moonslav59

I know my opinion is just my opinion. I think Manfred is a stupid clown. Yes, that's an opinion. I know what I say does not make it so. You keep reminding me, like I need to be reminded.

There does seem to be some serious movement from MLB, at least on the lux tax. Maybe the players give 14 teams for the playoffs, banning the shift, a universal DH and a couple other tidbits, and the owners close the loop hole on player service time manipulation, somehow, without giving into much more. I still think the players deserve something more on arbs and earlier free agency, but maybe an even healthier raise to the min salary might quell the players appetites on helping the lower salary players. Maybe this ends up being the final package: Min Salary: $740K with $20M additions each year, so $820K in 2026. Lux Tax: $228 in 2022 (owner's recent offer) 30% Tax ($20-40M over 60% and $40+M over 90%) $240 in 2026 ($2M over owner's recent offer) 40% Tax ($20-40M over 70% and $40+M over 100%) The pre-arb Pool: $50M (owners most recent offer, I believe was $30M) Fix the service time manipulation, somehow. Int'l draft (not by losing record) 14 team playoffs and Universal DH in 2022 Pitch clock and Robo Umps in 2023 Maybe think about making this longer than a 5 year deal. Banning the shift should be banned.

If this were true, the owners would let the best 1200 players walk.

I like a lot of what you say, but I really think you are wrong, here. True, Franchy would be facing worse pitchers, so he'd hit better than we saw, but I've seen AAA and AA games. It's like little league vs college ball.

I closed my eyes. Seriously, though, if we had 9 Franchy's in the line-up, we'd be the worst team in the history of MLB and probably any sport. I honestly think I couldn't watch, and I watched some pretty sad Sox teams from start to finish.

True nuff!

It's beyond stupid, but when you have a clown in charge, these things happen. It won't ruin the game, but it's a needless change, when so many clear changes are needed.

I would not watch 9 Franchy’s, even you paid me.

Speak for yourself! (At least when we were 25-30.)

I’m not denying many changes to the game have affected stats in the past- many by more than the shift. There is no asterisk for 1968. I get it. My position is that this is a major change that will affect some players a lot and others by maybe nothing. Telling a defender he can’t position himself where the chance is greatest to create an out is a major intrusion into the game and it’s history. Will they outlaw the curveball, next?

You can’t be serious!

I’m not saying it has to be quantifiable to get the asterisk. If anything, the sac fly rule can be figured out, so to me, there is less need on that one.

I’m certain it took more away than it gave, and I’m surprised you doubt that. Sure, a debate might be on how many hits but I think it’s certain many more taken away than given. How many times did we wonder why he didn’t just bunt down the 3B line.

He annoys the hell out of me. I'm sure the players think much worse.

Yes, your words, not mine. It's my opinion, there should be an asterisk. There probably should be one for other things, and I'm fine with talking about those, if you want.

Take his last season, where he hit .315 in 537 ABs and 626 PAs. Add 10 hits and he's at .333 Add 20: .351 Add 26: .363 What would Ted Williams' BA career be? Give him 40 hits over 19 seasons: he goes from .344 to .350. Give him 80: .355 120: .360

So, individual plays don't affect yearly numbers? Would 10-25 more singles over a season make a yearly difference?

So, now MLB is saying there still may be a 162 game season. Manfred is such a lying clown. MLBTR... Finally a sizeable movement: "MLB offered to raise the base luxury tax threshold to $228MM next season, with that figure rising to $238MM over the course of the CBA..." SNY’s Andy Martino tweets that MLB’s most recent proposal does not include any movement on the pre-arbitration bonus pool. The league is still offering a flat $30MM pool with no increases over the five-year term of the agreement. The MLBPA had lowered its ask from a $115MM peak to $80MM at last check, though the union was also believed to be seeking annual increases to the size of the pool.

I saw many plays where Papi lined out to a third infielder on the right side and very few hits into the open hole on the left side of the IF. You sincerely did not not notice any of that?

#34 Victor Santos: https://soxprospects.com/players/santos-victor.htm Potential emergency depth starter. Ceiling of a sixth starter/long-man. High floor/low ceiling. Potential for two at-least average secondary pitches. Lack of fastball potential limits ceiling. Has solid feel for pitching and an advanced command profile. Will throw strikes, but lacks put-away stuff. Turns 22 in July.

I'm not saying it "has to be" anything. Those are your words, not mine. LOL!

I'm not making the rules, and I'm not sure of my views on asterisks for other changes. I happen to think this a major rule change that will and would have affected a great many players' numbers, and some not so much. I think Papi's numbers would have been even better, perhaps much better had they changed the rule in 2000. The fact that Aaron played longer and got more PAs does matter, but it's not related to anything the league did. You can make adjustments for shorter seasons, on your own. One can always look at HRs per PA, but how can you adjust, even roughly, for things like the shift being taken away?

Yup, and this is a buggy for some players and hardly anything for others, as are other past changes.

Yes, I did think about it and maybe asterisks should be placed next to other stats for other reasons, but this is a rule change. The shorter season is also a big one.

Please, go on and on.