• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

MLB 2016-2017 Offseason |OT| At Least Next Year is an Odd Numbered Year.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Choomp

Banned
The damn minor league affiliate names just get worse and worse. The new Marlins Triple A team: the New Orleans Baby Cakes
 
do you know how much a win is worth?

Do you think Dexter Fowler will be more than a 1 win player per season over the next four years?

He had a career year last year at age 30. He isn't holding that production. Most likely set for a correction.

$10m/yr maybe. Certainly no more than $12m.

But Cubs got Cubs money, and on a team with Heyward any other possible deal would look good so maybe they do give him 4 / $64m. Would be dumb, but sure why not.
 
I don't see JT leaving. It's his dream to play in front of his family. Also

PetCo is better than Dodger & Angel Stadium.

Depends on what kind of offers he gets. I could see the front office that didn't match a big contract on Grienke because of his age maybe being hesitant to give big money/years to a 32 year old third baseman.
 
Great article from a year ago on the downtown Montreal baseball park that never was: Labatt Park.

The best major league baseball park that was never built now lives forever in a glass case. The case is sealed, protecting the best major league park that was never built from dust and grime and wobbly people who don’t watch their step. This is because the scale model of the best major league baseball park that was never built is too big to tuck away and too precious to destroy so it sits like beautiful but useless furniture on the lobby floor of the Montreal architecture firm Provencher Roy.

The best major league baseball park that was never built was given a name: Labatt Park. It had a site; in downtown Montreal, just southeast of the Bell Center, home to hockey’s Canadiens. The best major league baseball park that was never built was going to be tiny, with only 35,000 seats. It would have given fans in even the worst seats a sense they were close to the field. It would have had a grace unique to any ballpark – modern but not utilitarian. It would have been … perfect.
 
Jerry Howarth, radio man for the Jays since 1981, has prostate cancer.

Longtime Blue Jays’ announcer Jerry Howarth is scheduled to undergo a cancer operation next week to remove a small tumour.

Howarth, 70, told Pauline Chan of CTV that he credits a MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scan earlier this year for detecting the growth.

Howarth, the Jays’ radio play-by-play announcer, said a biopsy failed to find any prostate cancer, but the growth was later detected by the MRI.

His cancer specialist, Dr. Robert Nam, of Sunnybrook’s Odette Cancer Centre, is currently conducting a study to determine the best method for prostate cancer screening.

Howarth was in the news earlier this fall when he told “The Jeff Blair Show” on Toronto’s Sportsnet 590 The Fan that he has stopped using the term “Indians” a quarter century ago out of respect for indigenous fans.

Howarth said he has also refrained from using the team name “Braves” for the Atlanta term, or jargon like “powwow on the mound.”
 

CygnusXS

will gain confidence one day
Hey do you guys remember when I said Scherzer could win the CY this year and everybody laughed at me? You are all losers now.
 

Malo

Banned
55NyF5M.jpg


Verlander was left off two ballots.
 

Friggz

Member
porcello wasnt even better than tanaka, nevermind kluber or verlander. the bbwaa took a step back with that vote. =/

this probably also means trout wont win MVP.
 

Friggz

Member
Kate Upton having a freak out on Twitter

holy shit.




Kate UptonVerified account
‏@KateUpton
Hey @MLB I thought I was the only person allowed to fuck @JustinVerlander ?! What 2 writers didn't have him on their ballot?

im a little jealous of verlander now.
 
im curious to know who and your reasoning? trout should winning his 4th or 5th mvp right now.

Reasoning I can give you. I just don't think that ultimately, an MVP should be given to a player on a team that ultimately, didn't do anything. Trout's skillset is game changing, absolutely, but he was on a team that was one of the worst in all the AL. I believe that an MVP should, at the very least should be for a player that, with his performance, helps bring his team, if not into the playoffs, then pretty damn close. And Trout, for all his world class ability, didn't do that considering the Angels finished under .500.


You are a god amongst men BigAT.
 

Friggz

Member
Reasoning I can give you. I just don't think that ultimately, an MVP should be given to a player on a team that ultimately, didn't do anything. Trout's skillset is game changing, absolutely, but he was on a team that was one of the worst in all the AL. I believe that an MVP should, at the very least should be for a player that, with his performance, helps bring his team, if not into the playoffs, then pretty damn close. And Trout, for all his world class ability, didn't do that considering the Angels finished under .500.

you dont think thats penalizing trout for having a shitty team? what if trout and betts switched teams? Trout would then win becuase the rest of the team was better? Ive seen your reasoning before, im just not sure i understand it.

to each their own my friend.
 

Malo

Banned
Reasoning I can give you. I just don't think that ultimately, an MVP should be given to a player on a team that ultimately, didn't do anything. Trout's skillset is game changing, absolutely, but he was on a team that was one of the worst in all the AL. I believe that an MVP should, at the very least should be for a player that, with his performance, helps bring his team, if not into the playoffs, then pretty damn close. And Trout, for all his world class ability, didn't do that considering the Angels finished under .500.



You are a god amongst men BigAT.
You're penalizing Trout for having bad teammates? MVP is an individual award, not a team award. And this isn't the NBA where one player can propel a team to a winning record/playoffs.
 

jbug617

Banned
You're penalizing Trout for having bad teammates? MVP is an individual award, not a team award. And this isn't the NBA where one player can propel a team to a winning record/playoffs.

How big is the gap between his season and Mookie? Is it big enough that he is a clear choice or is it close enough that Mookie has an argument?
 

Friggz

Member
How big is the gap between his season and Mookie? Is it big enough that he is a clear choice or is it close enough that Mookie has an argument?

trout was worth a win more. and made about 125 less outs then betts. to be honest, they werent even really close.

trout was about 3 wins better on offense.
 
Reasoning I can give you. I just don't think that ultimately, an MVP should be given to a player on a team that ultimately, didn't do anything. Trout's skillset is game changing, absolutely, but he was on a team that was one of the worst in all the AL. I believe that an MVP should, at the very least should be for a player that, with his performance, helps bring his team, if not into the playoffs, then pretty damn close. And Trout, for all his world class ability, didn't do that considering the Angels finished under .500.

Take Mookie off the Red Sox and that's still an 87-89 win team. You act like he willed his teammates to be better thank Trout's.

I don't understand where this stupid idea that the MVP has to come from a winning team came from. Trout is the best player in the game and it's not really close. The Red Sox would trade Betts for Trout in a cocaine heartbeat. How else do you measure value?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom