Bumgarner has been one of the big stories from this post-season. He has been an absolute stud and a true Ace. Certainly a better Game 1 starter than Shields.
Everybody loves the KC story and for good reason - but the Giants have much more quietly breezed through this postseason too. And got through much better pitching staffs to get here.
Hard to really love either offense - but the SF starting pitching and postseason experience should be a big edge here.
Hope i'm wrong but I dont see this series getting back to KC next week.
out of all the players in this World Series, he's probably the biggest star.
It's wayyy too early to call Posey a future HOFer. But he's been a tremendous hitting catcher and already has 2 rings.
He's hit .302 this post-season but has 0 extra base hits. This World Series could be the moment where Posey gets to put a stamp on his early career success. ROY, MVP, WS MVP, 3 rings through the first 5 years of a career? Would be pretty damn impressive. Baseball really needs more young stars and Posey could be that guy with a big series.
Ratings have actually been up for the post-season this year. And the Royals actually seem to be a decent draw. They've sucked forever and have a unique style, makes them a compelling underdog.
I think it depends on KC. If the Giants KO them tonight and Game 2, people will lose interest. People are sick of the Giants.
are going to get 2-0 pitches called strikes that arent even close to a strike it's going to be a long night for the Royals. That 2-0 pitch to Gordon fucked the entire inning
It's far from over but if SF gets up on them in the series out of the gates, the clock will strike midnight and they're probably doomed. SF is far too experienced and I don't think KC will be able to beat them in a long series.
Can the "Big Game James" thing just die now? 5+ postseason ERA this year coming into tonight.. 5 runs in 3 innings in WS Game 1. Just stop. He's not "Big Game" anything.
And it doesn't matter where or how he got it.. it should just die. He has a career 5.19 postseason ERA and he just blew it up even more tonight. Dude is not a big game pitcher.
it was never about him being a big game pitcher lol Â
You have offense for people who like it and a masterful job of pitching. Lopsided score doesn't equal a bad game.
I'm speaking for myself as a person who is hoping to see a new champion and wants the cinderella story. Watching the SF retreads steamroll the Royals was incredibly boring to watch. Now we get to watch them trot out Hudson, Peavy and Vogelsong.
the name is not from when he was a kid. He got the name in the minors. So no, it's not a childhood nickname, it was given to him in the minors because he liked james worthy as a kid. They referenced it in the broadcast last night and look at the article below.
I get that he hasn't pitched like "Big Game James" but people are shitting on him like it's some self proclaimed nickname. Almost every headline I've seen makes some sort of comment about it. Link - ( New Window )
Who about the pretty woman that's been sitting behind home plate Â
Ratings have actually been up for the post-season this year. And the Royals actually seem to be a decent draw. They've sucked forever and have a unique style, makes them a compelling underdog.
I think it depends on KC. If the Giants KO them tonight and Game 2, people will lose interest. People are sick of the Giants.
Obviously not a competitive game, but game 1 registered the lowest overnight rating in history for a game 1. This series needs length or its going to be another disaster.
I dont watch the games but i do watch the ratings, and a trend i notice that actually runs opposite of conventional wisdom is that mlb playoff games tend to draw bigger audiences when they are competing with the nfl than when they arent. You would think the nfl audience would cut in, but it seems to have the opposite effect consistently. My best guess is that more sports minded fans are tuned into television sets when there is an nfl game on, and may switch over to check in on baseball during breaks in the game (of which there are many, nfl games take forever now) or switch over if the nfl game is a blowout, giving the baseball audience a boost
This series is going to be bottom 2 rated all time. They might beat the 2012 sweep. Going to have a smaller audience than the nba finals for a 5th straight year
did a lower rating than I would have thought, but there wasn't much drama in that series aside from LeBron cramping game 1. This series will need to get to a 6th or 7th game to see a decent number.
Sean, the nba final averaged a 9.3 rating this year with a virtual worst case scenario. Only 5 games, most of them uncompetitive late, plus san antonio is a chronic ratings depresser. I cant see even the best case scenario for this world series averaging a 9.3. Even if it goes 7.
But it wont be enough to lift a series into double digits for an average, or even much north of 9 when all the prior games are doing low 8/high 7. And the official number for game 1 figures to come in a tad below an 8
bigger than the actual number itself is the fact that the baseball audience is still being carried by the over 50 demographic. Theyre holding on on the backs of that demo. Were it not for the fact that theyre still widely popular there, theyd be doing 5s. Looking ahead a generation, thats not a good recipe
ND-FSU did an 8.5 the other night. I don't think it is outrageous to say College Football is the second most popular league in this country behind the NFL.
And that's not even pointing out that they had postseason games on FS1, which not everyone carries. You're right, and it's sad. Bud went out of his way to destroy the Yankees' competitive advantage, but the result of "parity" is that a sport that still leans heavily on the fans of participating teams is struggling to put up ratings because New York and New England (and the legions of Yankee haters) sat out the entire postseason and absent LA it was largely medium-sized or smaller markets.
The Yankees got old. They need to rebuild. There was no conspiracy. Both Yankees `West´ teams made the playoffs this year... they just choked. Last year those blue-collar, low Budget Red Sox won the whole thing.
Ratings still suck even when the Yankees and Red Sox are in it... the games are boring and take well over 4 hours to play just 9 innings. They must find a way to pick up the pace.
With all that said, its great to see KC in the World Series after 30 years. Hope they make this a series.
This thread didnt need the trolling about ratings. Neither here nor there.
Between the changes to the luxury tax, the changes to the rules for signing amateurs, the changes to the compensation for signing FAs, these were moves designed to enshrine parity and to undermine the advantage large-market teams had. That's not really in dispute. The Yankees have certainly played a role in their own demise, both by poor decisions and just by regular old aging, but Bud certainly wanted to accelerate the process.
Some people have an interest in the numbers. I didnt just pop in here without the topic having been brought up. If you dont care thats your right too. I dont give a shit that you dont give a shit though
by the way, the official rating of game 1 was adjusted down to a 7.3. It was not only the least watched game 1 ever, but the least watched world series game ever excluding saturday night games. Figures for game 2 to come sometime tonight. Remember the overnight rating is not the official rating
And its absolutely true that the yankees being down is bad for baseball. Whether you hate the yankees or not, it just is. Its true decline in viewership had been happening even with them in the mix, but it has accelerated in recent times with thek badically irrelevant. Baseball viewership has become so regional that having a market like kc is just a killer. Game did a 48 rating in kc last night, and even with that it couldnt lift the national average much north of 7.
who doesn't give a shit about baseball i'm not sure why you give a shit about their ratings, Joe. Also not sure why you keep bringing up NBA numbers, as if its some type of competition between NBA and MLB.
I dont get whats hard to understand about having an interest in ratings yet not being a baseball fan, the two have nothing to do with eachother
also with regards to the nba vs mlb aspect, It is the natural comparison because those 2 sports are the ones that are closest with eachother, at the moment at least. You cant compare either to the nfl or nhl. And given baseballs place in this country historically, its well worth noting where it now relates on the totum pole to illustrate drastic and rapid change.
It's trolling baseball fans in an attempt to get a rise out of them, plain and simple.
And duh when big market teams get knocked out ratings suffer. Same could be said if Indiana played San Antonio in a NBA Finals. But the point remains that baseball ratings werent all that good even when the Yankees & Red Sox were in it every October.
And Bud hasnt made it his mission to bring down the Yankees... while allowing the Red Sox, Dodgers and Angels to thrive. That's cop-out bullshit... the Yankees have had a few down years because their core got old and Cashman & company havent done a good enough job building their farm system. They'll be back soon enough.
mab: youre the only one who seemed to get a rise out of it Â
People were talking about the ratings both before i came here and after. And those who didnt care about the ratings, didnt feel a need to expressly mention that they dont care, nor were they thin skinned enough to label it trolling. If the game got a 10 rating, i wouldnt avoid posting the number. Im not only posting it because the number was bad. Just so happens the number was terrible.
It's trolling baseball fans in an attempt to get a rise out of them, plain and simple.
And duh when big market teams get knocked out ratings suffer. Same could be said if Indiana played San Antonio in a NBA Finals. But the point remains that baseball ratings werent all that good even when the Yankees & Red Sox were in it every October.
And Bud hasnt made it his mission to bring down the Yankees... while allowing the Red Sox, Dodgers and Angels to thrive. That's cop-out bullshit... the Yankees have had a few down years because their core got old and Cashman & company havent done a good enough job building their farm system. They'll be back soon enough.
The Red Sox aren't "thriving," they won a flukey title in their only year in the postseason. The Dodgers haven't paid the luxury tax long enough for the consequences to pile up, and the Angels have been mostly terrible for some time. You have a sport that does a piss-poor job of marketing its stars (how many non-baseball fans could pick Kershaw or Trout out of a lineup?), that lives and dies with regional markets - largely because they do a bad job of marketing to a national audience - and yet consciously undercuts the regional markets that actually produce ratings.
Probably wont post again until the series is done. But game 2 officially did 7.9 national rating, up from the 7.3 game 1. Average for the first 2 games is a 7.6, which is the worst 2 game start ever (slightly worse than 2012). link - ( New Window )
having a pitcher hit for the first time in his professional career in a World Series game is awesome.
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
having a pitcher hit for the first time in his professional career in a World Series game is awesome.
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
And yet, that pitcher got a hit.
And you'd be wrong about the reason for no DH. But carry on...
having a pitcher hit for the first time in his professional career in a World Series game is awesome.
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
And yet, that pitcher got a hit.
And you'd be wrong about the reason for no DH. But carry on...
Yeah, I'm wrong. Tell me why the pitchers don't hit in the minor leagues then? Because it's convenient for the owners to not have them hit.
The only thing that saved San Fran in this game is the pitchers spot coming up in the 3rd inning. Otherwise that game is 6-1 or 7-1. It's a joke.
Owners can't argue about that being the way the games has always been played and then use a DH in the minor leagues.
They don't have it because of money. Plain and simple.
The same reasoning people use to support the DH can be used to make an argument to have entirely separate offensive and defensive teams. Does anyone want that? Why should SSs, catchers and CFs have to hit when they are generally worse hitters than average and derive most of their value one defense? Is that just evidence of owners being cheep?
The same reasoning people use to support the DH can be used to make an argument to have entirely separate offensive and defensive teams. Does anyone want that? Why should SSs, catchers and CFs have to hit when they are generally worse hitters than average and derive most of their value one defense? Is that just evidence of owners being cheep?
Pitcher hitting is literally the most boring thing in baseball. They don't even try. It's pointless and the only level in all of baseball pitchers hit is MLB national league. Ridiculous.
Great! A few outliers must mean pitchers can ACTUALLY hit! Oh wait- thats total bullshit and false?
The 10th best on base percentage for a pitcher was .222(minimum PA 40). Fuck even Bumgarner, who had the best, was a lousy .286. The 30th best was .164. 60th best .073.
For comparisons sake, for qualified hitters, 1st was .410, 10th .383, 30th .356. 60th .336. 90th .323. 120th .307.
You have to go all the way to the 140th out of 146 eligible hitters to find someone as bad as the best pitcher at .286, and thats over 500+ more PA.
That is horrid, horrible, basically giving up an at bat any time a pitcher gets up to bat.
instead of walking Crawford twice he lets him swing the bat and Crawford has 2 rbi's hitting in front of Bumgarner, who is one of the better hitting pitchers in baseball and still gets a hit only 16% of the time.
They very well may, but they're going to have to win a game another one in KC and Bumgarner won't be starting either one. KC still has a decent shot to win this, they got the win they needed in SF.
instead of walking Crawford twice he lets him swing the bat and Crawford has 2 rbi's hitting in front of Bumgarner, who is one of the better hitting pitchers in baseball and still gets a hit only 16% of the time.
Are you saying there's strategy in baseball that the AL manager didn't employ because it isn't something he has to normally do?
But if he doesn't start, they'll have him piggyback whoever does. He's a horse. He's not wearing down at all and they can't hit him. He's wanted to even come out of the pen in games he didn't start. I guarantee if this gets to a game 7 he'll wind up on the mound in that game somehow.
in both leagues, just different strategy. Double switching in the NL does not take a rocket scientist to figure out, like some would lead you to believe.
Still waiting on an answer why the NL uses the DH in the minor leagues but not in the majors if they keep it the way it is because that's the "pure" way to play baseball
But if he doesn't start, they'll have him piggyback whoever does. He's a horse. He's not wearing down at all and they can't hit him. He's wanted to even come out of the pen in games he didn't start. I guarantee if this gets to a game 7 he'll wind up on the mound in that game somehow.
I'm sure he'll be available out of the pen, but one or two innings is a hell of a lot different than 7-8. They're going to have to win in KC largely without him. You'd still favor Giants chances obviously but it's not going to be easy for them
Leyland, in a pregame talk in his office, said it is “more fun to manage in the National League, and there's more to do,” but said he considers it more difficult to manage in the American League.
“The reason I've said that all along is that, in the National League, if you get to the fourth or fifth inning down by three or four runs, you pinch-hit for your pitcher,” Leyland said. “So the decision's kind of made for you.
“In the American League, you have to be precise as to when you take him out. He might have given up three (runs) in the first (inning) and really settled down and really is pitching a good game. You get to the sixth inning and maybe he gets in a little trouble – has he lost it, has he not? I think pitching is the most of managing. So I think it's a little more difficult than people understand.”
It's just shocking they do things differently there. Perhaps they just want to get other positional players to have more at bats while IN THE MINORS.
Why are you acting like that is something that has any real meaning?
So then it's not about keeping the game "pure", right? It's convenient for them to not use it in the minor leagues, so they don't.
Or is minor league baseball not baseball and the way it's always been done doesn't matter?
Wouldn't you want the pitchers to hit so they could actually, you know, be competent hitters in the major leagues when they get there instead of largely being sacks of shit at the plate because they never face live pitching in the minor leagues?
do something in the major leagues, don't you think it's something they should be doing in the minor leagues and working on? Wouldn't that keep the game "pure", instead of making a mockery of it, which is what having pitchers hit who never swing a bit against live pitching in the minor leagues is, a complete mockery of the game. They get hits once out of every 10 times they are up, that's "pure" to you?
If they had them hit in the minor leagues, they would be a hell of a lot more effective in the majors doing it, rather than looking like schmucks every time they come to the plate.
is just insane. He doesn't even make mistakes that get fouled back, his mistakes are missing by an inch rather than hitting the perfect spot. As good of a performance as you'll see in a big spot
Hard to really love either offense - but the SF starting pitching and postseason experience should be a big edge here.
Hope i'm wrong but I dont see this series getting back to KC next week.
In fairness to Shields, he has disputed what everyone thinks "Big Game" means for a while now. But nobody listens for whatever reason.
wtf, Big Game James?
For the final time his nickname is not about baseball.
It's wayyy too early to call Posey a future HOFer. But he's been a tremendous hitting catcher and already has 2 rings.
He's hit .302 this post-season but has 0 extra base hits. This World Series could be the moment where Posey gets to put a stamp on his early career success. ROY, MVP, WS MVP, 3 rings through the first 5 years of a career? Would be pretty damn impressive. Baseball really needs more young stars and Posey could be that guy with a big series.
Ratings have actually been up for the post-season this year. And the Royals actually seem to be a decent draw. They've sucked forever and have a unique style, makes them a compelling underdog.
I think it depends on KC. If the Giants KO them tonight and Game 2, people will lose interest. People are sick of the Giants.
Bumgarner should probably go 7 tonight
Let James Worthy have it. No one should call Shields that because there's no reason to.
he didn't give it to himself...his friends called him that.
????
You have offense for people who like it and a masterful job of pitching. Lopsided score doesn't equal a bad game.
Quote:
Big Lame Shields
????
You have offense for people who like it and a masterful job of pitching. Lopsided score doesn't equal a bad game.
I'm speaking for myself as a person who is hoping to see a new champion and wants the cinderella story. Watching the SF retreads steamroll the Royals was incredibly boring to watch. Now we get to watch them trot out Hudson, Peavy and Vogelsong.
Hate the friggin' guy, but I can say that about most any current or former TB DRay.
You get to keep the nickname if it fits you........this doesn't.
I get that he hasn't pitched like "Big Game James" but people are shitting on him like it's some self proclaimed nickname. Almost every headline I've seen makes some sort of comment about it.
Link - ( New Window )
A plant?
Quote:
I'm fascinated as to what this does ratings wise.
Ratings have actually been up for the post-season this year. And the Royals actually seem to be a decent draw. They've sucked forever and have a unique style, makes them a compelling underdog.
I think it depends on KC. If the Giants KO them tonight and Game 2, people will lose interest. People are sick of the Giants.
Obviously not a competitive game, but game 1 registered the lowest overnight rating in history for a game 1. This series needs length or its going to be another disaster.
I dont watch the games but i do watch the ratings, and a trend i notice that actually runs opposite of conventional wisdom is that mlb playoff games tend to draw bigger audiences when they are competing with the nfl than when they arent. You would think the nfl audience would cut in, but it seems to have the opposite effect consistently. My best guess is that more sports minded fans are tuned into television sets when there is an nfl game on, and may switch over to check in on baseball during breaks in the game (of which there are many, nfl games take forever now) or switch over if the nfl game is a blowout, giving the baseball audience a boost
This series is going to be bottom 2 rated all time. They might beat the 2012 sweep. Going to have a smaller audience than the nba finals for a 5th straight year
Sean, the nba final averaged a 9.3 rating this year with a virtual worst case scenario. Only 5 games, most of them uncompetitive late, plus san antonio is a chronic ratings depresser. I cant see even the best case scenario for this world series averaging a 9.3. Even if it goes 7.
link - ( New Window )
bigger than the actual number itself is the fact that the baseball audience is still being carried by the over 50 demographic. Theyre holding on on the backs of that demo. Were it not for the fact that theyre still widely popular there, theyd be doing 5s. Looking ahead a generation, thats not a good recipe
The Yankees got old. They need to rebuild. There was no conspiracy. Both Yankees `West´ teams made the playoffs this year... they just choked. Last year those blue-collar, low Budget Red Sox won the whole thing.
Ratings still suck even when the Yankees and Red Sox are in it... the games are boring and take well over 4 hours to play just 9 innings. They must find a way to pick up the pace.
With all that said, its great to see KC in the World Series after 30 years. Hope they make this a series.
This thread didnt need the trolling about ratings. Neither here nor there.
by the way, the official rating of game 1 was adjusted down to a 7.3. It was not only the least watched game 1 ever, but the least watched world series game ever excluding saturday night games. Figures for game 2 to come sometime tonight. Remember the overnight rating is not the official rating
And its absolutely true that the yankees being down is bad for baseball. Whether you hate the yankees or not, it just is. Its true decline in viewership had been happening even with them in the mix, but it has accelerated in recent times with thek badically irrelevant. Baseball viewership has become so regional that having a market like kc is just a killer. Game did a 48 rating in kc last night, and even with that it couldnt lift the national average much north of 7.
link - ( New Window )
also with regards to the nba vs mlb aspect, It is the natural comparison because those 2 sports are the ones that are closest with eachother, at the moment at least. You cant compare either to the nfl or nhl. And given baseballs place in this country historically, its well worth noting where it now relates on the totum pole to illustrate drastic and rapid change.
It's trolling baseball fans in an attempt to get a rise out of them, plain and simple.
And duh when big market teams get knocked out ratings suffer. Same could be said if Indiana played San Antonio in a NBA Finals. But the point remains that baseball ratings werent all that good even when the Yankees & Red Sox were in it every October.
And Bud hasnt made it his mission to bring down the Yankees... while allowing the Red Sox, Dodgers and Angels to thrive. That's cop-out bullshit... the Yankees have had a few down years because their core got old and Cashman & company havent done a good enough job building their farm system. They'll be back soon enough.
It's trolling baseball fans in an attempt to get a rise out of them, plain and simple.
And duh when big market teams get knocked out ratings suffer. Same could be said if Indiana played San Antonio in a NBA Finals. But the point remains that baseball ratings werent all that good even when the Yankees & Red Sox were in it every October.
And Bud hasnt made it his mission to bring down the Yankees... while allowing the Red Sox, Dodgers and Angels to thrive. That's cop-out bullshit... the Yankees have had a few down years because their core got old and Cashman & company havent done a good enough job building their farm system. They'll be back soon enough.
The Red Sox aren't "thriving," they won a flukey title in their only year in the postseason. The Dodgers haven't paid the luxury tax long enough for the consequences to pile up, and the Angels have been mostly terrible for some time. You have a sport that does a piss-poor job of marketing its stars (how many non-baseball fans could pick Kershaw or Trout out of a lineup?), that lives and dies with regional markets - largely because they do a bad job of marketing to a national audience - and yet consciously undercuts the regional markets that actually produce ratings.
I disagree pretty strongly with this. I don't see a bright (near) future for the Yankees.
link - ( New Window )
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
And yet, that pitcher got a hit.
And you'd be wrong about the reason for no DH. But carry on...
Quote:
having a pitcher hit for the first time in his professional career in a World Series game is awesome.
There is nothing more boring in sports than watching the pitcher hit. It's a waste of time. The only reason the pitchers hit in the NL is because their owners don't want to pay up for a DH. When it's convenient for them, like in the minor leagues, the pitchers dont hit
And yet, that pitcher got a hit.
And you'd be wrong about the reason for no DH. But carry on...
Yeah, I'm wrong. Tell me why the pitchers don't hit in the minor leagues then? Because it's convenient for the owners to not have them hit.
The only thing that saved San Fran in this game is the pitchers spot coming up in the 3rd inning. Otherwise that game is 6-1 or 7-1. It's a joke.
Owners can't argue about that being the way the games has always been played and then use a DH in the minor leagues.
They don't have it because of money. Plain and simple.
The same reasoning people use to support the DH can be used to make an argument to have entirely separate offensive and defensive teams. Does anyone want that? Why should SSs, catchers and CFs have to hit when they are generally worse hitters than average and derive most of their value one defense? Is that just evidence of owners being cheep?
The same reasoning people use to support the DH can be used to make an argument to have entirely separate offensive and defensive teams. Does anyone want that? Why should SSs, catchers and CFs have to hit when they are generally worse hitters than average and derive most of their value one defense? Is that just evidence of owners being cheep?
Pitcher hitting is literally the most boring thing in baseball. They don't even try. It's pointless and the only level in all of baseball pitchers hit is MLB national league. Ridiculous.
Great! A few outliers must mean pitchers can ACTUALLY hit! Oh wait- thats total bullshit and false?
The 10th best on base percentage for a pitcher was .222(minimum PA 40). Fuck even Bumgarner, who had the best, was a lousy .286. The 30th best was .164. 60th best .073.
For comparisons sake, for qualified hitters, 1st was .410, 10th .383, 30th .356. 60th .336. 90th .323. 120th .307.
You have to go all the way to the 140th out of 146 eligible hitters to find someone as bad as the best pitcher at .286, and thats over 500+ more PA.
That is horrid, horrible, basically giving up an at bat any time a pitcher gets up to bat.
They very well may, but they're going to have to win a game another one in KC and Bumgarner won't be starting either one. KC still has a decent shot to win this, they got the win they needed in SF.
On 2 days rest?
Are you saying there's strategy in baseball that the AL manager didn't employ because it isn't something he has to normally do?
Still waiting on an answer why the NL uses the DH in the minor leagues but not in the majors if they keep it the way it is because that's the "pure" way to play baseball
I'm sure he'll be available out of the pen, but one or two innings is a hell of a lot different than 7-8. They're going to have to win in KC largely without him. You'd still favor Giants chances obviously but it's not going to be easy for them
“The reason I've said that all along is that, in the National League, if you get to the fourth or fifth inning down by three or four runs, you pinch-hit for your pitcher,” Leyland said. “So the decision's kind of made for you.
“In the American League, you have to be precise as to when you take him out. He might have given up three (runs) in the first (inning) and really settled down and really is pitching a good game. You get to the sixth inning and maybe he gets in a little trouble – has he lost it, has he not? I think pitching is the most of managing. So I think it's a little more difficult than people understand.”
Why are you acting like that is something that has any real meaning?
Why are you acting like that is something that has any real meaning?
So then it's not about keeping the game "pure", right? It's convenient for them to not use it in the minor leagues, so they don't.
Or is minor league baseball not baseball and the way it's always been done doesn't matter?
Wouldn't you want the pitchers to hit so they could actually, you know, be competent hitters in the major leagues when they get there instead of largely being sacks of shit at the plate because they never face live pitching in the minor leagues?
If they had them hit in the minor leagues, they would be a hell of a lot more effective in the majors doing it, rather than looking like schmucks every time they come to the plate.