Lifestyle > Sports & Entertainment
The Official MLB Thread
Remedy360:
--- Quote from: Iveus on June 11, 2013, 09:17:12 PM ---Well one of the big reasons he was so touted here was because he stood out offensively in a Yankees system that's loaded with catching talent. The fact that Posada was on his way out and everybody was hoping that Montero would be his successor also fueled the buzz.
That said, I can only wonder how things would've gone of we didn't trade him. Would we be cheering or booing him? Would he be up in the bigs because of Cervelli's injury and Stewart's minor but nagging injuries? Would we have traded Romine or Sanchez away instead?
I suppose those questions will never be answered but now that I think about it I'm glad we got rid of him. More than anything because I've been a Cervelli supporter for a while and because he sucks defensively compared to Romine and because I want a clear path for Sanchez as he makes his way to the show.
And even after those three we've still got O'Brien 8).
--- End quote ---
I still don't see how you can use the coaching argument there though. If he learned all that shit in NY it's not like he just un-learned it in a matter of months when he came here. Also to that point, the word on Montero here is that he's less willing to make adjustments cause the approach he's grown accustomed to through the years has worked so well for him. You can use that argument for Ackley but it doesn't really work for guys like Montero or Smoak that had all of their seasoning in different farm systems.
MistaNova:
I'm just saying that something weird is going on Seattle and it might (emphasis on might) be because of their coaching staff.
I mean I know that Montero and Smoak were brought up in other organizations but I'm sure that they're being looked at by the training staff there in Seattle and not just being left alone to work on their swings and approaches by themselves. Not saying that any adjustments they tried to implement (if they did any) are what ruined them, exactly, but I'm just specuilating that maybe that's a factor in all of this madness.
Anyway did any of you guys see the catch Bourjos made yesterday? Do you guys think the Angels'll trade Bourjos for pitching this season?
I keep hearing all sorts of rumors about Angels targeting guys like Lee, Niese, Garza, Feldman, Norris etc...
Remedy360:
--- Quote from: Iveus on June 12, 2013, 10:08:01 AM ---I'm just saying that something weird is going on Seattle and it might (emphasis on might) be because of their coaching staff.
I mean I know that Montero and Smoak were brought up in other organizations but I'm sure that they're being looked at by the training staff there in Seattle and not just being left alone to work on their swings and approaches by themselves. Not saying that any adjustments they tried to implement (if they did any) are what ruined them, exactly, but I'm just specuilating that maybe that's a factor in all of this madness.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, it's definitely strange. Ackley's tearing the cover off the ball in AAA so you hope a guy that's been successful at every level/ was as highly regarded as he was just needed a little confidence boost. Don't really know what I project from Smoak or Montero at this point for different reasons. Smoak had been hitting well for a few weeks when got injured, but based on AB's it's hard to know what to expect from him as a whole. With Montero, he's young enough that he still has a lot of upside, but you wonder how much the whole biogenesis thing played into his success. Seager and Franklin have looked good, but I agree that a big name is going to have to pop to erase that stigma. The more I hear about Zunino the more it sounds like it was out of necesscity based on the position and not due to them thinking he was ready, cause the guy is still pretty raw. Unless he's absolutely raking I'd expect him to be sent back down in a few weeks once Sucre is healthy.
MistaNova:
At the same time for all we know Ackley might become the next Matt LaPorta...
As for the biogenesis thing, it's pretty much the same question with all PED users. How much of an effect do those drugs have on the players?
There seems to be this common perception amongst people that PEDs are this magical elixer type of drug that turns nobodies into Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. Which is far from the truth.
I mean normal people like us use PEDs practically a lot. Like how sometime you see athletes (Pettitte comes to mind) claim to have taken HGH when they were recovering from injuries.
Now in a sense you could say that that might've prolonged the careers of some of the players, but at the end of the day we don't know exactly how much those drugs "helped" a player's performance. Look at the list of the guys in the biogenesis report. Outside of the big names like A-Rod and Braun everybody else is either mediocre or shit (sorry Cervelli, but you've been terrible for the most part).
And I've been thinking about the whole biogen issue and, this could be just me but, I'm puzzled at what the MLB hopes to gain by punishing those PED users. From a moral standpoint it's clear "Don't cheat. If you do you'll get punished." But at the same time you could argue that without the steroid era, the post-strike era in baseball would've been a very bleak and dark one. And during that era I think it's pretty clear that a lot of people (owners, front office folks, the player's association, the MLB execs etc...) turned a cold shoulder to the players taking drugs.
So why are they so bent on getting rid of the very thing that they helped create that ultimately saved them?
Although I guess the most notable answer I've found for that question is that "the reporters were so butt-hurt at the way Barry Bonds treated them that they set out to turn him into the biggest disgrace in baseball. The fact that he's black only fueled their hatred of him."
I guess I'll never why MLB's making such a big deal out of this and why so many baseball fans actually care about that mess (I mean, do people ever give a fuck about PEDs in other sports?). But then again baseball fans also care about the HoF SMH.
Alright enough of my PED-issue rant. Now it's time to prepare and witness the Yankees take on the magical A's. And interestingly enough, they take on the Dodgers next week in Yankee Stadium. Which can only mean one thing, the return of Donnie Baseball 8).
Remedy360:
--- Quote from: Iveus on June 12, 2013, 02:02:18 PM ---At the same time for all we know Ackley might become the next Matt LaPorta...
As for the biogenesis thing, it's pretty much the same question with all PED users. How much of an effect do those drugs have on the players?
There seems to be this common perception amongst people that PEDs are this magical elixer type of drug that turns nobodies into Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. Which is far from the truth.
I mean normal people like us use PEDs practically a lot. Like how sometime you see athletes (Pettitte comes to mind) claim to have taken HGH when they were recovering from injuries.
Now in a sense you could say that that might've prolonged the careers of some of the players, but at the end of the day we don't know exactly how much those drugs "helped" a player's performance. Look at the list of the guys in the biogenesis report. Outside of the big names like A-Rod and Braun everybody else is either mediocre or shit (sorry Cervelli, but you've been terrible for the most part).
And I've been thinking about the whole biogen issue and, this could be just me but, I'm puzzled at what the MLB hopes to gain by punishing those PED users. From a moral standpoint it's clear "Don't cheat. If you do you'll get punished." But at the same time you could argue that without the steroid era, the post-strike era in baseball would've been a very bleak and dark one. And during that era I think it's pretty clear that a lot of people (owners, front office folks, the player's association, the MLB execs etc...) turned a cold shoulder to the players taking drugs.
So why are they so bent on getting rid of the very thing that they helped create that ultimately saved them?
Although I guess the most notable answer I've found for that question is that "the reporters were so butt-hurt at the way Barry Bonds treated them that they set out to turn him into the biggest disgrace in baseball. The fact that he's black only fueled their hatred of him."
I guess I'll never why MLB's making such a big deal out of this and why so many baseball fans actually care about that mess (I mean, do people ever give a fuck about PEDs in other sports?). But then again baseball fans also care about the HoF SMH.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, you just never really know how much of a difference they're going to make. I mean, look at all the guys in the 90's that tore it up offensively compared to what you see now. I don't think there's any denying that they can make a major difference for people, it's just a matter of the extent. Conventional wisdom would say that it wouldn't turn a bad player into a good one but with a lot of people I feel like they can become a crutch, to where if they're all of a sudden forced to play without them and lose confidence (could be a possibility with Montero). As for your argument about the MLB crackdown on them, I agree with you for the most part, I find big offense much more interesting than a pitchers duel (even before the M's offense was atrocious lol). The only point I was really trying to make was what could be going on with Montero.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version