1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

MLB 2018-19 Offseason Thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Elliotte Friedman, Oct 4, 2018.

  1. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Boras better come close. He’s got the client who says get me the biggest and the most. Yanks and Nats both publicly moved away from Harper. They don’t want or be seen as a bargaining chip for Boras. They want to be there when Harper takes a 3 year 96 million
     
  2. Della9250

    Della9250 Well-Known Member

    What is close though? 375 million? 350 million?

    If Harper is going to want opt outs, the number is not going to be as big as he thinks.
     
  3. swingline

    swingline Well-Known Member

    A perfect Harper contract for a team would be a 7-year deal for $40 million per year with an opt out after year five. Harper makes $200M or $280M and is a free agent at 31 or 33.

    I’d like to see STL pull off that deal.
     
  4. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    Ottavino: I'd 'strike Babe Ruth out every time'

    MLB should go to work now on developing an off-season series (tape it next fall) featuring 30 or so recently released minor leaguers who spend two or three months playing, training and eating like they did in Babe Ruth's time. Playing games using that equipment, using whatever weights they had back then, wear the old uniforms, down to the underwear and sanis. I think it would be fascinating, and educational.
     
    lakefront likes this.
  5. Vombatus

    Vombatus Well-Known Member

    Run and Hyde to the Orioles?

    Hyde might be the next manager. Not announced by Elias yet.

    But on School of Roch’s MASN message board, there was this glorious post this morning:

    B0520648-B213-4C05-92AD-45F00B9AEEA4.jpeg
     
  6. CD Boogie

    CD Boogie Well-Known Member

    More likely Babe Ruth as a pitcher would have struck this putz out every time
     
  7. John B. Foster

    John B. Foster Well-Known Member

    Such a dumb take. Not yours. His.
     
  8. maumann

    maumann Well-Known Member

    To steal the old joke, of course Ottavino could strike out Babe Ruth every time. Guy's been dead since 1948.

    Ruth hit nine home runs and over .300 against Hall of Famer Lefty Grove, considered one of the two greatest left-handed pitchers of the 20th century by The Sporting News (along with Warren Spahn). Ruth beat Hall of Famer Walter Johnson head-to-head five times as a pitcher, and hit over .300 against a man who held the major league record for strikeouts until Nolan Ryan showed up.

    Ottavino? He's given up 41 home runs in 413 innings. And none of those players is the caliber of a Babe Ruth.
     
    John B. Foster likes this.
  9. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Small strike zone horizontal.
     
    Hermes, Fred siegle and maumann like this.
  10. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    Do they get VD and drink like Ruth did?
     
  11. maumann

    maumann Well-Known Member

    One hundred years ago, baseball players -- as well as the general middle-to-upper class population -- were eating meat, dairy products, baked goods and vegetables prepared farm to table with a minimum of chemical preservatives or additives. People then had jobs that required more strenuous activity, whether it be on a farm or blue-collar work, so they could better handle higher caloric intake.

    Now, I can't argue against the fact that today's athletes have the advantage of better medicine, technology and nutrition (re: dietary supplements and vitamins). But don't fall for the myth that athletes 100 years ago weren't as good because they didn't eat well. If anything, they probably ate healthier than 98 percent of the U.S. population does now.

    Some of the reasons why athletes are bigger and stronger can be explained by the exponential increase in the pool of available talent, and not just because of integration. Not only has the population of the U.S. tripled since 1920, the game is now played at a high level throughout the world. More potential employees for the best 750 jobs in the world.

    Then there's the economic aspect. Who knows how many prospective "athletes" in 1918 became farmers, coal miners or steel workers because sports weren't considered a career choice? The idea of making a living in "entertainment" was still in its infancy until the Roaring Twenties. The lure of a lucrative paycheck for a gifted athlete has never been greater, and with more opportunities to develop or discover them, it goes without saying that a larger percentage of the available pool desires that rather than menial work.

    I was surprised to find out that compared to some other developed countries over the past 100 years, Americans have lost pace in average height for both men and women. However, based on the amount of processed food we eat, Americans have seen their BMI skyrocket. That didn't surprise me in the least.

    How humans have changed in height in the last 100 years - CNN
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2018
    FileNotFound and lakefront like this.
  12. Hermes

    Hermes Well-Known Member

    The Cleveland Indians right now are like me when I get drunk and start playing Out of the Park Baseball at 3 a.m. on a Saturday night.

    I like to think Chris Antonetti is getting back from the craps table at 4 a.m. during winter meetings drunk texting Farhan Zaidi "WHAT IF I GAVE YOU EVERYONE ON MY TEAM AND YOU GAVE ME EVERYONE ON YOUR TEAM AND WE SEE HOW THINGS SHAKE OUT"
     
    maumann likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page