Hitch

Again, I disagree. They were haemorrhaging fans before they started changing things up. The need to speed up changes within the game was driven by the fact that younger kids were/are not taking to the game in the same sort of numbers and they were losing numbers in general. They are trying to make a new kind of baseball that attracts the new generation of sport watchers. Without them, the sport will die (hyperbole) eventually. The new generation is always the sports lifeblood. I dislike a lot of what they are doing as well, but as I read from someone else in here recently, unfortunately you'd better get used to it. This is just the start. Adapt or die.

Um, no. I don't agree at all. This feels like you're trying to wrestle this into your overall points. Unfortunately, I believe the kids very much enjoy this new version of baseball. I've seen little evidence that suggest the new breed of fans don't like the juiced ball.

Again, I don't disagree, but the 65+ geographic will die off soon enough and they're unlikely to leave the game they love before they do, no matter what. The older generation is the most committed. They'll continue to watch every game and they'll complain through it and talk about how this isn't the way it should be, but they'll still be there. Because they love it. And when they die off, if MLB doesn't attract new fans and at a good rate the sport will begin to flounder. And you can talk about how stupid/or not stupid young people are (this isn't the point of my post, not by a long shot), but the point is that we are as a society moving towards more instant gratification. It's a serious psychological problem. There are numerous studies available that show that younger people are having diminished concentration levels. Many won't sit and watch clips over 30/40 seconds because it takes too much time. Anything above 280 character is deemed too much to read. That's where we're at. In the UK, cricket at its peak was played over five days. It was considered the highest form of the game where only the most skilled could live. Now the highest and most paid form by a massive amount is 20/20 where a team comes in and thrashes the ball around for as many runs as quickly as possible before the other team comes in and tries to hit more. It has completely changed the face of the game. Whereas the old style of the game used to have grounds mostly half-full with older people (mostly men) the new form of the game has stadiums filled with kids and families and the money being generated is incomparable. MLB is fighting for it's new generation of fans. I'm not saying what they are doing is right, but I certainly understand why they're doing it. Although, they should have been honest about it up front.

I agree with him, but it's a tricky one. MLB needs new fans and the younger generations want excitement now. Instant gratification. Whereas most of would maybe prefer a really well pitched, tactically close game, I'd bet all the money I have that the vast majority of new/young fans would prefer games like we saw in London, recently. If you love the sport already, I think you appreciate vastly different things to the people who are just starting to like the sport now.

We do not need a reset/rebuild. Nor will it likely happen. If we decide to be sellers we will see what we can get for Porcello, Moreland and any other pieces we don't really want. We won't get much but we might get a couple of interesting prospects/lottery types. That said, I would certainly kick the tyres on any potential Betts trades. I mentioned it a month or so ago, but I think we'd be stupid not to. I imagine there are a couple of teams very close the next two years that would love him for some top quality prospects close to a promotion. I'd look at trading JD too if he'd shown any indication he was likely to opt out season end. We'd get some more very good prospects back for him. Then go back and re-sign him in the summer. Only under the stipulation that discussion had taken back, mind you. Either way, I'm sure the office is doing it's job and exploring all possibilities. I'll make the point again, falling out of contention this year could actually be healthy in the medium to longer term if we made the right trades.

*cringe

If Cora is sacked this year because the Yankees win we don't deserve success. Thankfully I don't believe that is going to be the case.

They won't have been sitting around, waiting to see what they react to. They will have plans set up ready for many different scenarios already.

This. If we fall away we deal Moreland, Porcello and possibly JD if he's making noises about opting out. Get some prospects back and go again with the core next year and probably try and re-sign JD. The only possible big move would be if we decided to move Mookie. Highly unlikely but we may be making plans to go on without his huge contract (or the worry that he won't sign with us). The prospect haul we'd get for such a player at this years deadline would certainly be enticing. I personally would be looking at what we could get for Price - although I don't expect DD is. He's good again this year but I can't shake of the feeling he is about to fall off a cliff with injuries. There's a lot of miles in that arm and we are still on the hook for big money. I feel like we've got the best out of the contract and we might be in a position to deal off the downside of it.

As a Brit, let me assure you that while they may turn out to have the story right, The Daily Mail is a piece of s***. Think Fox News. Only recently, they darkened the skin of a woman on a photograph that was fighting Brexit in an effort to turn its readers (or are mostly incredibly ignorant, racist and desperate for Brexit) against people in the UK who have darker skin. It is a major part of the reason the UK is going to s***. They lie and stir up hatred with impunity.

Possibly, yet it is very much a thing. There's more pressure playing at certain clubs and in certain markets.

I wouldn't like to argue either way about if it's affected Shaw or not but there are out certainly players that thrive under different conditions and expectations. Sports stars are not robots they are human beings and open to all the pressures that come with certain situations. Some love the limelight, others wilt under it. As it's ever been. Shaw didn't strike me as somebody who was struggling here, however.

If we are still at .500 after those games we may well have problems. Really need to put the hammer down and build the win column through this run.

Even if we fall to pieces we clearly aren't going to blow it up but if we are out of it (it may well be healthier for us long term to be out of it for one year) then we will trade Mitch and Porcello. We should get two okay/good prospects in those trades. I also trade JD as I'm convinced he opts out this year and we would get a very good prospect for him. Re-sign JD in the summer and go with what we have with three prospects (one very good) we didn't have before the trades. If two out of those three make it we will be in a good place in a few years time.

Even if we fall to pieces we clearly aren't going to blow it up but if we are out of it (it may well be healthier or us long term to be out of it for one year) then we will trade Mitch and Porcello. We should get two okay/good prospects in that trade. I also trade JD as I'm convinced he opts out this year and we would get a very good prospect for him. Re-sign JD in the summer and go with what we have with three prospects (one very good) we didn't have before the trades. If two out of those three make it we will be in a good place in a few years time.

Yeah no way Moreland goes unless we are out of it. I do sometimes wonder if us being out of it this year would be better for our longer term outlook (note: this is not what I'm advocating for). If Moreland continues his hot start and Porcello is pitching well then we should get two decent pieces for them. Martinez should bring back a prize. A very highly rated prospect close to the bigs from a competing team looking to be put over. Maybe something like 2nd baseman or CF. Re-sign Martinez in the summer. We will have Chavis, Devers, and the prospect hopefully in the team bringing costs down. Re-signing Betts will mean we need to get creative somewhere. That all said, one high level prospect and two low ones isn't a great return for a broken year.

He's just an angry confused fella. He seems the type to want Leon to fail, so he can say 'told you so'. Every fan group has them.

Why did it start? Why did he target Spud? Some odd people in this world.

For the right price we absolutely should keep him. I don't think the right price will be Rick's price however, no matter the talk of discounts.

What?! There's Lion King porn, too? Man, a little too quick on the ban hammer there YOTN!

Tremendously disappointed to find out that I wasn't the only one to receive this message. Ruined the special feeling I got. Interesting message title....I recall somebody else saying this recently that got banned. I forget who. Same guy, obviously?

Absolutely. End it now.

Yeah, I don't think the answer to us losing one of our starters for two months is to take another (and best) starter and throw him in the pen.

You've missed the point of my post. I wasn't asking the question you've assumed I was. I know we are on the hook for it. Hence my post.

But if everyone knows he's done why should we have to keep him on the books when he can't play anymore? Everyone knows he could technically keep rehabbing and picking up his money, but it suits all involved for him to get his money yet not clutter up a ball team he is going to have no part of playing in. This is assuming he is all together finished, of course. It's not like he is just not very good and we are looking for ways out. If he is finished but doesn't want to give his cash up it's a simple way out. I don't see it as that unethical if he is finished.