aren't that dark! yes they are
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested?
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
reflex posted:How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested? Combination for me. When there's nothing going on there's normally a game in the background. I wont cancel other happenings for games unless I have tickets and/or it's a big game. I'd say I watch a good 100+ games a year, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Austrian mook posted:So, the Seattle Mariners, truly the greatest of teams, for the greatest of people. I'm super hyped to watch some games this year, although I am a pretty huge newbie. What can you guys tell me about the teams chances? I figure it's not good since our pitching rotation is still bad, aside from the King. We signed that one guy who's supposed to be pretty good, and we've got some pretty good young players so hey, maybe things aren't that dark! yes they are They are competing with the Angels to be the 3rd-best team in their division on paper. They will probably be decent or even above-average, but a lot of things need to break right for them to make the playoffs. On a larger scale, they have probably the worst front office in the sport by a long way, and they seem to be less operating on a plan than flailing wildly trying to keep from getting fired. Most of the "pretty good young players" you're talking about are actually overrated, or at best made redundant by their weird offseason strategy of signing a million LF/1B/DH types. reflex posted:How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested? I watched/listened a ton of games (probably at least 160) the last few seasons, mostly slacking off at work since my team is 3 time zones ahead of me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
reflex posted:How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested? I tend to watch about 80-90 games but for 75 of those I only pay attention when I hear excited voices.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:They are competing with the Angels to be the 3rd-best team in their division on paper. They will probably be decent or even above-average, but a lot of things need to break right for them to make the playoffs. So do the Mariners have any young guys to watch out for particularly?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
reflex posted:you people Watch it, fella.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
reflex posted:How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested? This is actually the best thing about baseball, to me. Rather than being event watching, baseball is the background hum of the summer. I'm fond of saying "I wonder what's on TV tonigh-OH ITS BASEBALL" The effect is even better when you have MLB.tv and you can pretty much have some or other game on every PM hour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Austrian mook posted:So do the Mariners have any young guys to watch out for particularly? (note: I am not a Mariners expert, and others can give you a better answer, so I'll just write some stuff and hope it's true) Taijuan Walker and Danny Hultzen are the two big pitching prospects, Kyle Seager seems legit to me, and Mike Zunino has a lot of potential if they didn't ruin him by rushing him to the Majors. It's the Smoak/Ackley/Montero/Franklin tier of dudes that is likely to disappoint, but even if Walker/Hultzen/Zunino end up as good players there's no guarantee they contribute anything this season.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Austrian mook posted:So do the Mariners have any young guys to watch out for particularly? Taijuan Walker could be a fun pitcher to watch. The problem with the Mariners is that their "core" was supposed to be built around Felix and the offense provided by Smoak/Ackley/Montero. None of the latter dudes panned out, and if they fail this year then the whole thing will need to be restarted. Mike Zunino and Brad Miller, and to a lesser extent Stefen Romero, *could* be fun to watch but there's a lot of unknowns, and given the failure of the earlier core it's hard to get too excited about them. Welcome to Mariners fandom 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
reflex posted:How many games do you people watch a season? I'm looking at the Nats schedule and there is a stretch in April of 20 days where there is a game every day. How the hell. Does baseball eventually degrade into highlight watching for 75% of the regular season or does it become your main time sink/you get really invested? I work from home so baseball is basically how I get poo poo done during the season because it's an effective background buzz and then the occasional break of Something Happening provides a nice distraction. I really don't remember how I used to work before I could spend all day with the pleasant drone of midseason baseball games between two teams nobody cares about in the background.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
I try to watch most games, although I'm oddly not usually able to watch weekend games. I love afternoon games because I can watch them on my laptop in class while my professor yammers on about WHO CARES BASEBALL IS ON
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Taijuan Walker could be a fun pitcher to watch. The problem with the Mariners is that their "core" was supposed to be built around Felix and the offense provided by Smoak/Ackley/Montero. None of the latter dudes panned out, and if they fail this year then the whole thing will need to be restarted. Just pretend it's still the 90s and the pain goes away, just for a second.  Also Farqhar is like the goofiest goddamn name, me and my buddy call him lord Farqhar, like the guy from Shrek. Baseball is a great sport, and so good live. Gonna go down and see the Tigers and Jays series with my buddy, road trip style.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
I chill and do work while base ball is on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:They are competing with the Angels to be the 3rd-best team in their division on paper. They will probably be decent or even above-average, but a lot of things need to break right for them to make the playoffs. On paper going into this season, when you consider things like the disabled list, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim are a decent, not-insane pick to win the West. Depending on how hurt Seattle's pitchers are and how Houston's rebuild comes together, the Mariners could legitimately find themselves fighting for last place; at the very least, all of Texas/Oakland/LAA are on a tier above them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Austrian mook posted:Just pretend it's still the 90s and the pain goes away, just for a second. Here is Junior to third base, they're going to wave him in! The throw to the plate will be LATE, THE MARINERS ARE GOING TO PLAY FOR THE AMERICAN LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP! Nothing can ever take this away from us  .
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
Why do people still hate the Angels even though they've been basically irrelevant for a decade
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 22:38
|
|