MLB 2022: The Long and Winding Thread

So what you're mad at is that Harper signed with the Phillies and not the Giants. OK. All is understood.

 

Actually no. I’m mad at him being a complete tool while with the Nationals. I brought up the Giants nonsigning as a he chose a few extra million over a playoff chance. Fill in any other team you want where he could have gone and made the playoffs except he flirted with the Giants (I think more to drive the price up for Philly than actually being seriously interested in San Francisco). And honestly, good riddance to bad rubbish. We have a history of big contracts biting us in the ass and a big contract for Harper would have gotten my goad because of his assholery with the Nats.

 

What Harper did today gets an *asterisk* because he did it against Angels pitching.

 

The first year or two of Jackie Robinson Day, a majority of players didn't wear 42. I don't think it was until a couple years in when teams started doing it as a group (I want to say some prominent Black players like Torii Hunter egged it on) did it become an official thing, to the chagrin of photographers and statisticians everywhere.

In a way, I'm kind of OK with it not because it's good or reflects well on them or the Rays, but if you're gonna be a bigot you might as well be a bigot and take the heat you deserve for it rather than going with the flow and lying to everyone. Given the communities that professional ballplayers are coming out of these days, it's not exactly shocking that there are well-to-do white kids with half or no college education who think this way. If anything it's on the Rays for not telling them to take a hike for it.

 

Now do Mike Trout.

 

The Romans had the right idea.

 

Tampa can trade for Brendan Donovan:

Cards rookie sorry for anti-gay slurs in old tweets

 

1. I don't think Trout is a tool.

2. Trout didn't leave for greener pastures to be with the Angles.

 

Harper didn’t have the opportunity to stay with his team because it wouldn’t pay him market value.

 

@Michael_ Gee when he starts using we, rest assured his argument is based on nothing but fanboy emotion.

 

Then he should have signed with his Giants.

 

Yes I said we instead of "the Giants" or "San Francisco." It's a common turn of phrase to express an attachment to a team that is actually quite well known on this board. I am not delusional about my effect on the team or any possible membership of that team. I'm just lazy with a phrase. Sue me. And does it really change my argument to say "The Giants have a history of big contracts biting them in the ass and a big contract for Harper would have gotten my goad because of his assholery with the Nats"?

Or am I in general not allowed on a message board dedicated to topics of sports to discuss my fandom for or irrational anger toward teams and players? Gee says he's happy with a massive contract for a dude because dude hit a grand slam on June 5 to help the team win a game. I said that massive contract is cool except the Phils haven't gone to the playoffs with it. Gee said I was wrong and I'm sure is being polite for not calling me an idiot for it.

I mean it's a sports debate. They're all meaningless. Contracts. Numbers. Who is better than who. It doesn't matter. They play a game. And the ultimate scoreboard is who actually wins a title. The rest is window dressing.

Or am I suffering from fanboy emotion?