en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2002871 Comments by The Baseball Idiot http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/10/12/tough-day-to-be-a-sox-fan/#IDComment206531435 I'm in the middle of '1949' by David Halberstam. He does a good job of taking apart the Boston media of that time, and how it was nothing tabloid sensationalism, and they were more against the players than for them. I guess some things never change. Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:50:20 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/10/12/tough-day-to-be-a-sox-fan/#IDComment206531435 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/07/09/on-jeter-and-his-3000th-hit/#IDComment171839248 I'm not sure how the phrase 'too many' became 'all'? I could say 'too many' people don't like ice cream, but that's a far cry from 'all'. Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:06:15 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/07/09/on-jeter-and-his-3000th-hit/#IDComment171839248 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/07/09/on-jeter-and-his-3000th-hit/#IDComment171786522 I think you're doing a dis-service to all non-Yankee fans by lumping us together. There are non-Yankee fans who hate the Yankees just becasue they think they are supposed to, and there are non-Yankee fans because we actually know something about the game, but are fans of other teams. I'm a Yankee-hater because I watched them beat my beloved Royals three years in a row in the playoffs. That being said, I don't have a problem with Jeter. He's a great player and a Hall of Famer, and I admire the way he plays the game. My only issue is that too many Yankee fans continue to push the idea that Jeter is an elite fielding shortstop when everyone knows he isn't. He never has been, but I think 75% of the teams in baseball would take over their current starter simply for the intangibles Jason was talking about. He's not a good fielder, but his knowledge of the game makes up for a lot of that. Sun, 10 Jul 2011 10:00:00 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/07/09/on-jeter-and-his-3000th-hit/#IDComment171786522 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137269476 The stolen bases are just my thing. I realize most people don't agree with it. I just feel that bases gained by stealing bases are under represented, in the grand scheme of things. It shouldn't really matter how you get to third, as long as you get there. As far the probability issue, I don't disagree. It's just my thing. Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:59:28 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137269476 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137256370 It's okay if you don't understand what I'm talking about. Some people are caught up in numbers and don't really know anything about the game as it's played on the field. If you want me to clarify something, just ask. No need to be rude and insulting about it. Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:51:22 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137256370 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137243448 Sorry, but that doesn't mean anything to me. I'm not against sabremetrics. I think they're are a good thing for the game. But I don't deal with probabilities. I deal with reality and what actually happens, not what might happen Probability says any batter might hit a home run or strike out. Reality is Adam Dunn will do a lot of both, while Ichiro won't do much of either. Reality is that Adam Dunn hits the ball a lot farther than Ichiro, but reality is Ichiro was on base more times, and had more total bases (if you count stolen bases, which you should). Power, for the sake of power, is over rated. It's good to hit the ball hard and far, but what are you doing with it? That's the reality. Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:52:13 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137243448 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137224444 I don't understand the preoccupation with 'power'? It doesn't really matter how far a guy hits the ball. A 302' home run counts the same as a 500' home run. Frank Taveras, he of the two career home runs, once hit a grand-slam that was a bouncing ball down the third base line that got into the corner and rolled around. Counted for 4 runs, just the same as any ball that crossed the fence. The infatuation with power is just a leftover of the steroid era, when guys like Adam Kennedy were hitting three home runs in one playoff game. Power, for power's sake, is overrated. Some guys hit the ball 400 feet on a regular basis, and it's a fly out to center field. Others hit 60 feet on a regular basis and end up on 1st. I'll take the single over the out any day. It doesn't matter how hard or how far you hit the ball, it matters how many bases you get out of it. Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:52:12 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137224444 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137052809 I don't think the idea of slugging percentage was to ever identify power. It was created to identify the number of bases a batter got per at bat, and does exactly what it was designed for. It was probably mis-named as slugging percentage, and would have better described as a base percentage instead. The only way it was ever really used to describe 'power' was due to the deadball era, in which a 'slugger' would hit more doubles, triples and homeruns (mostly inside the park) than the Punch and Judy hitters who only hit singles. The closer you got to home in your own at bat, the closer you were to scoring on any type of hit. I think the only flaw in it is that it doesn't count stolen bases, as they are earned as surely as any hit or walk earns a base. Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:06:26 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/23/should-slg-be-the-next-stat-to-go/#IDComment137052809 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/09/prospect-fatigue-spectrum/#IDComment133609754 Not all minor leagues are "prospects", and as a Royals fan, I gave up on the whole prospect thing a long time ago. Brett and White were never prospects, just guys drafted out of high school. Saberhagen, Gubicza and Jackson were never prospects either. They just pitched well and progressed onto a bad team. I remember them all, from Clint Hurdle to Bob Hamelin to Alex Gordon. I know there are exceptions, but I believe that guys labeled as prospects don't succeed nearly as much as some guy called up at mid-season as an injury replacement or just hit well in spring training. I'm sure someone has the numbers and will prove me wrong, but I cite Albert as my rebuttal. Good post. Wed, 9 Mar 2011 14:59:29 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/03/09/prospect-fatigue-spectrum/#IDComment133609754 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130121890 Now that would be outstanding. Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:29:47 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130121890 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130109510 Don't give me too much credit. I just read a lot of Russian literature. McCarthy is a reference to Joe McCarthy, but that's not comparing him to you. Its comparing him to Steinbrenner. Its a matter of needs vs wants. We need to eat, but we want to go to a restaurant, not grow it ourselves. We want baseball, but we don't need it, Baseball is a commodity, and it's packaged as that. Its a business and that's the debate. My complaint is that everyone always looks at it from the side of the producer of the commodity, and not the consumer. This is no different than rich factory owners complaining the price of materials for refrigerators cuts into their profit margin too much, so they raise the price of refrigerators, while forgetting the consumer is already having trouble buying them. The producers are complaining about how much money they are making while the consumer is left out of the discussion entirely. I'm done now. I have a headache. Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:34:04 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130109510 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130101632 Pleasure and need are not the same thing. Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:52:38 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130101632 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130058778 Meanwhile the proletariat is still denied any rights in the matter, while their labor (money) is used to fund the revenue stream. It's a good point, but I think you and McCarthy are both missing something. Baseball is a non-essential revenue stream. It doesn't produce anything except for those who are directly involved in it. The idea of socialism is to produce items of need for the common good. While I'm the biggest baseball fan around, if the game disappeared, life would go on. Tractor production, used for mass production of food, would greatly hurt society if disappeared. Socialism is designed to benefit the masses, and not the bourgeois. Just as religion is the opiate of the masses, so is baseball for the American proletariat. The more we want, the more it costs. The more it costs, the more we spend. Its a one-way flow of resources, with only perceived value being return. And the perception of that value is what causes the wheels to turn. Nothing else. Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:26:28 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/23/socialism-101/#IDComment130058778 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/22/guide-to-spring-training-performance/#IDComment129890769 I wish they would stop keeping stats during spring training and just let them play. I'll bet doing that to the extent is done now is a relatively new thing ('60s maybe), and is done more for the fans than any type of evaluation. Tue, 22 Feb 2011 18:09:50 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/22/guide-to-spring-training-performance/#IDComment129890769 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/18/reader-participation-2-favorite-obscure-players/#IDComment128843354 Roy White. Odd choice for a Royals fan. Jerry Dybzinski. Very odd batting stance also. Orlando Pena. One of first cards. You'll have to look him up. Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:40:08 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/18/reader-participation-2-favorite-obscure-players/#IDComment128843354 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/15/tony-larussa-sounds-awfully-entitled/#IDComment128142735 Just so I can understand. You're blasting LaRussa for blasting the union, becasue LaRussa would like to keep the best player in the game on his team to help his team win a championship? The same union that told Sabathia that he needed to sign the biggest contract offered to him, and not the one he wanted, in order to help other players get big contracts? Which landed Sabathia on the Yankees. The same union that refused to let Rodriguez renegotiate his contract so that he could be traded to the Red Sox? Which landed Rodriguez on the Yankees. You don't see the hypocrisy in that? Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:25:41 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/15/tony-larussa-sounds-awfully-entitled/#IDComment128142735 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/11/espn-simulpost-the-albert-pujols-list/#IDComment127379059 And Pujols isn't DH'ing for anyone. Everyone should forget that right now. He's playing first. Anyteam that won't guarantee that won't have to prove how big their checkbook is. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 18:29:22 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/11/espn-simulpost-the-albert-pujols-list/#IDComment127379059 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/11/espn-simulpost-the-albert-pujols-list/#IDComment127378734 Everyone should stop ruling out Kansas City. Pujols is from there, spends a lot of his offseason there, and is very popular. The Royals payroll this year is only $33 million, and they have some money to spend. This might be enough for Glass to open his pockets. Put Pujols on a team with all the young talent the Royals are suppposed to have, in the Central Division, and they could actually be competetive. Pujols will fill more seats in Kansas City than any other town. It's a long shot, but it ain't impossible. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 18:27:39 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/11/espn-simulpost-the-albert-pujols-list/#IDComment127378734 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/10/the-questioning-of-mlbams-internetsharing-policies/#IDComment127186330 Aren't we in the 21st century now? I seem to remember some fuss a little over 11 years ago and then again a year later. Either I'm drinking too much, or spending too much time on the internet and just can't stay current. Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:46:24 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/10/the-questioning-of-mlbams-internetsharing-policies/#IDComment127186330 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/03/reader-mail-joba-tips-pitches/#IDComment125762676 I would have to think this couldn't make much of a difference. Chamberlin pitches out of the stretch the majority, if not all, of the time. The batter would have a hard time picking this up, as his right hand would be shielded from the batter by the glove. This would mean the 3rd base coach would have to pick up the movement, and then relay it to the batter in the span of miliseconds. I would have to doubt this is really possible. Most pitchers that are tipping do it out in front as the pticher sets up, not during the actual delivery. He might be tipping, but it would have to be something different than this. Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:15:53 +0000 http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/02/03/reader-mail-joba-tips-pitches/#IDComment125762676