It's May 31, 2024, 05:48:56 AM
Quote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 09:58:50 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 09:50:24 PMQuote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 04:37:23 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 04:28:57 PMQuote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.The only difference is Adam Wainwright has to face a fresh pitcher; not a guy in his 16th inning of work in the second game of a double header lol.So that means when Ruth was throwing 23 win seasons with 41 CGs with a 1.75 ERA and 9 shut out games a years he was really just throwing 18 straight innings a day? Shit, he must have been the best pitcher ever.I don't get you. I really don't. When Ruth smashes HRs he does so because the pitchers back then sucked. And when he has blow away knock out pitching seasons he does so because the batters back then sucked. So the MLB in the teens and 20s was just one big high school league and Babe Ruth was the only guy that would have make the league in the modern game, and if he tries really hard he might get to start a game or two.No, what are you talking about? You get me lol.I'll never get you, but I will envy you for the next 4 years, but I'd kill to re-do 18-22 in my life. Enjoy these years my friend. Because you never get them back, but you spend a lot of years thinking about them.
Quote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 09:50:24 PMQuote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 04:37:23 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 04:28:57 PMQuote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.The only difference is Adam Wainwright has to face a fresh pitcher; not a guy in his 16th inning of work in the second game of a double header lol.So that means when Ruth was throwing 23 win seasons with 41 CGs with a 1.75 ERA and 9 shut out games a years he was really just throwing 18 straight innings a day? Shit, he must have been the best pitcher ever.I don't get you. I really don't. When Ruth smashes HRs he does so because the pitchers back then sucked. And when he has blow away knock out pitching seasons he does so because the batters back then sucked. So the MLB in the teens and 20s was just one big high school league and Babe Ruth was the only guy that would have make the league in the modern game, and if he tries really hard he might get to start a game or two.No, what are you talking about? You get me lol.
Quote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 04:37:23 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 04:28:57 PMQuote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.The only difference is Adam Wainwright has to face a fresh pitcher; not a guy in his 16th inning of work in the second game of a double header lol.So that means when Ruth was throwing 23 win seasons with 41 CGs with a 1.75 ERA and 9 shut out games a years he was really just throwing 18 straight innings a day? Shit, he must have been the best pitcher ever.I don't get you. I really don't. When Ruth smashes HRs he does so because the pitchers back then sucked. And when he has blow away knock out pitching seasons he does so because the batters back then sucked. So the MLB in the teens and 20s was just one big high school league and Babe Ruth was the only guy that would have make the league in the modern game, and if he tries really hard he might get to start a game or two.
Quote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 04:28:57 PMQuote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.The only difference is Adam Wainwright has to face a fresh pitcher; not a guy in his 16th inning of work in the second game of a double header lol.
Quote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.
I'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent.
1994 sees the dawn of the Steroid Era. Every timeline I have seen usually calls this the Long Ball Era, usually dated 1994 because of the season ending strike. But I would argue that even though steroids were used in the 80's, it becomes unreal in the 90's, and every team had at least one player juicing. Barry Bonds is the poster child of that era.
Quote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 10:02:05 PMQuote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 09:58:50 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 09:50:24 PMQuote from: Chamillitary Click on September 10, 2010, 04:37:23 PMQuote from: Shallow on September 10, 2010, 04:28:57 PMQuote from: Javier on September 10, 2010, 09:41:22 AMI'm not saying James Loney is even an average player though, I really don't even want him on the team. My point with Loney is that he's one of dozens of players every year that are on top of scouts lists as pitchers and hitters but only get to do one. Even with the 95+ and HR power example, a team would rather see the player concentrate on one thing to maximize the talent. I agree with that. Ruth was brought up as a pitcher. His one recorded year in the minors was pretty average for a hitter. It was while he was in Boston where someone saw him, I guess during practice, slug the fuck out of the ball. In 1915 with 92 ABs Ruth had 4 HRs. Broggo Roth lead the league with 7 HRs that year and he had over 350 ABs. The Sox knew that as a batting pitcher he was top notch and after a while they gave him a full batting schedule. New York saw what he did and said that's our guy.What happened to Ruth could happen today. If an NL pitcher with under 100 ABs was tied for 3rd in HRs and bat over 300 that team would look to switch him over. At the very least rotate him.The only difference is Adam Wainwright has to face a fresh pitcher; not a guy in his 16th inning of work in the second game of a double header lol.So that means when Ruth was throwing 23 win seasons with 41 CGs with a 1.75 ERA and 9 shut out games a years he was really just throwing 18 straight innings a day? Shit, he must have been the best pitcher ever.I don't get you. I really don't. When Ruth smashes HRs he does so because the pitchers back then sucked. And when he has blow away knock out pitching seasons he does so because the batters back then sucked. So the MLB in the teens and 20s was just one big high school league and Babe Ruth was the only guy that would have make the league in the modern game, and if he tries really hard he might get to start a game or two.No, what are you talking about? You get me lol.I'll never get you, but I will envy you for the next 4 years, but I'd kill to re-do 18-22 in my life. Enjoy these years my friend. Because you never get them back, but you spend a lot of years thinking about them.True words, man I miss being 18-22, it was the funniest times, with the best girls.
Lol real talk. I'm only 22 right now (just recently graduated college) and I'm actually in a pretty good place in my life, and yet even I would love to go back and re-do a small handful of things from within just one year ago. Sometimes you wonder if "pretty good place" could have been a "really good place."And yea, the college bitches were a definite plus too haha. Speaking of which, I know American pop culture leads us to believe that these are the best bitches, but do they really not get better from here on up? I always thought that it was my own assumption and personal taste that made me chase the young tail, but if there really is no improvement as we get older, that's actually kind of depressing to know lol.
Quote from: Halu Sination on September 11, 2010, 03:07:41 PMLol real talk. I'm only 22 right now (just recently graduated college) and I'm actually in a pretty good place in my life, and yet even I would love to go back and re-do a small handful of things from within just one year ago. Sometimes you wonder if "pretty good place" could have been a "really good place."And yea, the college bitches were a definite plus too haha. Speaking of which, I know American pop culture leads us to believe that these are the best bitches, but do they really not get better from here on up? I always thought that it was my own assumption and personal taste that made me chase the young tail, but if there really is no improvement as we get older, that's actually kind of depressing to know lol.I feel for you. I really do. It's all over and you don't even know it yet. It doesn't punch you in the face until that horrid 25th birthday, and until then you can still stretch out what you got going on now, but at 25 you'll see that pre-23 was where it was at.
I really don't want to wake up one day and just say "what the fuck have I been doing."