Bellhorn04
-
Posts
54,672 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
75
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Bellhorn04
-
I think that's a matter of perception.
-
Sure, I'd be saying "Why can't we get an owner like the Red Sox have?" It's the other side of the same point.
-
Cancelling games hurts everyone. As others have said, the owners can afford the losses more.
-
Obviously no one wants to see the best 1200 players replaced by the next 1200 players. By the same token, I'd rather not see John Henry replaced by Angelos or Moreno. The whole argument is just plain dumb!
-
There already are a whole lot of arbitrary rules in the game though. The pitcher has to throw the ball from 60' 6" away. That's pretty arbitrary.
-
I just want baseball back, flaws and all.
-
I was not one of those people wondering why he didn't bunt more. He hit over .300 in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2016. Maybe we should look at his BABip.
-
Of course, but what makes you think the shift only took hits away from him and didn't give any back? I think there are actually stats on hitting against the shift.
-
Right, but we were talking about replacing the best 1200 with the next best 1200. So weaker players going against weaker players.
-
Not talking about individual plays, talking about yearly numbers.
-
I don't see one. Do you?
-
If you think we would have done as well the last 20 years with Peter Angelos or Arte Moreno as owner, you're certainly entitled to your opinion...
-
Well, you're right. But the whole argument is kind of dumb IMHO. Owners are different too, because they're actually human beings too. Henry is BY FAR the best owner the Sox have ever had, and probably the best in baseball. Because he's not only wealthy but smart.
-
Why, do you think his numbers were hurt by the shift? Seems to me he did fine.
-
Only if there are other good numbers to go with them. C'mon, man, this is 2022, isn't it? We judge Hunter Renfroe on his whole game, not his dingers and ribbies...
-
Of course they wouldn't be as good. But as we've said many times, the differences between players aren't that large. And it would be weaker against weaker.
-
You don't know that. What made players think swinging for more home runs and striking out a lot more was the way to go all of a sudden?
-
Yes, I get the point, but if we really want to go down the rabbit hole, the 1200 best players would be replaced by the next 1200 best players, so the difference might not be that noticeable after a while.
-
*Conventional wisdom* has been that players have tried to combat the shift mainly with launch angle, leading to more homers and more K's.
-
But it's fans who notice the differences in players too.
-
Disagree. There are good owners and bad ones. The Red Sox have a good one, and I think we've enjoyed significant benefits from it.
-
Hey, I'm cynical too, but I try to base my opinions on actual evidence...
-
I don't know, what's the latest on sports team owners being tax cheats?
-
Now they're all tax cheats too? Hey, let's just dismantle pro sports completely. Then there will be no more rich sports team owners. Problem solved. Get rid of big time college sports while we're at it. That's all driven by money and corruption too.
-
So that's an annual 6% ROR for LAD and 6.5% for SDP. Not really a monster growth rate for those franchises over 10 years.
