Carlos Beltran and the St. Louis Cardinals' corner bats
by DanUpBaby on Dec 22, 2011 8:02 AM EST
Email
Print
Over at Baseball Nation Rob Neyer makes an entirely reasonable point that I have almost completely ignored in my rush to include Carlos Beltran in my 2012 mock Cardinals batting order and imagine one of those years where he stole bases nearly as efficiently as Tyler Greene and also had 70 extra-base hits. Entirely reasonable point: Carlos Beltran was a corner bat last year; the Cardinals have, counting up Matt Holliday, Allen Craig, and Lance Berkman, three of those guys already, which is the maximum number allowed by National League law.
Given those stipulations, I don't think the Cardinals should go after Carlos Beltran, who's likely to command a superstar salary over a Jake Westbrook-sized commitment. Also given those stipulations, I don't think they would be going after Carlos Beltran.
Much of my enthusiasm for this deal centers on my faith in John Mozeliak as a competent general manager—specifically, my faith that he's going aggressively after Carlos Beltran after having confirmed that Beltran would be willing (and confirmed with his scouts that he'd be able) to play center field at least on a part-time basis.
In 2010 he did it and was basically fine there; in 2011 he made a much-publicized move to right and did it with some enigmatic comments split between prolonging his career and thinking he could still play center.
The ideal alignment for the Cardinals' corner bats and Jon Jay—the one in which this deal would make sense to me—is this: Holliday playing every day, Beltran playing nearly every day, Craig and Jay splitting time in the outfield based on where Beltran is positioned. That leaves Beltran in center against most left-handers—the good side of his platoon split—and in right against a lot of right-handers, and it gives both Jay and Craig plenty of playing time given the apparent fragility of Berkman at first and Beltran in front of them.
If this is a move to push Craig into a conventional fourth outfielder role—well, it doesn't make a lot of sense. But my position has always been to hope that it wouldn't make a lot of sense to Mozeliak, either. Used as a right fielder Beltran is blocking Craig at the moment the Cardinals would be best served by Craig emerging as a full-time bat; used in something like the Josh Hamilton role Beltran is both a major offensive upgrade and a novel solution to the problem of depth posed by starting both Craig and Jay every day.
822 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Reds add Latos/Marshall.
Cincinnati has subtracted nothing from it’s 2011 team and added Sean Marshall and Latos. Neither which would be extraordinary, if not for how brutal their pitching was last year. Thus, adding average is a bigger deal than for most clubs. Concern?
Nope.
As of right now I expect the central to be a three way race between the reds, brewers and us
bollocks
by SecondHalfMatt on Dec 22, 2011 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
They subtracted Volquez and Alonso
both were on the ML roster last year. Not that I have any clue what they contributed.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
That's nearly addition by subtraction if you're talking about 2011 numbers
Alonso was worth 0.6 WAR and Volquez -0.3 WAR.
I would not be surprised to watch the Friars turn Volquez into the second coming of Carlos Marmol, however. I just don’t think he’s ever going to have the control necessary to be a great starter.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Oh, I know
I was just saying that Alonso (if he was gong to play in LF) and Volquez (if he can’t solve his walk problems) might actually have been worth replacement level in 2012, so anything they could get for those guys would be an addition.
I agree on Latos. Not sure how many wins Marshall adds as a bullpen guy though. He might be a 2-3 win pitcher as a starter, however.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
for people who are going to come to this thread late:
nothing has happened. we’re just warring over whether college sports are morally and economically just.
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
by il rosso on Dec 22, 2011 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I thought we already covered this...
there are plenty of starts available for Beltran. Craig is going to miss around 40 games. If Berkman starts 130 and Holliday 145, that’s 89 total starts available to Beltran at the corners.
Plus six (or nine) DH opportunities gets him to about 100. If we want to limit his starts to around 130, then he would only have to start in center around 30 times. And this is best case scenario. We could easily lose one of Craig, Berk, and Holliday for an extended period.
Sign Roy O
Last season...
the Cards used Craig at 2B a few times. I know he is probably not even an average defender at 2B, but getting his bat in the lineup against a LH even if Beltran can’t play CF could be an option. Do you think Oquendo will be working with Craig at 2B any this spring or is it going to be solely OF and 1B?
I think Craig will be lucky to be allowed within 100 ft. of the playing field this spring.
He keeps saying he hopes to be ready by Opening Day, but I’m hoping the staff disabuses him of this pipedream.
"I actually used about nine pitches--two different fastballs, two sliders, a curve, a changeup, knockdown, brushback, and hit-batsman" - Bob Gibson
by ISawGodInGibby'sRightArm on Dec 22, 2011 4:11 PM EST up reply actions
They could all miss games at different times if they're healthy...
if not, then the problem goes away…
Sign Roy O
They will miss plenty of games on purpose to rest Berk, Jay against LHP, and even Holliday doesn't average 162 games a year, his average over past 8 seasons is 142/Bill James projects 149 this year
Also, Craig will be out for at least the first month. But even if two are out that all the more reason to have 4 good bats, instead of just 3.
The power hitting will be awesome if 3 or 4 of this 5 are hitting well – Holliday, Berk, Beltran, Freese, Craig, with the occasional HR / RF blooper from Yadi. Especially if this combination helps the rest of the line-up to get on base ahead of them
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 9:34 AM EST up reply actions
That's probably the best assumption of all time
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
er nevermind, i misread
beltran would still be an asset if they all missed games at the same time.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure why that matters
If they all miss games at the same time, then Carlos Beltran is worth even more to our club.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I like this plan
One of the things I really enjoyed about the 2011 Cardinals was the ability to move guys around. Everyone except for Holliday and #LazyRasmus played multiple positions. Maybe this was just part of the TLR genius, but I like it.
I smacked Rickey right in the face when he told me this idea.
That's assuming that some combination of Berkman Holliday, and Craig are never off on the same day.
That’s not really possible.
So, drop that number by at LEAST 10%. I’m guessing that Beltran would get at most 120 starts, barring injury.
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
Sign Fielder
Let’s stop fooling ourself her folks and go our and replace “Benedict” Alber with the Prince. He’s in his prime, he is a legit power threat in the dying steroid era, and he doesn’t come out of the lineup. Pitching and defense is our future but it would be so nice to have the big hammer at first base in the Birds attempt to defend their title. BTW don’t we owe him for giving us home field advantage over Texas last year?
this doesn't strike me as something either fielder or the cardinals would really want to do
if you’re prince fielder, why would you want to go to the only team where you’d be a clear downgrade at first base? if you’re the cardinals, why do you want to sign someone else for huge money at that position right after trying very hard to convince your fanbase that you had the team’s best interests in mind by not signing a guy they and their kids all loved?
Probably because
no one was convinced of Alberts real age and thanks for the memories but we have wormed oursolves off the hook for paying for the declining production of an aging superstar. Prince is the real deal. You are correct Prince may not want to come here who knows? But if I can sign a 27 year old with 50 HR 120 RBI production sign me up.
by Uncle Lights on Dec 22, 2011 9:31 AM EST up reply actions
if you find one of those guys sign me up, too
prince fielder is unlikely to age as well as pujols did simply because he isn’t as good, and twice in his five year run since that one 50 home run year has been “just” a very good hitter instead of the MVP candidate pujols was and fielder will be paid as.
all the small things that made pujols an outstanding player—his year-to-year consistency, his baserunning, his defense—make fielder a potential disappointment. already he’s 5-10 runs below average on defense as a first baseman; in addition to the offensive downgrade from pujols you’re losing a win from the things pujos did well and that fielder will only do worse as he gets older.
I agree.
He reportedly turned down 6 years, $120MM from Milwaukee. That doesn’t mean that type of contract will be available on the free agent market but I anticipate him getting seven years or so.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I heard Albert was really 1000 years old and that he was the one who told Jack Sparrow where to find the fountain of youth
by CarpIsMyManCrush on Dec 22, 2011 10:16 AM EST up reply actions
Albert Pujols was actually a gifted athlete from an ancient Greek colony
He boasted to the god Apollo that he could defeat him in a test of sport. Apollo was angered, and he answered the challenge and of course defeated the mere mortal.
As punishment for his hubris, Apollo doomed Pujols to be reincarnated in the future. In his new life, he would be the best in the world at his sport, while being constantly under-rated. By the time he was recognized as the best, age had begun to make its mark and he would decline.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
by mattybobo on Dec 22, 2011 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
that's exactly what chase utley claims happened to him!
i used to be disgusted, but now i try to be amused . . . - macmanus
by tom s. on Dec 22, 2011 2:05 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I, too, prefer Fielder to Beltran in a vaccuum
but his signing does nothing to address the concerns about stealing ABs from Craig, which was the main point of this post.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 9:23 AM EST up reply actions
Play Craig everyday.
He is our up-and-coming potential All-Star. If he’s not playing everyday, I will be majorly disappointed. If we sign Fielder, Craig won’t be playing everyday…and thus I’ll be disappointed.
To me, this is a portion of the argument against Fielder.
I don’t think he is necessarily an upgrade over Berkman in 2012. If we do sign Fielder, we are committed to moving Berkman back to right field and Craig back to the bench in 2012. I’d much rather sign Beltran and bump Jay to the bench.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Except
Beltran may be worse defensively than Fielder, particularly if playing in CF on a raw UZR basis. He was -9.7 in RF last season. Granted, that’s a small sample size, of course.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 11:49 AM EST up reply actions
You aren't taking into account the positional adjustment for offense.
In addition to how much more value Beltran in CF (assuming a -10 defensive season) would provide than Fielder. Fielder is a lesser upgrade over Berkman and Craig moving forward than Beltran is over Jay, IMO.
The other reason I’m against Fielder is the cost of his likely contract ($20MM+) and the length (6+ years). I’d much rather have Beltran for two or three years than Fielder for six or seven years.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
No, I get the positional adjustment
Right now, however, Fielder is a better hitter than Beltran, too, which figures into the equation.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with your concerns about the length of Fielder’s contract. Although IMHO, age is less likely to be a factor for a 1B from ages 28-34 (if a seven year deal) than it is for a “CF” from ages 35-38.
Neither are great signings, IMHO.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:15 PM EST up reply actions
These are all roundings of what I anticipate Jay, Beltran, Berkman and Fielder to be worth in 2012.
I’m using conservative projections and assuming everyone stays healthy (which is a big “if,” I admit). We have the potential to replace a 2.0-WAR center fielder with a 4.0-WAR center fielder for about $12MM. To sign Fielder would be to replace a 4.0-WAR first baseball (Berkman) with a 5.0 WAR first baseman for $20MM. I don’t think the comparative upgrade Fielder might bring over Berkman/Craig over the next seven years is worth what we’d pay for Fielder. I also think the potential upgrade of Beltran over Jay is much more likely to worth it over the next two or three seasons.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I don't disagree with this analysis. . .
I would much prefer a better bet for a 4.0 WAR CF than Beltran, but that guy doesn’t exist on the FA market.
Absent a 2B upgrade, the easiest way for the Cards to improve in 2012 is to upgrade their ~2.0 WAR (going forward, best conservative guess) CF. I don’t think that Beltran is a great bet to do that, mainly because of his age/injury history/recent defensive history, but I understand the arguments made by you (and others) that Beltran is a good bet to do that.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
There's no way Fielder can fit in a vacuum
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
by mysterui on Dec 22, 2011 10:42 AM EST up reply actions 6 recs
black hole maybe
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
if Fielder came near a black hole, he would be compressed into a single point
this seems to break the laws of physics, as far as can tell. when an unstoppable force meets a blubberous object…
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
I disagree
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Beltran's range and his knee
I figure the reason his UZR numbers look so bad is that his range decreased because of his bum knee. But with his knee better rested at this point. Would it be hard to believe he would have increased mobility and range?
I just don't know
I honestly like his potential offense but defense in center field is a big worry for me.
Wouldn't be hard to believe at all
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
Beltran and Crisp
for the OF.
Oh, wait we already signed Skippy :(
by gocards62 on Dec 22, 2011 9:39 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
WOOOOOOO
Just one final left, and I’m KILLING them so far.
Manchester City: 44 points, 14-1-2, 1st in EPL, +38 GD
Sergio Aguero: 11 G, 4 A
Edin Dzeko: 10 G, 3 A
by cardinalswsbound on Dec 22, 2011 9:44 AM EST reply actions
It's always a good feeling to wrap up your last final and head home for break.
Good luck.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Craig will be better than Beltran next year.
We should sign from that point of view. As a matter of fact, Jay will be better than Crisp. I don’t mind signing either if we keep those ideas in mind.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 10:06 AM EST reply actions
Bill James predicts
Crisp to have a line of: .271/.333/.395 with an wOBA of .328
Jay to have a line of: .287/.340/.414 with a wOBA of .328
Crisp’s UZR/150 for his career in CF is 5.6, Jay’s is 4.4 so to call him better isn’t necessarily true.
Manchester City: 44 points, 14-1-2, 1st in EPL, +38 GD
Sergio Aguero: 11 G, 4 A
Edin Dzeko: 10 G, 3 A
by cardinalswsbound on Dec 22, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
Also, Crisp is an elite baserunner. Jay is not.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Not so much any more, is he?
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
45 SB last year and he he missed a significant number of games
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
49 as bgh points out below, in 136 games
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
AL leader in stolen bases last year
It would be fun to see the havoc crisp and Greene would wreck on the base paths together
bollocks
by SecondHalfMatt on Dec 22, 2011 10:43 AM EST up reply actions
I wonder if Matheny embraces SBs more than LaRussa
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
I think it will depend on the personnel.
Last season the Cardinals didn’t have many base stealers. When Greene played, La Russa gave him the steal sign fairly regularly.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Rudy Law and Rickey Henderson shake their fists in your general direction.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
Also, Canseco.
The negative waves. Always with the negative waves...
Elation. Sadness. Mayhem. Champagne. Sleepless fury. Never been a night like it. - Joe Posnanski
I think Apu's supposed disdain for folks running while at the plate
also had something to do with it. I hope Holliday or Berk doesn’t have the same disdain.
Irish provenance of the schwa pronunciation of vowels in weakly stressed syllables -> Missoura
Are you talking about the same guy that put on his own hit and runs during the WS?
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
that will never get old
Johnny Gomes could not be reached for comment
"There is not a better feeling in the whole world than knowing that you are the best team in both leagues."- Bob Forsch on winning the 1982 World Series.
by MaytheForschbewithyou on Dec 22, 2011 12:31 PM EST up reply actions
wreak
"I actually used about nine pitches--two different fastballs, two sliders, a curve, a changeup, knockdown, brushback, and hit-batsman" - Bob Gibson
by ISawGodInGibby'sRightArm on Dec 22, 2011 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Crisp had 49 stolen bases last season, which was tied for second in MLB.
He also had an 84% success rate. I’d say that is elite.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
In Moneyball
I thought Saber guys were anti-stolen base. Is there a success percentage cutoff?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
The breakeven point is at like 70%
If you can steal at over that rate, then it’s fine
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
I think it's 70%-ish
beltran in his prime was incredibly valuable, though he doesn’t really run now; between 2000 and 2004 he stole 162 bases and was caught 15 times.
vince coleman also had some baserunning years so enormous that they nearly made up for his inability to hit.
If I understand it correctly...
the damage done by getting caught stealing outweighs the advantage gained by successfully stealing. So you have to have a lot more stolen bases than caught stealing to “break even”.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
The absolute value of a caught stealing is higher than that of a stolen base.
Is that correct, saberdudes and saberdudettes?
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
That's correct
but the numbers quoted above are context neutral. A better analysis would be a case by case basis using some kind of run expectancy or win expectancy table to add context.
For example, success in the 1st inning of a 0-0 game is not the same as success in the 9th inning of a 0-0 game. Alternately, success in 14-1 game is less valuable than either of the previous situations (probably).
To muddle things even further, applying context also is, to an extent, dependent on how much you think players “play to the score”.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Right
The context part makes it much more complicated. Do the generally accepted “break even” percentages just average that all out?
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
depends on the player
some guys only steal in high leverage situations. Some guys steal whenever they are on first base.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:20 PM EST up reply actions
He's asking about the break even numbers presented above.
Those are a rough guess based average success and neutral context. By specifying a player, you are adding context.
So the answer is still “yes”.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
azru did a better job of saying what I was getting at below
But this is also interesting. Basically, this would lead to a player-specific break-even percentage?
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
not necessarily player specific
but context specific. and I’m sure there is a correlation with player identity.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:57 PM EST up reply actions
The much bigger thing to me is the count
Stealing on 0-2 1-2 with 2 outs and getting caught is obviously like 1/10th as bad as stealing 3-1 no out. I wish I had the motivation to figure out the breakeven rates then.
Not afraid to nitpick
wOBA usually isn't
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
Crisp is aging and Jay is develping
My statement is a prediction, not a fact. I find predictions on younger players to be very unreliable. See Colby last year.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 10:17 AM EST reply actions
Fair enough, but I don't know many who expect Jay to break out next year
Given his high BABIP and whatnot.
Manchester City: 44 points, 14-1-2, 1st in EPL, +38 GD
Sergio Aguero: 11 G, 4 A
Edin Dzeko: 10 G, 3 A
by cardinalswsbound on Dec 22, 2011 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
It's kind of cute, though
They think they’re being all dark and hardcore but they don’t realize how hilarious it is that they can’t spell “Baphomet” or “grimoire”.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
A couple of days ago, someone asked for Shannon's call of Freese's HR in Game 6 tp be synced to the video
There is actually a part in the World Series Film (the bonus section) where it has a bunch of different calls of the HR. I was having a bunch of problems (YouTube was instantly blocking it for obvious reasons) but I’ve uploaded it to a Google+ album, which you all can view here. This was ripped from my Blu-Ray copy of the World Series Film, which I then converted to 720p for a smaller file size. I recommend you use a program to download the video, in case Google decides to delete this.
by CarpIsMyManCrush on Dec 22, 2011 10:29 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
I smacked Rickey right in the face when he told me this idea.
Thanks CIMMC
Love Shannon, Brit, of course see you tomorrow nite, and the spanish call … did he say Federalies?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 10:47 AM EST up reply actions
We don't need not stinking ¿Cardinales? badges?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
/no
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
still brings a smile to my face.
"Carpe diem! Rejoice while you are alive; enjoy the day; live life to the fullest; make the most of what you have. It is later than you think." ~ Horace
EL SEPTIMO JUEGO DE LA SERIE MUDIAL
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I like the call on Freese's triple better
by Evilfrog on Dec 22, 2011 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I watched Cape Fear tonight, and now I'm watching The Simpsons Cape Feare so I can laugh about it
http://www.megavideo.com/?v=KUQC5KV8
Bart at 17:05 is so funny.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
i'm on a weird sleep schedule
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:47 AM EST up reply actions
Which Cape Fear?
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Scorsese
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Did you know Spielberg was originally tapped to direct the remake?
It would have been interesting. I like both Cape Fears but I think the Mitchum/Peck pairing is pretty terrific.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Yeah, I just read that
It would have been cool to see Scorsese make Schindler’s List also. I haven’t see the original yet. My favorite thing about this version is the impressionistic aspects, especially while they are boating into the water in the last 30 minutes. Really ties the whole movie together.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
And Ted Williams in Yankees stadium?!
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
BART DO YOU WANT A BROWNIE BEFORE YOU GO TO BED!!!!
I smacked Rickey right in the face when he told me this idea.
BART YOU WANNA SEE MY NEW CHAINSAW AND HOCKEY MASK
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
I cant believe the Simpsons is still on
It is horrendous
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
To: Those who complain that VEB is too beholden to prospects
Memo: Most of those same VEB members who are “beholden to prospects” are now advocating for Carlos Beltran. "Why," you ask. Because it was never about prospects and always about value. The fact that prospects have an easier time of generating value (as they are essentially free or slave labor), is simply a by-product of that understanding.
Carlos Beltran is a great player. If healthy, there’s a good chance he’s better or equal to Craig. Even assuming that he’s a worse centerfielder than Jay, the offensive projections require that gap to be about 20 runs (!) over a full year to compensate for the better bat.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
So nice, we get it twice!
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
same thing just happened to me upthread
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
We are also in the 90 win range
He would provide a lot value in adding a few wins.
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
Slave labor?
I don’t remember any slaves getting $400,000 a year.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
See: Latrell Sprewell
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
dude has a family to feed.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
was my favorite basketball player
solely for the fact that he played at Three Rivers and I got to watch him play there as a kid. Blindly faithful through the Carlisemo choking and everything. Now he’s just another sad cautionary tale. Last I heard about him was his yacht getting repo’d.
Also, I went on to attend Three Rivers at the same time as his nephew Ceso. Which just so happened to coincide with the only time that Latrell ever reached out to Three Rivers.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
by scoot on Dec 22, 2011 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd for TRCC reference
Sunday Adebayo < Latrell Sprewell.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
I got Adebayo's autograph
it was so fun watching them lob post entry passes in to him and him skying way above everyone else to catch the pass. He was like a man amongst boys.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
Also
Shon Peck-Love < Sunday Adebayo
Anthony Beane > all
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
OMG ANTHONY BEANE
he was my favorite, by far. How do you know all these guys? It was such a strange experience going from being a fan and then going to school and interacting with the then current players on an everyday basis. I couldn’t imagine being a big fan of a big program and then being a part of it.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
I don't remember any slaves at all, but then I'm younger than any one-third of you
they aren’t slaves, but they are unable to reap their full economic value because of contracts they had no part in agreeing to.
now college athletes are kind of just slaves.
How are athletes any less slaves than normals students?
Athletes get scholarships at least.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
But they do the same amount of work
It’s just that people value the sports more. And that’s only because of the institutions put in place by the colleges. No one would pay to see a bunch of college level athletes play pickup games.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
so in the absence of the ncaa cartel
you don’t think a league would form willing to pay nearly-pro-level players money to play football? or that football teams (and especially basketball teams) wouldn’t hire those players on developmental contracts?
No, not to any significant extent
For one, it would be very hard to get such a league off the ground. If one did get started it wouldn’t be nearly as large or as profitable as the current college system.
Secondly I think a big reason guys pay to see college sports, and minor league games, is their affiliation with something greater. Much fewer people would care about college sports if they didn’t associate them with the college, same with minor league teams and their parents.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
while i disagree with your general point, specifically in regards to basketball
VEP has a very good point, which is that the overall talent pool is diluted/extended quite a bit by the college system. if this wasn’t true:
Secondly I think a big reason guys pay to see college sports, and minor league games, is their affiliation with something greater. Much fewer people would care about college sports if they didn’t associate them with the college, same with minor league teams and their parents.
and we had a developmental/minor league for either sport like DanUp mentions, there would be a lot of dead weight talent/walk ons/etc trimmed, meaning there’d be a lot less teams, meaning there would be a lot less money. i think this is dramatically more true in football- college basketball is pretty lean already.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
This is a false argument.
The NCAA system has been in place for decades. And the NCAA sets the rules. There is no other place to go. To play basketball after college, one has to go to Europe or the NCAA (thanks to the NBA’s CBA). To play football after high school, one has to go to the NCAA to physically develop because no NFL team would sign you. The professional leagues and NCAA have worked in concert to funnel players through the NCAA ranks. This is a relationship that benefits both the leagues and the NCAA.
The only league where this is not true is MLB. Thanks to Branch Rickey and the St. Louis Cardinals, the minor leagues were developed as a way to develop talent and compete with the likes of the Dodgers and the Yankees. This system developed before the NCAA grew. I think it’s highly likely such a minor league system would exist for the NBA and NFL if the NCAA didn’t exist. Sure, it wouldn’t be as large or as successful as the current NCAA system, but it would exist and be successful.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Ok, I agree that something would be put in its place
probably by the NFL and NBA clubs. However that would pale in size to the collegiate system. Most college players aren’t good enough to even be considered pro-ready.
And whats the quality of life for a minor league player? 90% of them never make the big leagues, and they get paid 10% a year and have nothing to show for it. College players get an education and a degree.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
In baseball, there's a choice.
A player can sign with a MLB club or he can go to college and play baseball. With basketball, a player is not eligible for the NBA draft out of high school under the NBA’s CBA (which the player had no say in). He can either go to college or Europe. With football, no player would ever be drafted out of high school due to the physical development needed to be an NFL player. So he has to go to college before going to the NFL. These players are forced to go to college by a system they had no voice in the development of. While in college, folks make millions off of these players and they don’t get a dime.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Yeah and the baseball players who go to an MLB club
Spend 4 years in the minors making 10k a year and have a small chance at even being called up. That’s what would happen if the NFL or the NBA set up a minor league system and athletes weren’t forced to go to college.
Wouldn’t you much rather go to college, have your food and board and education paid for, get to sleep with a bunch of 18-21 year olds? How is that not preferable to the life of a minor leaguer?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
what?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:00 PM EST up reply actions
it would be one thing if they were allowed the choice to go to college and have age-appropriate sex
or go to the minor leagues and work at their trade for profit, but that choice doesn’t exist. that’s the problem.
I loved college, and I did in fact enjoy it more than I currently enjoy making $10,000 to work at my trade for profit. the problem is that colleges aren’t allowing them to make that choice—the existence of this cartel is preventing it.
Where is this money going to come from?
Vast majority of athletic programs lose money. Do just football players get money or basketball players?
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:07 PM EST up reply actions
Where does this information come from?
A “vast majority” of athletic departments lose money? Please add some facts to this instead of making a blanket statement.
I’ve seen financials on lots of BCS athletic departments, and they’re a far cry from losing money.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Here is a good source from the NCAA
A recent NCAA report stated that only 14 of the 120 athletic programs in the Football Bowl Subdivision made money. The Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) includes all BCS conferences (PAC 10, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, etc)
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
this is creative financials.
first, if you broke it down by sport, i’m sure you’d find that every single football program, or at least damn close to it, in the FBS makes money.
secondly, i am just about 100% certain that this in no way accounts for donations from alumni donating because of a sports program. maybe it accounts for the donations earmarked for athletic purposes only. finally, this again in no way accounts for the free advertising/etc universities get from their athletic teams.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
About half of the programs
Make money off football and men’s basketball. No other sports for any program makes a profit.
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
...
about half of the programs make money off football and men’s basketball.
is this in aggregate? i have not read the report you are linking. if so, that does not surprise me, because a lot of men’s basketball programs lose money.
No other sports for any program makes a profit.
this is completely unsurprising, and i would never have argued it.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
And I call BULLSHIT
Go read the article in The Atlantic about college sports. That’ll open up your eyes a bit.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I'm not sure how accurate this is, but it may help.
NCAA Financial Reports Database
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
Texas Longhorns
Of the $89.6M it “took in” (and I use that term loosely, because I see $0 accounting for their share of Big XII media revenue, the revenue from their ESPN backed “Longhorn Network” or any NCAA media revenue, etc), exactly $5.75M was spent on “student aid”, i.e. scholarships. Yet $30M was spent on “Coaches and other Support Staff”. I’m guessing that there are as many athletes as there are coaches and other support staff, yet those people make SIX TIMES the compensation.
For reference, the St. Louis Cardinals had around $200M in revenue in 2011 and spent around $120M in player salaries.
What’s the difference between the two? The NCAA Cartel.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Anyone who can state that
this system is fairly compensating athletes has their head stuck firmly in their ass and refuses to remove it.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
depends upon your definition of "fairly compensating"
I guess.
I suspect that any non-college sports league that is “developmental” in nature would make far less revenue than the college equivalent. Junior hockey, American Legion baseball, and semi-pro football all exist, and none of them bring in the revenue that college football and college basketball do. There’s just not enough demand, IMHO, for “developmental” sports leagues for the athletes to get much more than the value that they are getting in the form of college scholarships. If there was, successful develpomental leagues would be springing up all over, and they’re not. A natural monopoly (as I would suggest the NCAA is) is not the same thing as the ‘trusts’ of the late 1800s.
Another way to put it, if the NFL would get rid of its age requirement for draftees, it wouldn’t really change the landscape of college football appreciably.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
But
In the absence of all college amateur sports, would there be enough demand to support full time minor league or club systems in those sports?
I think the answer is certainly yes.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Support?
Yes. Support at the same level of revenue as college sports are supported? That’s a dicier proposition, IMHO. There is a value in college affiliation that is pretty high. . . or else other the NBADL and, for that matter to a lesser extent the various junior college football leagues, would be pulling in more revenue than they are.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
Caveat
If this was 1910, I might answer your question in a different way.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
That's kind of dumb
The huge majority of athletes would choose college anyway.
There’s a lot in life that we don’t control. I don’t know why you’re picking on this when it clearly benefits the athletes.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:22 PM EST up reply actions
This seems to be a very specious claim:
The huge majority of athletes would choose college anyway.
I’m very skeptical of this and I think there is little evidence to back it up.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
VEP is simply considering NCAA scholarship athletes as a whole
instead of the Division I men’s basketball and football players. i don’t think it’s a specious claim to make in regards to NCAA scholarship athletes as a whole.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
in fact, that's his whole argument (i think)
and it’s sort of reasonable, if you like socialism and related concepts (let’s not get into politics, but yeah). while it pays for/does a lot of other things as well, men’s college football and basketball funds an enormous amount of scholarships for athletes who do not even have an option to go pro, let alone the ability. as a whole, i might argue that the entire population of student-athletes benefits from these sports (ignoring, of course, things like grade tweaking, decreased focus on academics and increased focus on athletics, lower professor salaries/higher athletic coach salaries, which of course make a HUGE difference).
however, i’m not sure why these athletes are FORCED INTO THIS SYSTEM, and therefore taken advantage of to support other students.
i would really like to see a hybrid system with both a pay semi-pro league (i.e. the minors), and college athletics, similar to baseball, for football. not sure it would work so well for basketball.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
This is my problem with it.
The basketball and football players have no choice but to go to college and provide a product that funds athletic departments.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
The NBA actually has a minor league system now.
Called “The NBA D-League” (for ‘Development’), started around 2000. Also, I think for the last 5 years, they have actually been having public tryouts for the D-league.
WWCD? CDGAF.
yep
the D-League is great, and has a minimum age of only 18, instead of the NBA’s 19. should have mentioned this. i still don’t think it works all that well for basketball, but it’s great people have a choice. still, you see most people who are determined not to go to college before the NBA go overseas, because the level of competition in the D-League isn’t high enough.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, just throwing it out there that it *is* a choice.
But the D-league, being new, hasn’t caught on in popularity, or as you mentioned, skill level yet. There have been some good careers to come from it, but right now I think NBA potentials know they will get more exposure via NCAA.
WWCD? CDGAF.
yep
it’s hard because it’s less segmented. one of the beautiful things about MiLB (and, in some ways, college athletics) is the segmented levels of competition. less relevant in college, as everyone’s around the same age anyway, but it’s cool that there is a place for the career minor leaguers (AAA), the hot prospects (AA), etc.
the D-League is hard because you have 35 year old former NBA players (Antoine Walker) playing against 18 year old kids- it’s not as organic of a prospect building experience, i don’t think, as a developed minor league system.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
A guy I work is currently trying out the STL one
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
There is not currently
A StL NBA D-League team.
I am a college student that sleeps with a St. Louis Cardinals Fredbird Pillow Pet, and I am proud of it.
Well I just assumed it was the D-League
Than it is some other semi-pro league
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
I think there should just be an open market for college athletes
The majority would get paid scholarships or less and the top guys who are close to NFL ready would drive up the bidding.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
all the minor leaguers i knew (which is very few)
all got to sleep with a bunch of 18-21 year olds, as minor leaguers.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
it's probably easier in college
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:20 PM EST up reply actions
have you ever been to a minor league game,
or to the after game parties that many of the local watering holes have after said games?
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
yes
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
Should the athletes get a share of the bars revenue?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
From my experience, they have no problem
getting shares of the college girls.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
That is how the bars provide shares in revenue
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
Do they?
College players get an education and a degree.
The dropout rate for college athletes (as in, athletes who exhaust their eligibility and don’t receive a degree) is actually about the same as it is for the general college population, around 40%. That’s ALL college athletes — I would guess the dropout rate for men’s basketball and football is at least 50% higher than the normal rate. Nolan Richardson ran a successful college basketball program at Arkansas in the 90’s without graduating A SINGLE PLAYER for nearly a decade. Those kids wouldn’t be in college if they weren’t playing basketball, partially because they couldnt’ afford it, but partially because they wouldn’t be admitted academically were they not providing some other value to the university.
Your argument is the one used by every defender of the NCAA cartel that I’ve had this discussion with. The bottom line is that universities really don’t give a shit whether kids graduate and the NCAA only cares now because people like Nolan Richardson, Kelvin Sampson, and Jerry Tarkanian have embarrassed them into sanctioning programs that don’t graduate students.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
50% is still better than nothing though
I’m not defending the college system, I’m just saying it’s better for the athletes.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:48 AM EST up reply actions
40%...
“50% higher than the normal rate”, which is “40%”, so 60% drop out rate – 40% graduation rate.
"Progress always involves risk; you can't steal second base and keep your foot on first base." - Frederick Wilcox
by cardzfanbub on Dec 22, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
It's not like the athletes couldn't go back to college
which is what you seem to be suggesting. Shouldn’t they have a choice? Shouldn’t they have a choice to see if they can make it as an athlete and then have the choice to go back to college if they don’t make it?
I’m more about giving the athlete the liberty to make their own decisions about their lives and not forcing them to do something they have no interest in (college) to further the ability to advance their actual interest (playing football) while only receiving compensation in the form of the thing they aren’t interested in.
I do not have the right to dictate what is “good for” anyone else. Hell, maybe Joe Blow the offensive lineman would have been happy digging ditches and pouring concrete for a living, how do I know? But that seems to be the argument for people who defend the NCAA: “Getting a college education is good for you. Therefore, even if you could be earning thousands of dollars in salary and endorsements were the college cartel to cease to exist, it’s your fault that you don’t value your education”.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
So few athletes are good enough to even have the option to make it as an athlete
And the ones that do can enter the draft after their first year of college.
So yeah, I agree that forcing athletes to go to college is wrong. But only the top 100 players in each sport would benefit more from going straight to the NBA or NFL from HS.
The rest of them are much better served going to college.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
Again
The rest of them are much better served going to college.
This is a blanket assumption on your part. Which also happens to be completely and utterly false.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
i think, in a perfect world,
where all student athletes graduated with meaningful degrees and managed to substantially better their persons while in college, i would agree with VEP. however, i’m fairly certain that theoretical does not actually exist in the real world.
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
Let me rephrase that
The rest of the athletes that get full scholarships to college, are better off going to college where they can sleep and eat for free for the next 4 years.
not even arguing about the degree.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions
And this is still a blanket assumption that has virtually no basis in fact
Just because that’s the way you would like it to be in Utopia, doesn’t mean that that’s the way it is.
You’re rationalizing. You’re continuing to rationalize throughout the whole thread, despite all kinds of evidence that supports the arguments of the rest of us.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Wait, what are you are talking about
what is incorrect about this statement:
The rest of the athletes that get full scholarships to college, are better off going to college where they can sleep and eat for free for the next 4 years.
I’m not making any utopian assertions.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
Sleep and eat for free?
Utopian assumption.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
not when your ROOM AND BOARD is paid for
that’s the defition of eating and sleeping for free.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
NHL also has developmental leagues
Granted, not on the same scale as MLB, but hockey teams, like baseball teams, draft teenagers. Those teenagers then usually continue to play junior hockey before turning pro, where they’ll usually land in their parent club’s American Hockey League team for development and adjustment. The AHL is essentially the AAA for hockey, with the ECHL being the AA. Teams are limited to 50 players, including signed prospects, a year, so there’s really no other level than that. Players also can go to Europe to play, but teams have no control over what happens there, even though they retain the rights to the players.
Several prospects chose to go to college (during which their drafting NHL team retains their rights but can’t sign them, obviously), while other prospects are drafted out of college. However, those are very few and far between compared to other draftees, and the fact that most of the top talent goes elsewhere is seen one of the things that is hurting NCAA hockey programs (in addition to the cost). The NCAA actually did away with Division II hockey in the late 1990s, while one of the Division I conferences folded a couple of seasons ago.
Hockey's a racket.
If a guy wants to get into most of the development leagues (at least in the 18 – 21 yo range) they have to pay the teams. A kid on my boy’s HS team went to all sorts of tryouts last year, and was picked up by a team in Colorado this year. For that privilege, his parents are paying $14,000.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Not that's Tennis
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Actually..
Some people do stay with college sports because of a personal affiliation to a particular school, but most sports fans I know watch college sports because they get to watch sports without all the advertisements, endorsements, contract talks, et cetera. Everyone I know who watches college sports does so because it’s sports without as much of a distraction due to player egos.
WWCD? CDGAF.
They like their athletes to receive none of the millions of dollars their work generates.
I get it.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Do not confuse revenue with profit
Most schools spend more on sports than they take in.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
outside of basketball and football
most college sports are a financial negative to the institutions.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
They have a non-financial value to the school and students.
A lot of successful people learn life lessons playing in college that help them throughout their life. The name recognition of sports team helps universities enhance their image.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:48 AM EST up reply actions
I disagree with just about everything you said here.
They can learn good and bad life lessons, and neither one of these are A) what should be the university’s mission or B) couldn’t be learned in other, better channels.
Also, who cares if it helps the University enhance its image? It’s most likely a false enhancement drawing students there who might have otherwise chosen a better option.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
I'm sure that we learned a lot of successful lessons from fighting World War II
But that doesn’t mean that it was a good reason to do it or that the overall war itself was actually a productive and efficient means of learning those things.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Same here
I agree with you that NFL and NBA should just establish minor leagues. But the college system is definitely better for the majority of students.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:49 AM EST up reply actions
Why?
Why is it better to receive no pay and a promise of a free education (that you may or may not be able to take advantage of) that it is to be able to sell your talents on the open market? Other than the narrative of “Everyone should have the opportunity to go to college” I don’t see one good reason why this system is better.
College isn’t for everyone. And if everyone has a college degree, then college degrees become meaningless.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
What open market is there?
That’s what I’m saying. If there were no college sports how else would athletes market their skills?
They could either set up an independent league, which would A) be very to get off the ground, B) be not nearly as large as the college system (fewer players), and C) be not as profitable.
Or the NFL would set up a minor league system and out of the few who were signed by the teams even fewer would make it to the pros (like in baseball).
The college system is definitely the most beneificial for the majority of athletes (excluding the top .0005% who are forced to play one year of college before they can get drafted).
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
This is totally your opinion
The college system is definitely the most beneificial for the majority of athletes (excluding the top .0005% who are forced to play one year of college before they can get drafted).
There’s literally no basis in fact for this statement. There’s no analysis you could provide based on actual figures that would support this opinion. Plain and simple.
I’ve provided a number of minor league sports that produce adequate revenues and salaries for players. And if college football didn’t exist, what, people AREN’T going to be looking for some football to watch on Saturday? People only watch college football because the athletes are “amateurs”? That seems to be your argument, and it’s a bad one.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Ok well those guys aren't forced to go to college
They can get a job out of high school if they want.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:25 PM EST up reply actions
no, but they cannot play their sport at a reasonable level of competition in the United States out of high school unless they go to college
and in football, they cannot play their sport at a reasonable level of competition in the United States for THREE YEARS after they graduate high school unless they go to college.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
because there is no market for their sport
the only market is one that’s created by a league, either college or independent or pro.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
that's the point
and because there is not, they are forced into a monopoly, which, i’m sure you know, does not manage things properly.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
the monopoly is better for them than nothing
which is what essentially would exist if college sports were not around.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
there is no market
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:48 PM EST up reply actions
what the actual fuck are you talking about?
i don’t think i’ve ever really understood why people hate arguing with you so much, but i’m starting to get it now.
you just love to ignore convenient facts for the sake of making your argument, and it makes you look like a real tool.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
it didn't used to be this way,
or at least i don’t remember it being this bad in 2009.
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
whatever
i’m not wrong that the actual market for athletes is much smaller than the artifical one created by college sports.
What the actual fuck are you are talking about?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
if the actual market was smaller, then a created artificial market would be bleeding money.
if you are arguing that it is the tradition, school affiliation, etcetera that creates the “artificial market” college of athletic programs, then i can make the exact same argument about every fucking professional sports team. you’re just making shit up now.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
I think he's right to the extent that
any league replacing college sports would start out with less fan interest/revenue than college sports has now. That’s because, like pro sports, college sports has spend decades cultivating interest, etc.
Over time, however, I don’t see why the market for an alternate football/basketball league would be all that much smaller, if it could figure out how to market itself.
this is completely true
but arguing that a minor league isn’t viable because it will be smaller because it will START OUT WITH less interest is a completely moronic argument.
that’s like arguing that a business isn’t viable because it starts out with low sales.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
First off, minor leagues are created by clubs
That’s the only reason why they are there, not so they can make money. Minor leagues would never, ever grow to the size of college, not even close.
It’s possible that an independent league could emerge, but how fucking hard would it be for that to grow to the size of college? it’s not realistic.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
That's just not true.
Many (most) minor league teams are independently owned and struggle to make a profit.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Minor league franchises
are typically owned by entities other than the clubs and these entities understandably approach the minor league franchise as a moneymaking endeavor.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I remember a time when college football was
far more popular that NFL football. And that time was around 35 years ago.
Anyone want to make that argument now?
Yeah, didn’t think so.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Will it always be that Way?
Or does it have a chance to swing back?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
I'm saying that if college sports didn't exist, whatever replaced it would be much fucking smaller.
How the fuck can you disagree with that?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
i'm going to leave this argument before i get myself banned.
i have laid out my argument entirely reasonably, and i think you have chosen a viewpoint and will stick to it in the face of all evidence.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
And I feel the same way towards you
have a good day.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
again, your argument is...
if the college sports system didn’t exist, something of a similar size would replace it?
just to be clear..
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
no that isn't your argument
your argument the whole time was that you agreed with me that college sports are larger than what would replace it.
did you switch with fourstick halfway through the thread or did you think I literally meant “no market”?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
get a room
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
“College isn’t for everyone. And if everyone has a college degree, then college degrees become meaningless.”
The hell? So what you’re saying is, college degrees are meaningless anyways because their only value is in their scarcity.
by purple_haze on Dec 22, 2011 12:29 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think it's about the relative skill sets.
If everyone is at the same skill/knowledge baseline, then folks will have to do something else to set them apart from the crowd, so to speak. Like, getting a masters degree.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Actually, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying:
So what you’re saying is, college degrees are meaningless anyways because their only value is in their scarcity.
That’s what VEP is saying: “A college degree helps you get a better job”. Sure it does, because not everyone has a college degree. But if 60% of the population has a college degree and only 65% of the population is actually in the workforce at any given time, then how, exactly, does it help you get a better job?
I would venture to say that 75% of what you learn in four years of college is forgotten within 5 years of graduating. What you learn in college is how to digest difficult material and create new skills from the tools that you have.
What do Ivy League schools have over other institutions? Scarcity. Ivy League schools, with their massive endowments, could easily double their rate of acceptance in any given year. But they don’t. Why? Scarcity. If 1 in 5 people have a degree from Yale, then a degree from Yale doesn’t carry the prestige it has when only 1 out of every 10,000,000 people have one.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Ok, well in the current distribution
Guys with degrees make more money than guys without.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:21 PM EST up reply actions
So now it's "Guys with degrees"
Instead of “Guys who go to college”?
Conveniently changed your argument.
Also, in the current “distribution”, the average and median earnings go up, but that doesn’t mean that every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a college degree is out-earning those without a college degree. So, it’s not like there’s an implicit guarantee of a better life just because you have some piece of paper that says you should, on average, be better off.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Oh comn
There are no guarantees in life
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
my future earnings argument was always about degrees
i’m not saying there is an implicit garauntee, but the evidence shows that having a degree increases earnings… on average. not sure how you disagree with that.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
Earnings /= Quality of Life
For one thing.
For two, I think we’ve proven over and over again in this thread that the people who earn degrees via the college athletic scholarship system are not a wholly separate group from the people who would earn degrees without the college scholarship system.
I’m not sure how you can refute that argument at all. You seem to be saying that not having college sports would fuck over millions of kids from having an opportunity to earn a college degree. And I’m telling you that this idea is preposterous.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I'm saying not having college sports
Would decrease the amount of kids who can attend college on scholarships, and that decrease would not nearly be reconciled on the free market for athletics.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
And I challenge you to prove this assertion.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I challenge you to prove the converse.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
For posterity
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2011/12/20/2647972/cincinnati-reds-mat-latos#86229007
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
no one wears those for sports anymore
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:47 PM EST up reply actions
I would.
but then again, I never was one of the cool kids.
Johnny Gomes could not be reached for comment
"There is not a better feeling in the whole world than knowing that you are the best team in both leagues."- Bob Forsch on winning the 1982 World Series.
by MaytheForschbewithyou on Dec 22, 2011 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
I'd like to see you prove this
Because there’s absolutely no way that’s remotely true.
While a lot of college sports lose money, the amount of money made by football programs dwarfs the amounts lost by other sports. Not to mention that most of the BCS conference universities actually run their athletic departments with an entirely separate budget from the university. in a way, the revenue generating college sports like football and men’s basketball are already run as a separate business — they just use the NCAA rules and regs to avoid paying those players anything for their contribution.
Explain, if universities lose so much money on athletics, why football and men’s basketball coaches make millions of dollars per year?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Yes, because everyone who wants to enjoy sports sans-drama is obviously trying to hold people down.
Let’s read a bit more into things that aren’t there.
WWCD? CDGAF.
This is what I read:
most sports fans I know watch college sports because they get to watch sports without all the advertisements, endorsements, contract talks, et cetera.
Advertisements are very prevalent in NCAA sports, so I ignored that statement. “Endorsements” are forbidden for college athletes by NCAA rules. There are no “contract talks” because players are not allowed to be paid for the product they provide on the field of play. I didn’t read anything into “et cetera” because that’s very vague. How on earth could you not interpret that statement to mean:
They like their athletes to receive none of the millions of dollars their work generates.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Mind listing all the electronics you own?
Because, by that logic, I could happily show you to what extents you “like” to support slave labor and worker suicide. Not many people these days do not own something fabricated @ Foxconn. Just because maybe you own an iPhone maybe, or an Xbox, or something else — that does not mean I think you were laughing as you purchased it because you “like” that someone jumped off the roof of a factory because of how much overtime they were forced to work to make said product.
Someone wanting to enjoy watching sports without some of the distractions pro leagues bring does not mean they implicitly support unfair labor practices. I agree there there are tons of issues with the college system; I very much hate the way the college system works in the U.S. (not just relating to sports, but also tuition costs in comparison to average household income, etc). Implying that everyone who enjoys the lower amount of drama in college sports does so because “They like their athletes to receive none of the millions of dollars their work generates” is ignorant.
WWCD? CDGAF.
This is a false comparison.
As a matter of fact, I explicitly make as many purchases as I possibly can of products made in America for this very reason. I have emails sent to myself of union-made goods so I know what to look for in the future. My car, a Chevy Impala, has the highest percentage of made in America parts available on the market (~98%). So, yes, I do believe in spending money in line with my values whenever I can. But that’s beside the point.
I suspect very few folks (myself included) buy an electronic appliance because they want to buy an electronic device without having to deal with all of the whiny workers who want things like safe work conditions and a decent wage.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Not really a false comparison.
You’re implying that someone is making a decision based off “liking” the negative impact it has on others. That’s where the comparison is. To me, both insinuations are asinine.
That said, I salute you for putting effort into understanding and researching where the goods you’re buying are coming from (including parts). Not many people bother with it.
WWCD? CDGAF.
YEAH BGH WHY DON'T YOU CARE MORE ABOUT LABOR
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
IHB's territory.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
...and his
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
dammit. Forgot that.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Denver has made you weak
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
I'm not in Denver?
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Shut up
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
Yeah!
And that honeymoon to Jamaica!
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
Wait
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
I just checked to make sure you weren't a
RiverRat puppet account.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
You and Rui are both
recently married, troublemakers, assholes, frequent commenters and had honeymoons in Jamaica.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I hope you get caught in the rain,
and rust to a full stop.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
by RiverRat on Dec 22, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
he has no heart dammit!
Think about that while you rust tin man
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 2:42 PM EST up reply actions
I'm rec'ing that even if I get in trouble.
Johnny Gomes could not be reached for comment
"There is not a better feeling in the whole world than knowing that you are the best team in both leagues."- Bob Forsch on winning the 1982 World Series.
by MaytheForschbewithyou on Dec 22, 2011 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Take it from me that was a bad move, don't do it if you haven't already done so
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
You'll all be getting warnings soon.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
I was told the next Tin Man or rust related jok would "relegate" me and my IP has been recorded in the manual of records
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 6:30 PM EST up reply actions
What have I said!
I meant hall
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
What would attendance be at a minor league football game?
It’s hard to get 10,000 to a AAA game. And football stadiums are more expensive.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
The XFL had pretty good attendance
Arena Football has REALLY good attendance and is actually a multi-million dollar business.
The NAFL averages around 15000 people per game.
Now, imagine that those leagues were the A, AA, AAA of the NFL, and they play on Saturdays, and there’s no college football. The television contracts and attendance figures would be off the charts.
Go look at how sports is organized in other parts of the world: The US is the only one with major collegiate sports teams. The rest are run as semi-pro or fully professional leagues that make money and pay players. That system works, you can’t deny it.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Fine, their system works for them....
But I love rooting for the old alma mater.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
So it's just an emotional thing then?
The NCAA and the Universities take advantage of a monopoly and use the athletes as milk cows. No, this is not ALL of the athletics. Stevens Point track is a different beast than OSU football, but the thing is that ALL of the athletics could be done just as well, if not better, in a club setting, and the big money sports would certainly be much more fair were they done extrinsic to academics. The current system is warped, and it only makes sense in the “well, that’s how it has always been” sense.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
You are assuming that club sports. . .
would not also exploit young athletes in the same, or worse manners. Junior hockey in Canada would like to have a word with you.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe they would, but it would be easier for alternatives to exist in this case.
Also, it would allow young athletes more power to choose their educational activities and timing.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
Do you disagree that the vast majority of college athletes
benefit from the system?
What’s the alternative? If college sports don’t exist, 2% of that gets reformed in either minor leagues or an independent league and the quality of life for 90% of those guys is shitty. And the rest of the 98% who aren’t good enough to play in the minors or in another league get nothing and have to go into debt to go college or simply not go and work in a KMart for the rest of their lives.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
"benefit" is a totally vague word.
Sure, they benefit. North Koreans draw some benefit from their political system. That doesn’t mean it’s the best, or even a good system.
Also, you’re setting up all sorts of false dichotomies here.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
I don't think I am
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
I think this is very much a false dichotomy.
to go college or simply not go and work in a KMart for the rest of their lives.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
how many people get good jobs without a college degree?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
I bet a lot loss than those with a college degree
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
i would imagine in sheer numbers that more people without a college degree get jobs that put them in the middle class than people with college degrees
perhaps this is wrong, but solely due to the number of people in this country without a college degree, i think it is probably relatively close.
now, to get into the upper class, you usually need to be educated, sure.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
I think we should be talking about percentages here
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
why?
offhand- please tell me what percentage of people in the United States you think have a bachelor’s degree or higher.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
Yes, let's do
Because you’ll still be wrong.
And then maybe you’ll start to get what the rest of us are saying.
But I doubt it, because you’re firmly entrenched in your narrative now.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
by fourstick on Dec 22, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
raises hand.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Oh, I think there are many.
I also know a lot of people with college degrees, a lot of debt, and a crappy job.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
the kids who get scholarships don't have a lot of debt
I think, clearly, all things being equal, having a college degree is better.
unless you’re arguing that a trade school or 4 years spent in the workforce is more valuable than a college degree – which I can see.
Even then, college gives you 4 free years of your life. And thats priceless.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions
I think we're discussing a couple of different things here.
Yes, a full scholarships is a very valuable thing if the kid is actually willing and able to get an education at the school. The little slip of paper by itself, though, especially in some phony degree, isn’t worth all that much, though, and certainly less than a skilled trade would be.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
fair enough
the numbers show that a degree increases earning power. so if a guy wants to get motivated he extract a ton of value out of a degree.
trade schools cost money. so does working and living by yourself.
besides this whole argument is unrelated to the main one. athletes aren’t forced to go to college, they are forced to go to college if they want to play sports for a living… which .001 percent of them do.
a much larger percentage of them can get scholarships. so the college system as a whole is beneficial.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
A lot of them have illusions of going pro, even if they're JV in high school.
Gotta run. Later, alligator.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
Agreed
And I think a lot of those kids would have been better off going to a trade school that cost far less. Few people get fabulously wealthy doing anything, but a lot of people could earn a very good income working in a trade that don’t do so because they want that pot-shot at fabulously wealthy.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
there for I am not?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
the argument isn't about the vast majority of college athletes
most of whom, as cloying NCAA commercials frequently remind us, play sports for which there is no significant national market. You’re right; if colleges or teams bid for the services of elite squash players, those bids would not be particularly high.
The discussion is mostly about the relatively small number of athletes who could make a nice living playing their sport, and who produce most of the revenue generated by the NCAA, who are prevented from seeking market compensation for their valuable services. You seem to have this bizarrely paternalistic attitude towards these kids. Yes, college is pleasant/valuable for many people (most of us here included). That does not mean that extremely talented young athletes should be compelled to take free college as the compensation for their labor during one or more years of the brief period of their life when their athletic ability gives them tremendous earning potential.
Ok, well I'm talking about the vast majority of college athletes
I agree that there should be a free market for college sports, but I’m saying that would only affect that top .1%.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
I would venture a guess
that college football and men’s basketball athletes make up about 30% of all college scholarship athletes.
So, we’re talking about WAY more than 0.1% here.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
that college football and men’s basketball athletes make up about 30% of all college scholarship athletes.
there is no way that this is true.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
Numbers are being thrown about very haphazardly in this discussion.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
yeah
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
Are you sure?
The key is “scholarship” athletes, not just “athletes”. There are a ton of college sports that don’t have scholarship athletes or have only half their team filled with scholarship athletes.
Go look at the numbers here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_I_(NCAA)
College football has EIGHTY FIVE scholarships available at the D-I level every single year, along with 25 additional counters. Men’s basketball has a limit of 13. So, at any given time at D-I schools, up to 133 scholarships are available to athletes just in those two sports alone. Are you telling me that there are an average of more than 433 scholarship athletes at each D-I school? Because any less than that would mean that 30% of all scholarships come from those two revenue generating sports.
This is not a haphazard number thrown out. I’ve done my research on this subject thoroughly.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
123, actually, so the number's a little lower
but yeah, maybe you are right. that seems like an incredibly excessive number, but i always forget how many damn scholarships D1 football gives out. i would venture to guess that DII skews it a little, if you include it, but i am completely willing to admit that you probably know more about this than i do.
RJ Swindle for LOOGY
I have a man-crush on Peter Bourjos
College football
is what makes Title IX so unfair to male athletes. Thankfully, more exemptions are being granted on this basis lately.
You can combine most women’s sports at the college level and not come up with 110 roster spots, much less 110 scholarships for one sport.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
But most of those guys are fungible
They would get paid scholarships or less.
Only the top guys would really cause any bidding war.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
nitpick- squash is not an NCAA sport, and many people actually do go pro in squash.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
And tennis
and bowling
and many other sports that don’t have billion dollar broadcasting fees and giant stadiums with which to play college sports in.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
whatever then, i'm done with is argument
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
I think this notion
The current system is warped, and it only makes sense in the "well, that’s how it has always been" sense.
coupled with this old saw:
“College degrees are valuable! They’re getting a free education!!!”
Seems to make for a very pro-NCAA narrative. And we’re seeing it all over this thread.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I think you are missing the point
Colleges rake in tens of millions of dollars of income from college athletes (primarily football and basketball players) risking their future health and ability to play professionally. A normal student does not bring in any income. They are paying to go to school to reap the benefit of an education. What work is a normal student doing that generates any income? Thus the argument goes that athletes are “slaves” because they are essentially working for free for the university.
I don’t necessarily agree with the argument that college players should be paid, but I can see the argument.
I think the new idea to give them money is good,..
but with the cost today of a four year education, they are not working for free. How many minor league ballplayers are only making $30 K a year, the cost of a good university?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
not everybody wants to go to college, or should be forced to
or values it in any significant way. which is obvious given the graduation rate of a lot of these institutions.
It's a fact that going to college increases your odds of getting a better job
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
I'm sure a year of classes in sports management was just what the doctor ordered for john wall
you aren’t the least bit disgusted by the ncaa’s motives here? these schools are making millions of dollars and they refuse to pay the people doing the work a dime, in the name of the absurd idea of amateurism.
Ben Cherington got a degree in sports management
And John Wall is not a reasonable example. He makes up the .005% of colleges players who leave after their first year and get drafted.
The huge majority are not good enough to play pro. Therefore they benefit more for getting a free ride to college and if they are smart they are realistic about their chances of playing pro and take advantage of that free ride.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Why can't the NCAA both compensate the players AND give them the free education?
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
one problem with compensating players...
is deciding how to compensate the players. Does it depend on sport, skill level, conference affiliations, school, etc…?
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
Flat number by sport
So every football player at a BCS school gets the same amount.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
So BCS schools are allowed, or required (?) to pay their athletes more? What about divisions?
Division I, II, III. AQ, non-AQ? And there is such a huge difference in profitability of even BCS-AQ schools that it could be very problematic for a large amount of schools.
Also, removing a chunk of profits from football and basketball would cause financial hardship for about every other sports program.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
They can and they probably should
But it doesn’t make the athletes students slaves if they don’t.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
setting aside the question of their benefit
does it make sense to you that schools are able to reap profits far in excess of what it costs them to award the scholarships and create the infrastructure and then not pass any of that to the people generating that income?
Again, I think you confuse revenue with profit
Also, One of the main reasons for sports is to enhance donations to the school. So if they look like they are losing money on sports, maybe the side revenue makes up for it.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
This argument doesn't apply to all college sports
because for many, you’re right, the sport is a net money loser.
But for, say, top-tier college football programs, it absolutely applies. The colleges are making money hand over fist, and the athletes are generally of a caliber such that they could make real money playing if there weren’t a cartel in place capturing the viewership and revenue that flows to non-NFL football, and ensuring that players receive little to none of it.
And given much of the current research on concussions
These guys are quite likely risking their quality and longevity of life
It bothers me to some degree
However, I don’t think college sports would be nearly as profitable if they weren’t organized by the colleges – who have name recognition, state funding, and clearly organized system. Minor league football would be maybe 2% of the size of college football. So the colleges are playing a huge part in generating the money and they should be entitled to a lot of it.
I don’t know how much college players should get. I would just take away the payment ban and allow athletes to market themselves. Most of them would settle for scholarships or less, and the top few would get paid a lot.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
I don't want to get in a flame war about this
But it appears from this comment that you know very little about how college athletic departments are funded, organized, and run.
I think you’re commenting on something that you don’t know very much about and it would behoove you to get some information before giving you opinion. Go read this and see if you have the same opinion.
And this statement is just empirically false:
Minor league football would be maybe 2% of the size of college football.
For someone who prides himself on being statistically correct, I suggest you go look at how much money A, AA, and AAA baseball teams make, even though major colleges still have baseball. Then imagine that number for football organized in the same manner, only without college football existing at all. 2%? That’s just silly.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I'm not talking about money with regards to minor league baseball
I’m talking about size. There are what 240 minor league teams in total? 8,000 players? That’s probably less than 5% of the number of scholarships given out to students baseball players. Correct me if I am wrong.
The minor leagues wouldn’t grow if college sports were abolished. Teams only need so many prospects to cultivate.
The NFL and NBA would create minor league teams, and that would take in 5% of the athletes currently playing college ball.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:32 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree with this:
The minor leagues wouldn’t grow if college sports were abolished. Teams only need so many prospects to cultivate.
I think there would be some expansion in the low minors. Right now, college baseball is like a low minors league, helping to weed out players. I think there would be some growth. There would be full-season rookie ball and teams would probably expand to have another rookie ball league.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Ok yeah, that makes ense
But I think teams would only add another 3-4 teams. It would still pale in comparison to college sports.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
So, how many college baseball players have full scholarships?
I think the numbers would shock you. Due to Title IX, many college baseball programs only have enough scholarships for about 40% of their roster. The rest are non-scholarship players.
So, how about you pay for school AND we don’t pay you AND we make a fuck ton of money off of your likeness and ability?
I can’t believe you continue to make this argument.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Yeah.
There are very few full scholarships given for baseball anywhere and likely fewer college baseball programs than you think.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
NCAA limit on full baseball scholarships
is 11.7 per year. With 27 counters that have to be worth at least 25% of a full scholarship but cannot be more than 75% of a full scholarship.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
This is a total fallacy
It doesn’t “increase your odds of getting a better job” if you’re not really capable of doing the work to begin with.
This is high school guidance counselor talk.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
What are you talking about?
Getting a degree in college definitely increases your job potential. Unless literally the only thing are competent at is football. And that’s not very realistic.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
He's saying it only increases your odds of getting a better job if you're capable of
and willing to do the work. I agree with this. A lot of my high school seniors would have been better served to go spend a couple of years working entry-level or going to a trade school.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
What do you think is better
assuming that athletes take no advantage of the education.
Going to college for 4 years, playing basketball and having room and board paid for. Or going into the workforce at age 18.
Because that’s the choice for the huge majority of athletes. There is no free market for athletes, only that created by teams – either pro or college or independent.
College is by far the largest in terms of population.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
It totally depends on the individual and their situation.
But I think going to a trade school or into the workforce is a much better option than going to a 4 year college for a lot of people.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
What if the 4 years of college are free?
That’s not just college, that’s room and board, and a social life.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
you are aware that even a full athletic scholarship does not really cover the costs of attending college, right?
and that these athletes have a much harder time working during because of NCAA rules and their athletic commitments, removing a major means to make money that MANY college students (including myself, for 4 years) take advantage of to earn spending money?
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
how does a full athletic scholarship not really cover the the costs of attending college?
serious question.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
I agree that the work-ban is ridiculous
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
what are your costs of attending college?
you have to get back and forth from school and home, right? scholarships don’t pay that. if you have a car, parking permits. scholarships don’t cover that. if a course has extra fees associated with it- scholarships typically don’t cover that. if your school charges graduation fees, and a scholarship athlete actually makes it that far- scholarships don’t cover that.
i could keep going for a long time. i think you’d agree you spend a lot of money per year on college-related things that are not included in your tuition, book, and room and board costs.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
(3 am pizza, weed, beer)
scholarship athletes are people too.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
eh those can all be reduced easily
if you have a car you can sell it, that’s not a necessary cost. you don’t to go home, that’s another unnecessary cost. Just pack up your clothes and take a bus to school and then stay there.
extra fees are textbooks, which you don’t really have to buy, and weed, pizza and beer – which if you are on the football team are usually afforded to you.
If the thing about changing fees is real than you have a point. Why wouldn’t scholarships cover that?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
required textbooks are covered
and so because they play a sport, they automatically aren’t people and don’t get to go home for break during their offseason?
what the actual fuck. you’re just being disagreeable now.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
What the shit are you talking about?
They don’t have to go home. They can, and if they can pay for it they should, but it’s not a necessarily cost of living to go home.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
IT'S A FUCKING COST OF GOING TO COLLEGE!
they are being required to go to college to play the sport because there is not another option, and that is a cost that is not covered!
i don’t understand how on earth that doesn’t make sense to you.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
yeah, I agree there is not another option
but I don’t think that’s because the colleges have a monopoly, its because there is a lack of real world value for athletics. The only people who are going to pay athletes are colleges (who pay them with scholarships) and pro.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
do you think that
if the colleges weren’t collecting the massive broadcast, ticket, and merchandising revenues associated with football and basketball programs, no alternate league would arise to claim some share of that money? Those programs ain’t charity.
Or, alternatively, if colleges were allowed to pay their players, do you think they wouldn’t bid much more than the cost of a scholarship for some recruits?
This I agree with 100%
Or, alternatively, if colleges were allowed to pay their players, do you think they wouldn’t bid much more than the cost of a scholarship for some recruits?
To the first point, I think something would replace it, but it wouldn’t be nearly the size of the current college system, nor nearly as profitable.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
I come down on the side of giving them a choice
and if there was a club league or minor league sports programs available outside of the college system that they could choose then WE’D ALL BE BETTER OFF.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
The minor league programs would be a tiny fraction of the size of the college ones
Even if less than 40% of collegiate athletes get scholarships, that would be way more than the 1,000 or so spots available in the minor leagues.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
I guess your entire point is that
fucking over massive amounts of athletes is just a cost of doing business?
Why don’t you go run a sweat shop in India or something. You apparently have the ability to rationalize anything as being “for the common good”.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
who's getting fucked over?
and i don’t give a shit about common good.
I’m saying the colleges create the value of the players, and they can pay as much as they want.
a scholarship is a very good value, even if you ignore the degree, it’s not fucking anyone over.
I agree that there should be free market in college, where the top players can drive up the bidding and take the schools to the cleaners.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
Really?
This is when you let the argument get away from you. For all your rationality, bombs like this:
i don’t give a shit about common good.
read as utterly ridiculous and do not improve your credibility.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
i wouldn't go that far
dude’s just not a utilitarian.
by molina mo problems on Dec 22, 2011 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
I'm saying "for the common good"
is not my argument.
Why would you read that in that manner?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
Because you say
“The college scholarship program is good for the majority of college athletes.”
So the revenue generating sports athletes take it in the rear to subsidize all the other athletes who’s sports don’t generate revenue. That’s rationalizing “being for the common good”, when neither athlete has a choice in the matter. They are forced into a system, and because you think that system works for some of them that we should just leave it the way that it is versus trying some other system that might not be as beneficial for some but much more beneficial for others.
Your entire argument is rationalizing for the “good of everyone”. If you can’t see that, then you’re REALLY good at rationalizing your thoughts to meet your expectations.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
fine yes, my argument is rationalizing for the common good of the student athletes
which is what we are talking about.
I’m not making any utopian claims, like you keep saying.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
Perhaps you should look up Utopian
because you’ve been spouting at the mouth about things you know nothing about in this entire thread. Just want to make sure you know what it means.
I’m done with this thread now.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Have a nice day!
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
because you provided no context
and even if that is parred down to a smaller group of users, I still think that it’s the kind of inflammatory statement that makes you lose credibility.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
I mean, literally,
this is the point in the thread (not the first time this has happened) when I just stop reading you because you’ve gone off the deep end.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
You're a fair overlord
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
I went to college (twice!), my brother became a lineman
one of us makes good money and has a clear line toward making more of it, and the other one is editing this blog.
Yes, but his advancement is limited
With your talent, you will obviously go far.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 12:13 PM EST up reply actions
Shyea right!
With your talent, you will obviously go far.
not true!
(i kid i kid)
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
I work in the telecom industry and recruit from the utility industry
Being a linesman is a pretty damn good job, with good pay, good benefits, and good opportunity for advancement in the future.
Really good linesman are hard to find and those people get paid very well.
They’re never going to make high 6 figures, but 99.5% of the rest of us won’t do that either.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
yeah, i don't think people understand how good jobs like that are
unfortunately, i feel that a lot of people think that if your job isn’t in an office, it isn’t good.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
On the other hand,
You’re 99% less likely to suffer a fatal on job injury while editing this blog.
It is what it is…
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
true enough
every so often he’ll post a picture of himself at work to facebook just to terrify our parents, and I am reminded how much I enjoy not being suspended in mid-air.
Helicopter linesman, that's where it's at.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
I keep telling both my boys to get into a good trade.
Job Security and earning potential is most likely better.
Also, I don’t have to pay for college.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
So I'm the only one who read this as offensive/defensive lineman, eh?
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
by mysterui on Dec 22, 2011 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
he actually briefly went to college specifically to play DIII football
as a lineman. which only made it more confusing when he dropped out after a semester.
That's totally a representative example
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:32 PM EST up reply actions
That's a high school guidance counselor pep talk
That is absolutely, unequivocally untrue in the real world. I would know, because I’ve been in recruiting and hiring for years. I’m not going to hire someone just because they have a degree over someone who has 10 years experience in the same field.
It might open some doors, sure. But lets be honest: How many college athletes (specifically football and men’s basketball) would still be in college if the university did not make piles of money off of their abilities? I’d say less than 25% would ever even be ADMITTED.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
...
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/censusandstatistics/a/collegepays.htm
How many college athletes (specifically football and men’s basketball) would still be in college if the university did not make piles of money off of their abilities? I’d say less than 25% would ever even be ADMITTED.
Yes I agree completely. And the majority of athletes that didn’t go to college would have some shitty job somewhere or would be unemployed. So college is hugely beneficial for those guys. Both in giving them a place to live for 4 years and giving some of them a degree and a higher likelihood of getting a job.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
First of all, this is a really awful assumption:
And the majority of athletes that didn’t go to college would have some shitty job somewhere or would be unemployed.
I mean, you realize that about 60% of the total workforce doesn’t have a college degree, right? And that some of those people make a very good living and provide services that you and I take advantage of every day? And that some of them actually enjoy their lives? And that a majority of entrepreneurs (a driving force in the world economy) have less than a 4 years college level of education? I mean, seriously, your high school guidance counselor seems to have done a real number on you on the value and impact of a college education. You seem to think that it’s impossible to succeed in life without a college education. That’s simply not true at all.
Also:
- How many of those who go to college actually get a degree? The number is less than 40%.
- How many of the college athletes who do actually graduate would go to college and graduate if they weren’t able to play sports? A good portion of the non-revenue sport athletes probably fall into this category, and they would probably have the same dropout rate as college students as a whole.
When you start adding all that up, even if you completely overvalue what a college education means to someone how might not value it at all, we’re not talking about a system that works for a lot of people. It really only truly gives opportunity to people who have no interest in that opportunity in the first place.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Even if you discount the education
A student athlete with a scholarship gets 4 free years of his life.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
no, they do not, specifically for the reasons i mentioned below
which you then referred to as “unnecessary costs”.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
going home is an unnecessary cost
you know what’s a necessary cost? food, which is what guys who don’t have college scholarships have to pay for.
besides you can just take a bus or a train back home, i’m sure you can hustle 50 bucks somehow.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
No they don't, the first thing you learn as a scholarship athlete is: There ain't no free lunch.
OH MY GOD YOU DON’T EVEN KNOW HOW SCHOLARSHIPS WORK.
Why do you continue to drop these incredibly biased opinions based on a 5% knowledge in the subject?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
What does a full scholarship not pay for?
The only think I’ve heard is transportation, pizza and beer.
http://recruiting-101.com/what-does-an-athletic-scholarship-cover-financially-overall/
There’s nothing there that’s in any way essential.
Please tell me about your knowledge of athlete scholarships.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not sharing this information with you
Go find it yourself. I have neither the inclination nor the time to share a bunch of links with you that you won’t read and will then cherry pick to death to support your arguments.
You never change your mind about a subject. So why spend my time? I’ll leave it to you to get educated on these subjects. I’ve put a number of links in this thread that will get you started.
Short list:
- Spending money (when they have no opportunity to earn money)
- Sunday meals typically aren’t included.
- Transportation
- Summer session lodging
- Non-Tuition fees and materials.
- Clothing
- Medical assistance and insurance
That’s not small beer. And it’s certainly not “living free” as you seem to suggest. There’s a reason why a lot of scholarship athletes also qualify for food stamps.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Did you read my link?
All of the stuff you listed is either provided by the school (free clinics, meal points stores, clothing, buses) or not necessary (summer school).
Regardless, college pays for room and board. That’s better than most kids would do on there own at age 18.
But no, keep arguing that a full scholarship isn’t beneficial to the student, that’s totally logical.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
True
But in life everyone makes a choice between college and work. Most high school players that are good can at least get into a junior college. And unlike basketball, few(or none) are physically ready for the pros.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
I just don't like the word "slave"
College athletes are going to college because that’s the best thing for them – except in the rare cases where a guy is good enough to go straight to the pros out of a high school. They get a free education for playing a sport. For a lot of the athletes they either wouldn’t be able to afford to go to college without getting a scholarship and they’d either end up not going to college or being in massive amounts of debt.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
"They get a free education for playing a sport."
This is incredibly, incredibly naive
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
You wanna tell me how it's naive?
Athletes spend as much time working out as math students spend studying.
The only thing about sports is injury risk which can worsen quality of life. And that’s only significant in football.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
Go luck up graduation rates for some of the top schools
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
UConn Huskies Men's Basketball graduation rate is optimistically about 30%
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
I bet it's higher than the graduation rates for people who don't go to college
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
That's just it.
The scholarship isn’t free. It requires them to commit enormous amounts of time to the sport they are playing: traveling, practice, workouts, etc. So much so that most athletes take the minimum course load. The commitment required of college athletes nowadays makes the old “free education” talking point way off-base because it is incredibly difficult to attain that education in four years while playing a major sport for the college.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Minimum course load is still better than nothing
I’m taking the minimum course load and I’m going to graduate with a degree and have a higher chance at getting a job (cue English major joke).
They aren’t getting the same educational experience as a guy with a math scholarship, but they are absolutely benefiting from their scholarship.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
I'm almost certain it's not worth having this argument
but let’s try a thought experiment before giving up:
In a near-total reverse of the current situation, we live in a hypothetical contact sports-based economy. Most people make a decent living as football players, boxers, or wrestlers. A small handful, though, make exorbitant sums as programmers, writers, or other types intellectuals, performing in front of large crowds. However, to crack in to the cartelized world of professional intellectualism, you first need to serve an apprenticeship in one of the nation’s sports training facilities, where you will receive training as, say, an offensive linesman while performing on the facility’s squad of performing intellectuals, earning the institution much greater revenue than it costs to train you.
Would you, as an aspiring and potentially talented professional intellectual, regard it as fair that you had to take your compensation for your valuable labor in the form of unwanted MMA training instead of collecting the wheelbarrows of money that society would otherwise be willing to offer you for your services?
I disagree with this part
However, to crack in to the cartelized world of professional intellectualism, you first need to serve an apprenticeship in one of the nation’s sports training facilities
Athletes are only forced to go to college because there is nothing else out there. Only the top .005 percent are good enough that the one year requirement (in baseball or football) for going to college is actually a negative.
There is no market for the vast majority of college level athletes.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
This is the whole point:
Athletes are only forced to go to college because there is nothing else out there.
There is nowhere else to go. There is no choice.
As for this statement:
There is no market for the vast majority of college level athletes.
Baseball teaches us that this is not true. Only .005 percent make MLB but there is a vast minor league system that spans the country. And that is with NCAA baseball existing. If you eliminated the NCAA, I could see football and basketball minor leagues having a rather large market.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
So I don't know where we disagree
Are you arguing that if college sports did not exist there would be a similarly sized free market for athletes? That’s ridiculous. The minor leagues is minuscule compared to college and that’s not a free market either.
There is no free market for sports. The only ones that exist are ones that are created by someone, and college is by far the biggest.
Now I agree completely that colleges should have to bid over athletes and it should be a free market in that respect. But for the vast majority of players it wouldn’t make a difference. They’d be happy to get the scholarship.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
And?
As someone who could not afford college and was not able to get financial aid, I don’t see what the big deal is. I worked as much as 100 hours a week at times to get by, and at times I’ve taken classes while stilling working 70+ hours. I’m not questing that what they have to do is incredibly difficult, but there is no way in hell I could ever afford to pay for classes @ a four year university out of pocket, so I am not going to pity them for having an opportunity to get their classes paid for.
Is it incredibly hard? I bet it is. But it’s also an incredible opportunity.
WWCD? CDGAF.
it's a great opportunity
I just wish they weren’t forced to take it, and I don’t think the chance to go to kentucky for a year and take 24 hours of gen-ed classes is worth what a year of a top recruit playing basketball is to the university.
This
A thousand times this.
The money spent on college athletics could be far better spent on college academics and those scholarships could go to bright kids who can’t afford college but really want to go. it’s a very inefficient system.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
It's both.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
But a lot of alumni donations are based upon the sport programs
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah
Which are donated to the ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT which are then wholly separate from the actual academic institution in a lot of cases. And are usually used to build million dollar practice facilities that only 1% of the student population will ever set foot in.
There’s a lot of misinformed people in this thread in terms of how athletic departments are run at the college level.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Untrue
Most of the donations are into the academic side(new buildings etc). Because of the exposure of sports alums keep a lifetime connection to their school, and many of those who do well donate large sums. The exposure of sports enhances this.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
Most academic donations are made for academic purposes
by former academic graduates. T Boone Pickens donated $2B to Okey State — all the money was spent on athletics upgrades. Well, what they had left after he lost 70% of it, that is.
Also, please quantify that amount of money donated to academics simply because the school has a fucking football program. You can’t. So why are you even bringing this up?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Because I don't have a number doesn't mean it is untrue.
I look at the University of Texas campus and see all the buildings named after people, and I know a lot of them keep connected for years through the athletic teams. Pickens is an example, but not one in the majority. I would bet that overall donations at OSU are up since he upgraded the athletics. There , I said all that and didn’t even need to cuss.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 6:10 PM EST up reply actions
I don't disagree with that.
I think the college system in the U.S. is absolutely horrible, I would not disagree with that at all. And I would rather pro-leagues not enforce NCAA involvement. That said, until the system changes, it’s hard for me to discount any opportunity at an education.
(I say this as a 30 year old who just started going back to college 6 months ago, for the first time in 6 years)
WWCD? CDGAF.
The injury risk...
not only worsens quality of life, but may cut their lifetime earnings potential by 90%+. I’m not sure whether to be more disgusted with the NCAA taking advantage of the athletes or the NBA and NFL for allowing it (actually enabling it).
"Progress always involves risk; you can't steal second base and keep your foot on first base." - Frederick Wilcox
by cardzfanbub on Dec 22, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
People make what they want to out of college
I had several friends who played football or baseball and still got great educations.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
which is great for your friends
but I don’t see why basketball or football players who could take their chances with professional sports should be satisfied with the idea that the thing they’re being forced to do as compensation is something they’re allowed to do for free.
I normally get what you say....
But I do not understand the last comment.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
they're being forced to accept a college education as compensation
despite the fact that they may not value it at all. I don’t know why that should be a satisfying state of affairs for college athletes in the money sports.
They are making a choice....
And when most of us make choices, they are other things we don’t like. I had to move a lot when I worked, and didn’t always like it, but the good outweighed the bad. Thanks for the rewrite.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
They have no leverage
If they don’t accept education, their lives are likely worse off. They either work at KMart or go into debt paying for college.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
They would still have essentially no leverage
if minor league teams were established instead.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
How so?
They would be able to unionize if they were treated unfairly, correct? College athletes can’t do this. They would be able to freely move to whatever team valued them the most and be compensated, correct? College athletes can’t do this.
Think about what you’re saying! It makes no sense!
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Minor league players get paid 10,000 a year
They may have unions, but the teams own them. Only the top players get to choose where they go and for how much. The majority are happy to get drafted.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
But minor league players have THE OPTION TO UNIONIZE
College players have no such option. You keep hammering the point of “well that just wouldn’t happen”. Well, how the fuck do you know unless it’s tried?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Minor league players get paid 10k a year
where’s the union?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
There is no union
because the players love what they are doing.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
The insinuation this makes is offensive.
As if belonging to a union means the member does not love what he or she does. That is absurd. I suspect the vast, vast majority of professional athletes love what they do and simply want a fair share of the profits they generate.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
by bgh on Dec 22, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know, that's not my point.
My point is that THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO DO SO. Whether they do or not is on them.
The NCAA cartel, OTOH, implicitly prevents this from happening.
Jesus, this really isn’t hard to comprehend.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Question for the lawyers here
why has no one sued the NFL over the age requirement for draft eligibility? The only way I can imagine a judge reacting to the NFL’s arguments in defense of that requirement would be breaking down in laughter. Am I crazy?
Not the greatest person to have testing those waters.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I seem to remember the NFL, like MLB,
having some modified form of anti-trust immunity, but I can’t recall the specifics. I know the American Needle case was going to challenge some of their marketing/merchandise purchasing contract practices, but that wouldn’t directly affect the age cap. Let me do a little digging, and I’ll get back to you.
Makin' toast!
DING
Butterin' toast!
I took Sports Law.
We specifically looked at that issue. I remember none of it.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
This is ridiculous
The huge, huge, huge, majority of college athletes have no chance at ever play professional sports.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
this is true
and i think it is wonderful that many many people get college scholarships through sports and then leverage that into a lot of other things, but the fact remains that the NCAA reaps enormous profits from a small group of young men who play football and basketball, and give them virtually no compensation at all in return.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
The salary at a lot of companies....
is way less that the value of what people produce.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
This is a false comparison.
No company has the disparate revenues vs. wage disparity of major college athletics. The players literally earn nothing in wages. They receive nothing from the video game licensing rights. They earn nothing from the television deals. They earn nothing from merchandise sales (even of jerseys with their numbers on them). Millions of dollars are generated annually and “non-profits” (which is a whole other discussion) pocket the money.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Agreed
There was a study done on the amount the “Fab Five” players were worth, combined, to the University of Michigan and Nike. Over their first 2 seasons in college (before Chris Webber went pro) the number was something like $100M. For which those five guys, in total, received around $100,000 in scholarship funds.
I can’t believe that anyone can make a serious argument that these players are not taken full advantage of economically and have very little choice in the matter.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
It is socialism
High caliber players generate money to fund the rest of Athletic programs at a school. If they paid football and basketball players money there would be no other sports besides those 2.
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
Where have I stated, anywhere,
that we start paying college players?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Isn't this what this whole discussion is about
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
No, it's not.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Yeah that's obviously true
But I don’t think that makes them slaves – they are getting a better deal that most other students.
I agree that they should probably be compensated, because the universities sure as hell shouldn’t take all of the profits. But I would much rather either have the universities sink 90% of the profits into the school, or not have college sports be for profit.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
They should not be compensated because
of the profit thing, they should be compensated so they do not have to sell tickets to get beer.
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions
The funny thing is that the conferences are organized as "non-profits."
The absurdity of this is reflected in the current realignment movement amongst the major conferences.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
And the BCS in general
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
The scholarship system works great for the ones who do not go pro. 90% of them. Could the other 10% form a minor league on their own?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
correct
but the ones who do have a chance to play professional sports are clearly being used here because they’re allowed no bargaining position at all.
They seem to have the chance
to come out alright. Because you cannot bargain and have all your druthers falls under the category of
Wah, Wah, Wah
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
The ones who are obviously top notch talent
Are used for a year, and they can go to the pro’s. The rest of those who have a shot need somewhere to prove that they do. And the current college system is much more beneficial towards showing off the players than any other realistic system.
I agree that in the absence of college sports, teams would create a minor league system. But those wouldn’t pay jack shit either. The education and chance at a degree is more valuable than 10k a year.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
Free education?
How so? Most college athletes I know spend at least 40 hours per week JUST PLAYING THEIR SPORT. Going to meetings, workouts, practice, film sessions, traveling to games, press conferences, publicity events. Then they have to go to class and study just like the other students.
I don’t know too many college students who work full time jobs on the side. Most would say that suicide, but in the same breath would say that athletes have it “too easy”.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Well certainly some guys work jobs on the side
And their academics are much more rigorous than most. And if they don’t work they are likely in debt after.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
As a former student athlete
I can agree with this a bit…
I don’t know too many college students who work full time jobs on the side. Most would say that suicide, but in the same breath would say that athletes have it "too easy".
But the idea that being in the sport was some burden is ludricous. The only time it was was trying to sit through a 3 hour night classes after a hard workout, and I only had to do that once a week.
And yes, it is a free education if you get a full ride scholarship. You’re getting paid to play for the school’s team and get an education, while most students have to find some other way to pick up the tab, whether they work for it or their parents do. The fact remains that regular students do not get the benefits that student athletes get, even in a lowly sport like I was in.
I don't think you fully realize the extent that
a college sports practice regimen would crush the souls of some people. Mainly because you were an athlete. It’s not necessarily a burden to you, but it would be a burden to someone else.
Also, if athletics departments weren’t rolling in cash, they couldn’t pay for half of the benefits that you receive. My guess is that if the cash was distributed evenly for all athletes out of a pool that you could get similar benefits and also pocket a little of that money as well.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Um....
A normal student does not bring in any income. They are paying to go to school to reap the benefit of an education. What work is a normal student doing that generates any income?
A normal student typically has higher costs to attend said school because student athletes do get several benefits normal students do not, such as full-ride scholarships and housing, which is how my Dad attended Rutgers as a baseball player. He got spiked in his sophomore year (back when they wore spikes) and had to pay his own way by working several jobs at once while attending classes. Most colleges get the majority their income from tuition and housing fees charged to students; in fact, that sets the baseline for their budgets. The idea that students athletes get nothing is false—if they want to get paid, then they should pay for their education at the same rates normal students have to.
Also the argument that athletes are “slaves” is insulting. Slavery does still exist in this world; as a former student athlete (cross country), I definitely know I didn’t experience it.
by Forsch31 on Dec 22, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
i worked 3 jobs at a time while i was in college.
i think you will find that many, many college students work while they are in college. i agree with Forsch here. not everyone can afford to take all of their time off and go to school and rack up debt.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
no you
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
Are you kidding?
People pay to get into Rucker Park to watch games all the time. Have you heard of the AAU and the “And 1” tour? People pay to watch what amounts to pickup basketball ALL THAT DAMN TIME.
Now, we’re only talking about a certain subset of athletes at the collegiate level. But those athletes create a huge amount of income for the university and receive an education in return. Which, considering the job market right now, isn’t necessarily a meal ticket.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
And Harlem Globetrotters
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
I'll never forget reading a piece on student athletes that featured Greg Ostertag.
He was married and had a child or two while in college. He told a story of buying groceries with food stamps because of the NCAA restrictions on student-athletes working and the person at the next cashier over checked out while wearing a Kansas #00 jersey—his jersey. He didn’t receive a dime from the sale.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
see, I don't know how anyone can't be outraged by stories like this
I’m embarrassed to have gone to two schools with ncaa ties. I feel like I’ve been paying tuition to the mob
Thats why the new money proposal(that is now on hold) was good
How many college students get rom, board, and still have spending money?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
What about the math student
Who was married and had a child in college and didn’t have any money either. Worse, he didn’t have a scholarship so he’s in huge debt already. So now he has to prostitute himself to cougars just to eat every week.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
sounds like a pretty decent life.
plus, i doubt that there are many people purchasing the math student’s jersey, even if he is a mathlete.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
The math student is not forbidden from working by NCAA rules.
Furthermore, the math student is not generating millions of dollars for the university with his math calculations. The math student doesn’t spend dozens of hours a week practicing, training and traveling in excess of his course load. This is comparing apples to oranges.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Yeah, I agree that the work ban is ridiculous
But the math student is working as hard at doing math as the athlete is at doing sports. My roommate who’s a bio major spends fucking 6 hours a day studying.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
i don't think the argument is about how hard student-athletes work relative to non-athletes.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
This is
You roommate, the bio major, spends 6 hours a day studying for class. Many athletes spend 6 hours a day studying in addition to the four or five hours they have to spend at meetings, practice, and working out for their sport. Also, your roommate’s studying is directly going to his education while the athlete’s hours spent training, traveling, practicing, etc. do not.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Yeah, I doubt too many athletes spend 6 hours studying a day
And lets compare apples to apples here.
Take a guy who’s skill is math, he can’t get a scholarship because the math department has no funding. So he has to get a job and work 30 hours a week.
The athlete might also work 30 hours a week for the school. Its the same deal.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
This isn't an argument about fairness
It’s an argument about economic opportunity, or lack thereof. You continually confuse the two things.
The math and biology students should be outraged that so much money is spent promoting college athletics when their peers receive no compensation.
Think about it this way:
The biology student is working in a college lab 6 hours per week in a work study program. During that time, said student synthesizes an enzyme that effectively cures all forms of cancer. The university states that since this occurred while the student was working in the work study program, that the university retains all rights to the enzyme and it’s patent, while the biology student simply gets free tuition.
Considering the patent on that cancer drug is probably worth trillions of dollars, does this seem at all fair to you? I certainly fucking hope not. Yet that is the same position you are arguing against.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I believe what you describe is in place for the biology student. And yes, it’s right, because the university is providing the free research facility and the experts to help develop said drug.
The student, however,
has license to the work that was done and is part owner of any intellectual property that comes out of said lab.
College athletes (like Ed O’Bannon, in a soon to be famous class action suit against the NCAA) have basically signed away all uses of their likeness IN PERPETUITY. So the NCAA can continue to sell O’Bannon’s jersey, game tapes, highlight reels, video game likeness, etc. forever, until the end of time, and O’Bannon has no claim to any of that. That’s strikingly immoral.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
NCAA prohibition against working
started because university boosters would give “jobs” to student athletes. Happened all the time, even in Division II.
That was his choice
Greg Ostertag could have been earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year playing in a professional sports league.
You’re confusing “fairness for all” with “economic opportunity”.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I'm not, this is a different subthread
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah...
Collapsible threads.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
by mattybobo on Dec 22, 2011 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I'm very sorry for using that throw away adjective.
Lesson learned.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Heh
I was mostly joking. Just think—it didn’t begin a discussion about whether the [REDACTED] War was caused by or fought over [REDACTED]. And that is a feather in VEB’s cap.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Although, college sports arguments might actually be more passionate and prone to start trouble, these days.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
It's fine. It's just that
1) I had no idea that it would veer that way and
2) I don’t really have any animus towards college sports any more than I do to, say, liberal arts programs at colleges.
But since society does a bad job of incentivizing what I would describe as productive pursuits (acknowledging huge personal bias involved in all this and how I value the various arts), I have mostly detached myself from caring about how much money the NCAA makes.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
I have a ton of problems with liberal arts programs at colleges, too
but one thing at a time, I guess
having spent a lot of time in two english departments
my concern is that through a slavish devotion to postmodern/poststructuralist theory and a method of advancement completely divorced from engagement with outside readers/the outside world, we’re walling ourselves off into what will eventually be complete irrelevance, and I don’t think it needs to turn out that way.
by DanUpBaby on Dec 22, 2011 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
This is probably true of a lot of places
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
A lot of scholarship just seems to approach culture in a way that is more and more separated from anything that the rest of the world should have a reason to give a crap about.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
yeah
and then they use the status quo as evidence that the rest of the world doesn’t matter, because obviously they aren’t paying attention anyway.
Anyway, I went to a very small Catholic university that pretty much cuts completely against this grain
And the contrast between my experience of a Liberal Arts education and many other people’s is interesting to me. There are a lot of reasons for the difference, and it’s not just because it’s a school with an actual robust religious affiliation (i.e., the Catholicism is pretty much worn on the sleeve and that’s just how they roll).
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Eh the worlds gonna blow up in 100 years anyway
Might as well get some cool ideas out there first.
Hows that for postmodernist?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
Nicely said. To paraphrase Vonnegut, the arts are disappearing up their own asshole.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
Vonnegut was definitely a postmodern leaning author, right?
Dan, what do you mean by postmodern advancement? Can you give an example?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
Vonnegut is definitely a postmodern author.
But post-modern novelists are not the problem. The key word in Dan’s post, IMO, is
theory.Postmodern theory is a self-perpetuating rabbit-hole that grows more and more absurd the further one dives in.
VEB WINTER MEET-UP DISCUSSION
SIGN CARLOS BELTRAN
can you expand on that a little bit?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 23, 2011 12:43 AM EST up reply actions
Got it
Thanks. I’m a happy liberal arts grad, with majors in econ and psych, and lots of time spent in philosophy and history (and some time in art history and biology). Just curious about which corner of the liberal arts was problematic. I can definitely see it in English lit….
Danup, I grew up in an English department, and did half my graduate work in an English department
and I can assure you that it’s always been that way. Postmodernism, like structuralism before it, and the Chicago Aristotelians before that, and the New Critics and the Marxists before that, and so on all the way back to the Greeks and Romans — the impetus behind all those movements was an effort to engage both literature and the world beyond it more meaningfully. And eventually each movement ran out of insights and petrified and was superseded. The real threat to literary studies lies not in the academy’s walling itself off but in the walls which the pre-academic educational establishment erects between its students and literature.
Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue parceque je n'ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte
by alberich on Dec 22, 2011 7:53 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
what worries me is that 40 years out from foucault etc.
we’re still dealing with it as though it’s something new and vital. there seems to be nothing jockeying to replace postmodernism but more institutionalized and stratified postmodernism, and that terrifies me.
by DanUpBaby on Dec 22, 2011 8:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
RE: Thought Experiment
Let’s assume that Carlos Beltran is signed through 2014 at $12M AAV and the club he plays for is shopping him.
What’s the most we give up in prospects to acquire him?
Az, I think it’s easy to make this comment about a player who is a free agent. I think it’s harder when the farm system has to be plundered to acquire said player.
Most of my complaints about “prospect-gasms” is that a lot of us tend to overvalue our own prospects while undervaluing their worth on the trade market.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Without speaking to you view specifically,
there’s a long, rich VEB history of people who complain that other commenters are “anti-veteran” in favor of young players or prospects. In that context, the Beltran situation is illuminating.
As far as your last point, I mostly agree. I really do not care for the surplus value analysis that people do with prospects (i.e. totaling up the next 6 years of value and comparing it against the rental player’s remaining time and value) because it’s near impossible for a trade to ever work in that context. There’s something about that analysis that’s flawed when one side ALWAYS loses though I’m not sure I can put my finger on what it is exactly. I, personally, liked the Holliday trade because I thought Wallace was vastly over-rated but I’ve also been guilty of favoring young players over veterans at times.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Surplus value
At least the one I did with the Holliday trade, expressly took into account increase in playoff odds for that one year.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
This doesn't change anything I've said.
When the threshold of analysis indicates that something like 90% (WAG) of prospect for MLB player trades are a fail for the team trading prospects, I think the methodology is suspect.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Do you also think the methodology behind Win Expectancy and IBB is suspect?
Because 90% of the time MLB teams do that, it’s deemed a bad move.
The way I analyzed the Holliday trade was to calculate the expected WAR of Holliday, figure out the increase in playoff odds and then multiply that by the expected revenue from reaching the playoffs – Holliday’s contract.
I compared that to the expected value (in Free Agent $ per WAR) of a prospect of Wallace’s caliber. That includes Wallace’s massive risk. Obviously it would be better to first translate Wallace’s expected playoff odds increase over the 6 years and find a better way to standardize money, but I don’t think there is anything glaringly off about that system that would cause the results to shift so rapidly.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
I dislike the way prospects are valued in that analysis.
It’s prone to huge value fluctuations based on how one values a prospect. On balance, I think teams are better at valuing prospects than Keith Law, John Sickels, you, me or any other individual person. So I think the expected value is a really instable (read: shitty) way to try and nail these numbers down.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
That would imply that in most prospect for veterans trades
Sickels, Law, BP, etc. are valuing the prospect significantly higher than how the teams are.
I also don’t think that teams are very good about valuing their prospects. Hanley Ramirez, Dan Haren, etc.
Your whole argument seems to stem from the idea that there is no way that 90% of prospect for veterans trades are bad for the prospect-trading team. I don’t know what the basis for that argument is.
My example served to show that a lot of what is considered “correct” in baseball is laughably wrong. You’re making an appeal to authority argument and I don’t think that’s very solid.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
Your example is far less dynamic than evaluating people.
My point was that any single talent evaluator is worse at talent evaluation than a group of similarly qualified set of evaluators. Thus when a team gets multiple scouting reports from their scouts on a player, that is better than JUST Sickels’ evaluation, on balance.
Ultimately, neither of us are arguing from evidence so I doubt this conversation is going anywhere. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen you change your mind on something here … well, ever. I understand what you are saying but I think it is disingenuous to argue that I am simply appealing to authority when I’ve made countless arguments to the contrary when I come across positions of that nature.
Until someone does a comprehensive study of the last 10 years worth of trades and whether the “prospect” or “MLB player” team came out ahead, this conversation isn’t likely fruitful. You think teams are bad at trades and that I’m appealing to that illegitimate authority. I think you have an incredibly skewed view of MLB front offices and a rather myopic interpretation of how they operate. We’re simply too far apart on this and since you rarely budge, I’m disinclined to argue a subjective point further.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think averaging out the different prospect rankings
BA, BP, Sickels, Law, etc gives you a good sample.
Fair enough. I’m not going to place much faith in teams when they still are signing Heath Bell’s to 30 million dollar contracts, paying Skip Schumaker, trading for Vernon Wells. I think generally sabermetrics backs up its points with specific numbers, whereas its detractors usually speak in vagueries. I agree that prospect evaluation is tricky, but I think the systems we use are pretty solid.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not really going to answer the false choice you present either.
That’s a blatant trap with all sorts of premises in the analogy that I disagree with.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
You really do like to present false choices and equivalencies
in hopes of painting someone into a corner don’t you?
Do you also think the methodology behind Win Expectancy and IBB is suspect?
Because 90% of the time MLB teams do that, it’s deemed a bad move.
I mean, wow.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
You didn't need enter this argument
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, you're the one that "entered"
as this was a response to my comment on the original post.
You and I will never agree on this matter because your entire premise is based on hearsay evidence masquerading as statistical evidence.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I totally agree with this:
there’s a long, rich VEB history of people who complain that other commenters are "anti-veteran" in favor of young players or prospects. In that context, the Beltran situation is illuminating.
And your opinion on the second point is illuminating — I was not aware that we agreed so much on that particular subject.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
But the defensive gap of 20 runs. . .
is a real possibility.
Jay is a career +4.4 in CF, and Beltran was -9.7 last season. . . in RF.
Maybe Beltran’s range has improved with distance from the surgery, and there are small sample sizes involved on both sides of the equation, but, wow. If, for a Beltran signing to be a success, he has to be able to play CF at better than -15, then there is a signficiant chance that it won’t be a success.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
for what it's worth, beltran was also -6 according to total zone and +2 by DRS
I don’t know what he looked like to people who watched him, but the metrics definitely disagree.
He was also a +2 in CF in 2010 according to Total Zone and a -7.5 according to UZR.
That’s a really small sample size. It was also mere months after his surgery. I think I’ve contributed to this problem by improperly phrasing my use of the fielding metrics in regards to Beltran.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
This is how I feel
I don’t think he is going to be bad as the metrics thought he was last year
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
Which would make them equivalent players.
And I think you are overstating his defensive deficiencies based on single season numbers. Intuitively it doesn’t make sense that he went from being a -5 type CF for two (injury plagued years) to a -10 type in RF. That’s like a 20 run defensive swing basically overnight (accounting for position).
I doubt he’s an above average centerfielder but between injuries and the variance in single season defensive data, I think “significant” is an overly strong word to use in this siutation.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Wouldn't you want to value recent-season declines more...
In the case of an aging player coming off a series of injuries? If a 27 year old has a distinctly poor defensive season, I’d be much more inclined to assume they will bounce back.
WWCD? CDGAF.
Sure. You'd weight recent seasons more.
But even assuming that Beltran fell apart overnight (which is what SSCF is implicitly arguing), it barely gets you to the 20 run differential. By the time you regress those numbers and then account for the probability that he’ll remain hurt forever versus getting healthy again, you’ll be hard pressed to come up with a 20 run differential.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
I think with a healthier knee in 2012
His range will increase and his defense improve
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
Sure.
There are arguments all over the lot for how well Beltran can play CF anymore.
Con:
-9.7 UZR in RF, a less difficult position
Hasn’t really played CF in 2 seasons
35 years old in 2012
Pro:
One year farther removed from surgery
Was once a very good CF
Other defensive stats rate Beltran less poorly than Beltran
Name is not Skip Schumaker
Whether he can play CF adequately (or maybe just un-horribly) is rightly considered to be a huge factor in his signing being a good idea. That is not a foregone conclusion.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
you should rewrite this with smaller words and tweet
It to joe strauss.
i used to be disgusted, but now i try to be amused . . . - macmanus
by tom s. on Dec 22, 2011 2:26 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I have a suspicion that he’s blocked me but I don’t know how to check that.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
why are you not using subject lines?
you been hanging out at one of our sister websites that exclusively does not use them?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
never mind was just the once, perhaps i was thinking of someone else
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
Now I remember it's the phans over at the "The Good Phight" who rephuse to use subject lines
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:00 PM EST up reply actions
Has this ever happened?
Where a club signed a free agent like Beltran, and then immediately traded him to another club? Like say trade Beltran for Martin Prado straight up.
I would think it would have to happen something like sign Beltran for 2y/27M and then take on about 17M of that on our payroll and then take on Prado’s payroll of around 2y/8M. The result is paying Prado 2y/25 as a great upgrade at 2B while Atlanta gets the “big bopper” they have been looking for.
That’s a lot of stuff going on for one transaction but at the end of the day it get’s us exactly what we need…a short-term RF and long term quality 2B. To compliment this you could also sign CoCo/Ross as a compliment to Jay in CF. The obvious result of all of this is that Craig would be a full time RF as I believe he has rightfully earned.
Teams
normally can’t trade a free agent they just signed until June 15, unless the new Basic Agreement changed that.
Repeal The LaRussa Tax.
by Michael_68_1999 on Dec 22, 2011 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
...Why wouldn't they team trading for Beltran just sign Beltran?
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
I was wondering the same thing.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
The question was has it ever happened.
Maybe the better question is how soon has a player been traded after being aquired as a free agent.
Money would be the biggest factor for a team like Atlanta (and I don’t know if that would be a factor for them and their payroll). Through this scenario they would get Beltran for 2y/10M as opposed to 2y/27 plus 2y/8M.
I think a player who signed as a free agent is protected under the CBA from being traded, as Michael_68_1999 notes.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I don't think they've released the new CBA yet.
I don’t know the specific date off the top of my head so I’ll defer to Michael_68_1999 on that.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
You're not thinking fourth dimensionally.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
by Alxfritz on Dec 22, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I once had a 5th dimension LP
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
Free Agent Blues?
Won’t you sign with us Bel-tran
Play center field, I know you can
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Even if Beltran can only play a corner
He’d still get plenty of at bats. Craig is out for the first month of the season right? That’s 100 PA right there. Then he’d split time with Craig and Berkman the rest of the way (Berkman is bound to get injured at some point) and could sub Holliday once in a while.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
the guy's a free agent
why would he join the cardinals if their pitch is “you can split time with allen craig the rest of the way!”?
Worst case scenario...
isn’t that he goes to the bench mad, it’s that he plays center, where he’s adequate.
Sign Roy O
Yeah, also Beltran probably doesn't want to play everyday
And this is based off absolutely nothing.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
Worst case scenario is Skip in CF,
Jay in right, Craig on the bench.
Makin' toast!
DING
Butterin' toast!
Craig
Forgive me if this has already been posted. Craig may be ready sooner than it seems most expect. 3 months post-op from the surgery he had, Craig should have a completely healed fracture and a strong quadriceps, assuming his rehab progressed on schedule without any complications and also assuming he did not have any sort of ligamentous damage repaired simultaneously. (I realize these are both big “ifs”). So that would be sometime in Feb I think? I’m not sure how long it will take him to get up to speed, but it’s conceivable the Cardinals could have him to start the season.
Seconded...
the original reports said 4 to 6 months, and the surgery was done mid-late November. This makes the projected return date mid-lat March to mid-late May. It makes sense to project mid-late April as a return date, but he could very well be avail opening day.
"Progress always involves risk; you can't steal second base and keep your foot on first base." - Frederick Wilcox
by cardzfanbub on Dec 22, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
But he'll have missed Spring Training.
My understanding of Craig’s time table for a return included extended Spring Training or a minor league rehab stint to get him into playing shape (timing his swing, etc.).
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Yeah
Unfortunately, we can’t really know that until we know that, right? And in the meantime we could lose out on FA opportunities. So there’s a risk no matter how we approach the situation.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I'd like to see how this negotiation goes:
VEP:
Then he’d split time with Craig and Berkman the rest of the way
Carlos Beltran:
Naw, I’ll just one of my other 6 offers and play 150 games. Thanks.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Yeah, this is something I'm wondering about
Like I’ve said somewhere else in today’s comments. I suppose the Cardinals could be assuming he would simply be the starting CF.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I'd say he'd replace Craig completely
I’d be lying of course.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
YOU THINK CARLOS BELTRAN DOESN'T HAVE A COMPUTER?
And that he doesn’t read baseball blogs anonymously every day?
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
The way Holliday chimes in on the radio,
makes me think he’s lurking VEB as well.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
Now I finally see what the heck <3 means ... ♥
I have no previous blog experience and can be somewhat dense as well
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
I get that it's supposed to be a heart
But it looks more like a sideways two-scoop ice cream cone to me.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Hell, he probably ripped off the "not actually injury prone" argument from us!
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Assuming we have money to throw around
Who would be a better upgrade? Oswalt?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
Yeah I don't know either
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
What's Young's contract situation?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
arbitration?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:51 AM EST up reply actions
That is really nice
Think Jay + Lynn + Motte would do?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
I'm sure they'd like a longterm solution at 3B too
So include one of Carp/Cox
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
That's too much on our end
Cox and Motte/Jay should be good.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
That seems like a lot of value
Motte’s a 1 WAR reliever who’s first year arb. Jay is a 2 WAR CF who’s pre-arb. Cox is a top 50 prospect.
Young’s only a 3.5ish WAR player and he’s the most expensive player in the trade. Jay and Cox alone would be more valuable for them.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
I feel like all three of those guys could be completely worthless in a year...
for different reasons.
Sign Roy O
So could Young
I don’t know when it became common practice to go off worse case scenario.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Nah...
Young is as solid as an athlete comes…
My elbow hurts every time Motte shot puts another pitch. Jay is a 260/320/380 hitter once his babip normalizes. And Cox seems like a really good candidate to never do anything well enough to be worthwhile.
Sign Roy O
why do we all have this opinion of Cox? is this just VEB groupthink?
i’m not calling anyone out on this, i have the same opinion. i’m curious if this is just groupthink, or if we have some actual reasoning.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:20 AM EST up reply actions
i mean, i read scouting reports and whatnot
but the only real reason i can see to be down on Cox is low power and positional/defense questions. i can’t think of any real reason why he won’t be a good MLB hitter, but i just have a feeling he won’t be.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
If he's borderline defensively...
and he doesn’t walk or hit home runs at unusually high levels… then he can’t really be a great player. He might touch league average if the babip randomly spikes, or he might somehow be Michael Young. But it seems like there are very few Michael Youngs.
Sign Roy O
my reasoning from the moment he was drafted
has been that the player he was described as by super-excited scouts, a .300 hitter with line drive power, doesn’t seem like a great third baseman to me.
Projections
Not a big fan of Cox either but we just lost a third baseman who projected to be a line drive hitter with power.
"Go crazy, folks, go crazy! It's a home run, and the Cardinals have won the game, by the score of 3 to 2, on a home run by the Wizard! Go crazy!" - Jack Buck (my earliest baseball memories)
by WizardofOz1982 on Dec 22, 2011 4:37 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
Jay is still a 2 WAR player once his BABIP normalizes
He’s as stable as Young, with a different mean of course. Motte and Cox are more risky.
But still, since when are players valued by their downside?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
SIGN BEN SHEETS
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
Cox and Jay
god damn i’d do that so fast
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
This is so silly
How would you feel if Cox/Motte was the return on Rasmus? Okay, now imagine It being the return on Rasmus only he’s just had consecutive 4.6 WAR seasons. I broke my laptop because we only got Edwin Jackson, Rzep and Dotel (also because we got Corey Patterson). I can’t even imagine the amount of property damage I would have incurred under those circumstances.
If we want Young, we need big center piece prospects. Anyone is on the table except Shelby Miller. I’d do Oscar Taveras + Lynn + Adams or something to get this done.
by purple_haze on Dec 22, 2011 12:51 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I'd say Cox and Jay is better than the package we received for Rasmus
We got a third of a year of a 4 WAR starter and .5 WAR reliever and then 4 years of a probably .5 WAR reliever.
They’d be getting 4 (3?) years of a WAR CF and 6 years of a top 50 prospect. That’s a lot better than the Rasmus trade. Young is also more expensive and older than Rasmus – and maybe a bit better.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Oof.
I don’t think Cox is going to be a top 50 prospect. A brief look around:
- He’s # 4 on BA’s list behind Taveras, Miller & Martinez.
- He’s #7 on Sickel’s top 20 list.
Cox may wind up in the 50-100 range on some lists but I doubt he’s a consensus 100 between BPro, BA, Law & Sickels.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
I just went and checked the (still being written) Future Redbird rankings
that Jeff & I are working on. FWIW, neither of us have him top 5.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
Taveras+Lynn+Adams is way, way too much.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
You have to take into consideration
that VEP’s prospect values are inflated about 40% over their actual market value.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Is there a table so we have a quick reference to compare VEP valuations to actual market value or a special tab on fangraphs I don't see
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
Fourstick probably has a few dozen pieces of paper pinned to his wall with all of my prospect related comments
He also probably has a home address and a picture of my family.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
does he talk to his mirror while wearing a should holster practicing the line "Are you talking to me?" while grimacing?
That would be really unnerving
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:20 PM EST up reply actions
I guess that makes me Cybill Shephard?
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
Jodi Foster
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:40 PM EST up reply actions
you're missing the fact that young is an average/
Just above average hitter, and most of his value lies in defense. I think the d-backs undervalue defense, as exemplified by their signing of Kubel to play over Parra. So, the d-backs may not view Young as having the value we see in him.
i used to be disgusted, but now i try to be amused . . . - macmanus
by tom s. on Dec 22, 2011 2:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
also Young's 4.7 WAR last year
came with a +15 UZR. There’s no way he’s actually that good. His career UZR is much lower.
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno...
AZ is a funny org. They’ve got high end pitching prospects stacked like cord wood, and they can’t easily upgrade anywhere because they’re pretty good at all positions.
The only clear upgrade for them is Jaime and Motte. And of course that can’t happen.
Sign Roy O
No
I’m thinking one of our top pitching prospects + one solid MLB reliever (since they actually need some) + another B prospect.
I mean, Houston did better in the Bourn trade than what you’re giving up here, and that was for 8 months prior to free agency.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Who do we spend all this money on?
SIGN CARLOS
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 22, 2011 10:46 AM EST via Android app reply actions
they could give me a little.
Piss off Tony, get shipped to Canada.
by beer me on Dec 22, 2011 10:49 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Good answer!
SIGN CARLOS
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 22, 2011 1:03 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I could use it to buy a Musial jersey.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
I think Fritz has one he can rub in your face
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
I have the usernames of the asshats on here that pulled it out from under my cart.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
I have one
My now exgf bought me one too but returned it once she realized I managed to get one too.
She had to return 4 items. Probably all of them shortly
bollocks
by SecondHalfMatt on Dec 22, 2011 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
SHF on the list twice now.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
hmm. . .
i wonder if M&N contacted you about the potential to pick up one of these returned items. . . I’m guessing no?
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
rabble rabble
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
I'll sell you one for $350
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:09 PM EST up reply actions
Invest in gold?
Invest in bonds?
Invest in Goldbond? People are always gonna have skin, and skin is always gonna have problems. Until we transfer our consciousness into cybernetic bodies, but I think that won’t happen for a long time.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Barry bonds?
SIGN CARLOS
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 22, 2011 1:04 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I'm not sure how the house arrest would affect a contract
If he played for free, would that count as “community service”?
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I think it is funny they are saying Toronto is in the mix for Beltran
Because they have a direct flight to Puerto Rico. Well you can get a direct flight from STL to San Juan
Why is he flying his people commercial, anyway? That whole angle doesn't make sense.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
I would think the Cards could offer a personal services contract that includes private jet flights
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
I would think it would run concurrent with his contract - its all negotiable
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
me too. i was trying to anyway
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
he's saying this because he thinks you explained your joke, and that it would be funnier without the explanation
but he thinks it’s funny to pretend he thinks it was funnier with the explanation.
oh...OK. That clears everything up.
Why didn’t he just say that.
Actually, I can see why he didn’t say that. He would have been explaining his joke which in turn would be hypocritical of the fact that he too had given a joke with explanation and thus continued the spiral toward endless meaningless conversations about stuff that isn’t even funny to begin with.
I can see clearly now…the rain is gone.
Well to be honest the rain isn’t gone here in AL. It’s coming down pretty hard but that’s not the point.
by Schnurdog on Dec 22, 2011 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This might be a dumb question...
but when is he going to have time to go to Puerto Rico? On an off day? Really?
Sign Roy O
Exactly
When is he going to have time to go down to Puerto Rico.
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
the work week before christmas
Is hellish. It’s slow and anyone that does come in is about as crabby as can be.
Piss off Tony, get shipped to Canada.
by beer me on Dec 22, 2011 10:48 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I'm not crabby.
It’s fun when all the bosses are gone. I’ve been reading VEB all week.
I smacked Rickey right in the face when he told me this idea.
Goold gave VEB a shoutout on his facebook page.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
Viva el Birdos does a good job this morning of outlining how Beltran would fit — and possibly be an upgrade — into the Cardinals lineup. Basically, it’s a weighted 3-into-2 rotation in the outfield … like what we’ve seen many, many times under La Russa’s guidance.
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 22, 2011 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
For some reason, I find myself getting very into the NBA this year
Well you're in luck this yera!
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
66 is closer to 82 than it is to 50
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
LOL IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
I laughed haha
after attempting to do math before just glancing down
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 22, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions
Who's your team?
I’m a huge Blazers fan.
by mattisnotfrench on Dec 22, 2011 11:20 AM EST up reply actions
I have literally no association with any team
Though I’m pretty tempted to bandwagon over to the Clippers. They were the first NBA game I ever went to, I lived in LA for 4 years, and now they have Chris Paul and Blake Griffin
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
Because it's the best advanced nba stats primer out there?
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
What's the general opinion in KC about moving an NBA team there?
I’ve heard of the possibility of the Hornets or Bobcats going there.
Ad Maiorem Tortius Gloriam
by peppermartin on Dec 22, 2011 12:39 PM EST up reply actions
NBA really needs to move another team to Chicago first.
that, or back to Seattle. just my 2cents.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
by tehzachatak on Dec 22, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
The arena in KC is much nicer than the arena in Seattle, isn't it?
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
i'm sure
anything’s better than that arena in Seattle, but that city loves the NBA, and it’s a shame what happened there. they need a new arena and their team back.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
I don't know about general opinion
We have the infrastructure in place for a team, and we have a strong basketball fanbase obviously. And nothing’s really happening during the winters here… It’d probably be a good idea
Of all sad words of tongue or pen; the saddest are these: 'It might have been!' -- Whittier
Twitter
Kansas City Monarchs has a nice ring to it
Ad Maiorem Tortius Gloriam
by peppermartin on Dec 22, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
The Kings were in KC for a while, right?
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
the Kansas City-Omaha Kings!
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
isn't there somebody currently renting the Sprint Center for events that would require an NBA team to be on the road for super long stretches?
i don’t know a ton about this but i’ve heard people bring that up when people talk about relocating an NBA team there.
by molina mo problems on Dec 22, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
It was a bummer to hear about Brandon Roy.
This has been a brutal off-season for Blazers fans. :(
WWCD? CDGAF.
NBA team
Never really had one until the Thunder moved to Oklahoma.
"Go crazy, folks, go crazy! It's a home run, and the Cardinals have won the game, by the score of 3 to 2, on a home run by the Wizard! Go crazy!" - Jack Buck (my earliest baseball memories)
by WizardofOz1982 on Dec 22, 2011 4:39 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
the NBA has been very entertaining the past few years.
I think advanced stats in basketball can be useful. But, I believe that they are much less useful to measure players than in other sports (especially baseball).
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
Who has two thumbs and let a one legged man fall on his ass this morning?
This guy!
Luckily he is ok. Only thing hurt is pride. Mine more than his.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
by scoot on Dec 22, 2011 11:18 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
i think your karma may have been damaged too.
i’m not sure though, i don’t know very much about karma.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
You call your penis pride, right?
Cause I assume he punched you in it.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
by Alxfritz on Dec 22, 2011 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
nah, he blamed himself
but he didn’t punch himself in the penis. At least that I saw.
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
When was the last time the Cardinals lost out on a free agent bid war
And it hurt them? It seems like every time the Cardinals are second fiddle it works out for the best. Mike Hampton, AJ Burnett, Schmidht, Fuentes….
All of them can be considered not to live up to their contracts
I was bummed about Renteria
Irish provenance of the schwa pronunciation of vowels in weakly stressed syllables -> Missoura
Your point still stands
I don’t want us to overpay.
Irish provenance of the schwa pronunciation of vowels in weakly stressed syllables -> Missoura
Jeff Weaver, Ronnie Belliard, and Jeff Suppan
good thing we got the last one back
HAPPY FLIGHT!!!
Running list of Molina pick-offs | twit
May be redundant, haven't read above, but my take
5 players (Holliday, Jay, Craig, Berkman, and hopefully Beltran) for 4 spots (LF, CF, RF, 1B).
162 games * 4 positions = 648 individual games played
648 games / 5 players = 129.6 games played/average
With Craig’s uncertainty regarding the start of the season, Berkman’s age, and the average “course of the season” injuries, why would anyone be against adding a bat with the impact that Beltran’s provides?
LF—Holliday, Craig
CF—Jay, Beltran
RF—Beltran, Craig
1B—Berkman, Craig
If, heaven forbid, significant injuries happen, no team in baseball would be better positioned to stay above water than the Cards. If they don’t happen and the team is healthy, there’s a great PH or possible defensive replacement in every game. I highly doubt many players would complain about 130 games started. I’d expect Holliday to start 145, Beltran about the same, Berkman 130-135, Jay about 120-125, and Craig the same.
Get it done, Mo
How about also adding the DH PAs?
I heartily agree with you.
Irish provenance of the schwa pronunciation of vowels in weakly stressed syllables -> Missoura
While Craig misses 30-45 games to start the season
Beltran, Jay, Berkman, and Holliday would not all be playing every single game. There will be a number of days-off during that stretch, so you need to factor that in as well. Basically, those are the days we would see Schumaker in the field.
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger. - Aeron Damphair from A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin
Not only that
but shouldn’t we view Craig as being Freese’s backup at third also? 3B is the position Craig played the most in the minors. I rarely find fault with DanUp’s analyses, but I think there definitely is room for Beltran on this team.
Beer and Baseball. Baseball and Beer. It's not hard to reevaluate your priorities when you only have two.
by PugetSoundCardsAddict on Dec 22, 2011 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
I would think Descalso is Freese's backup
and Schu (gulp) would be 3rd option at 2B
Lot of flexibility on the infield as well…
3B – Freese, Descalso
SS – Furcal, Greene
2B – Descalso, Greene
If the organization viewed Craig as a third baseman, I think he would have played there more
during Freese’s DL stints in 2010 and 2011.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Even though signing Beltran could be worth it for us
All the roster/positional gymnastics makes me wonder why he would sign here when he could probably just start almost everyday somewhere else.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
That's a good point. Maybe he doesn't want to start every day?
Ad Maiorem Tortius Gloriam
by peppermartin on Dec 22, 2011 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
Could be
He could see the almost-everyday starter thing as a plus since he could get more rest that way. But that’s something that only the negotiators would really know right now.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I mean, it's also possible that the Cardinals have made a thorough evaluation
and have decided that they would just put him in as our starting CF, with Jay starting at RF until Craig comes back and then become 4th OF after that.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Maybe he wants to play for a winner. . .
and on grass (the surface, not the inhaled substance), and with Lance Berkman.
by SouthsideCardsFan on Dec 22, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe that too
There are a lot of competing “maybes” in this situation.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
I'm sure Mo is selling that he'd be an everyday player
and playing 140-150 games is what an everyday player often gets, after hamstring pulls, wonky knees, obliques, whatever during the season. Especially 35 year old players.
Yeah, I think I agree with you
Also, the longer Craig is out, the more games/PAs added to the estimate.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
The way I am reading the counter-arguments boils down to
who people believe will get more time in the 3rd OF spot: Craig or Jay. To me, as long as Holliday, Beltran, and Berkman are the feature players, and Craig gets 100+ starts and 450 ABs (or the equivalent of that over the time he is healthy), it’s a can’t lose situation. Even then, Jay will get his time.
I thought the White Sox were rebuilding
WTF are they doing sigining him to that extension. I am confused.
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
'him' = Danks
"Why does everyone always forget about Trevor Rosenthal?"
-VolsnCards5
by Action Jaxon on Dec 22, 2011 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
no
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
rob neyer is on my shit list right now
i’m reading his rundown of for love of the game
You teach me baseball and I'll teach you relativity. No, we must not. You will learn about relativity faster than I learn baseball. --Albert Einstein
2011 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!
now you're on the list too, pal
You teach me baseball and I'll teach you relativity. No, we must not. You will learn about relativity faster than I learn baseball. --Albert Einstein
2011 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!
Did someone say Corey Patterson?
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
saying his name summons him
RE-SIGN EVERYONE
by Notorious PSC on Dec 22, 2011 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
like Dave?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
No man. It's me , Dave.
LET ME IN!!! I GOT THE STUFF!!!
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
What stuff are you talking about man?
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
"cue the mechanism"
> tebow
by cschepers on Dec 22, 2011 12:02 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
CLEAR the mechanism
gawd
You teach me baseball and I'll teach you relativity. No, we must not. You will learn about relativity faster than I learn baseball. --Albert Einstein
2011 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!
must cue it before it can be cleared
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
oh wow,that's even more lame than I thought
disclaimer: I think I own the movie
> tebow
by cschepers on Dec 22, 2011 1:38 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Oh, c'mon
compared to any of the sequels to Major League that’s a pretty decent baseball movie.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I assume, as a member of the Hyperventilating Prospect Geek fraternity,
that you prefer “Back to the Minors.”
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
But you are forgetting the enigmatic Japanese outfielder, Isuro Tanaka, in Major League 2
Dan Up would be ‘bout that like Cliff’s Notes.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Bull Durham is the closest a baseball movie should come to being a chick flick.
I also find it humorous that Costner did both.
Asshattery: it's an epidemic.
Second base….I’ve played second base, how hard can it be? -TLR
Also, Dave Concepcion.
kevin costner and baseball movies were made for each other
don’t forget field of dreams. also: he played a former baseball player in “the upside of anger” which is actually a great movie.
You teach me baseball and I'll teach you relativity. No, we must not. You will learn about relativity faster than I learn baseball. --Albert Einstein
2011 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!
"hey.... dad. you wanna have a catch?"
always gets me. right. here.
Ad Maiorem Tortius Gloriam
by peppermartin on Dec 22, 2011 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
Me too.
Only three movies get me every time. Field of Dreams, Marley & Me, and It’s a Wonderful Life, which I watch on Christmas Eve every year.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Marley & Me is a great movie, but i can't watch it.
i watched it one time and that’s enough for me. some movies, i am not designed to handle.
Sign Hong-Chih Kuo, Trade for Peter Bourjos
Seriously
I lost it when I turned on the TV and only watched the last 15 minutes one time.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
My wife tried to get me to watch it once
but I didn’t fall for her trickery. I don’t need any more dust in my eyes.
Stupid UCL's.
by Bring Back Tommy Herr! on Dec 22, 2011 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
ZuZu's petals
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
My wife and I watch It's A Wonderful Life every x-mas eve, too.
Luckily she falls asleep before the ending so she doesn’t see me bawling like Albert Pujols.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
at the risk of sounding like a grinch, i hate that movie.
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
Oh, hey Hitler.
"He probably misses his old glasses."
by Alxfritz on Dec 22, 2011 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I watch it every Christmas Eve, too.
It’s a great movie. One of the best screenplays ever written.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
It's A Wonderful Life is great.
for some reason the scene in “White Christmas” where the general is surprised by his old army unit gets me every time.
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
That is a great movie
The sports guy with a radio talk show that won’t talk about sports.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Could someone help me learn how to use VEB better?
I’m typing in a comment and a new comment comes in and jumps me to another place. Also, could I follow a thread I’m interested in and just see who responds to me?
Older than any three of you.
by Remember Kenny B on Dec 22, 2011 12:50 PM EST reply actions
it does that when you z and follow comments
I think you just need to unmark the comments you were following. I don’t use z a lot
RE-SIGN EVERYONE
by Notorious PSC on Dec 22, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
If you Z through comments
you can’t avoid this, it’s just a glitch that happens. I sucks when the thread is getting updated frequently and you’re typing in the middle of it.
One way I’ve found to solve this issue is to type your reply in a text editor and then hit “Reply”, type your subject line, and paste your reply in. It’s a lot of work though, and the screen jumping might be less of a pain in the ass for quick comments. I just write a lot of lengthy comments.
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
I'm hoping the verge's profile pages eventually move our way
they’re not perfect, but it’s nice having a list of your comments that tells you whether someone’s replied/rec’d them.
Verge has stolen most (all) of SBN's developers for the time being
me thinks.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
If you're looking for an Andy Richter type sidekick, my e-mail address is in my profile.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
go to the top and turn off refresh til you catch up
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
OT: i had some version of the stomach flu for the past couple of days.
i watched “there will be blood” with a fever of 102.
was it just my fever-induced haze or does that movie make no goddamn sense?
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
Gonna go with Fever-induced haze.
I thought it was a really good movie, but also it was more or less straightforward.
WWCD? CDGAF.
I didnt care for it
I was excited and it is normally the movie I like, but just didn’t care for it at all.
Piss off Tony, get shipped to Canada.
by beer me on Dec 22, 2011 1:25 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
[SPOILERS] okay, so here's what i gathered from it [SPOILERS]:
there’s this guy who is digging in the ground and finds some type of precious metal?
and then he dies
BUT WAIT HE’S ALIVE
and then there’s oil? in the mine?
and then there’s some more oil
and he all of the sudden has a kid for some reason
then someone comes and tells him about some more oil
he goes there and that person pretends to not know the oil guy
turns out that one guy was a preacher-man (also schizophrenic?)
BUY ALL OF THE LAND
fast-forward twenty years all of the sudden
marriage
“fuck you son!”
“fuck you preacher man!”
it is finished
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
Well...
There are some movies that I really enjoy not necessarily because the overall plot itself is great, but the character development was interesting to watch. It’s kind of like “Lost In Translation” — I love that movie, but a lot of people hate it because they don’t get what the point of the story was supposed to be. But for me, the “plot” was just a mechanic to give a window to the development of Bill Murray’s character.
I’m probably not explaining that well, but I watched There Will Be Blood in the same way. It’s not so much about the oil and the plot to control land deeds, but one guy falling further and further into greed until he basically loses everything around him that was at one point good.
WWCD? CDGAF.
helpful
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I've watched it a few times
and you are correct
I crawled the earth, but now I'm higher, 2010 watch it go to fire!
by First mammal to wear pants on Dec 22, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
helpful
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
this was actually the least helpful one for me because
i have no clue which of my proposed scenarios he is saying is correct.
does it not make sense?
or does it make sense and it just seemed it didn’t because fever?
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
unhelpful
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I love VEB
but if you read subthreads where someone actually asks a question, it’s probably something like 5-10% of the responses actually answer the specific question.
I’m not sure any of the following answers even include the word “sense” in them.
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
doesn't really answer the question
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
That movie is so awesome.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
doesn't really answer the question
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I should watch that agin
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
ignores the question
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Whoa
Watching There Will Be Blood in a fever-haze sounds like an awesome idea. Great movie.
by purple_haze on Dec 22, 2011 1:35 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
kind of answers the question
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Daniel Day Lewis
Is IMHO the best modern day movie actor
He only does one movie every few years, but he is so remarkable in all of them.
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger. - Aeron Damphair from A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin
I can't wait to see him in the new Lincoln movie
That is supposed to be coming out next year
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger. - Aeron Damphair from A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin
There's a new picture of him in full costume.
It looks terrific.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Wow
He’s not in costume, but Variety’s Jeff Sneider hears that Day-Lewis hasn’t broken his Lincoln accent since March and his real name doesn’t even appear on the call sheet, so it’s pretty safe to assume that he’s already "in character."
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger. - Aeron Damphair from A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin
that's such a strange way to go about acting to me.
it’s called acting because it’s a show for an audience. continuing to “act” absent an audience seems more like a personality disorder.
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
From Wiki
Method acting
Method actors are often characterized as immersing themselves in their characters to the extent that they continue to portray them even offstage or off-camera for the duration of a project. However, this is a popular misconception. While some actors have employed this approach, it is generally not taught as part of the Method
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger. - Aeron Damphair from A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin
i realise what it's called.
i suppose it’s easier for people to stay in character as opposed to going in and out…
it is what it is, not what we thought it'd be
Some would also say that it enables them to portray a character much better
because they explore the nuance of the persona when not on stage or before a camera.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Staying in character offstage is a fetish for some actors.
Not good or bad, just how they do it.
Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue parceque je n'ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte
Here he is in costume:
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Abe Lincoln didn't wear jeans and a sweater!
Is this going to be one of those movies where they play Hootie and the Blowfish, but in a “civil war periody style” during Gettysburg? GOD DAMN IT SPIELBERG!
"He probably misses his old glasses."
by Alxfritz on Dec 22, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
There's no need to bring Hootie and the Blowfish into this.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
You have to admit
Abe Lincoln was probably a Civil War era hipster. I mean, look at his hat for chrissakes!
Question Answered: Not Pujols. Not Luhnow either. WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO MY TEAM?!?!?!
Abe Lincoln 3D
The story of “America’s Greatest President” as told through the 3D imagination Steven Spielberg! As the Civil War tears apart the country, and brothers shed each other’s blood, a group of velociraptors covertly replace Jefferson Davis with their pack leader. Not only does Honest Abe have to keep the country from falling apart, he is now in a deadly cat & mouse game with history’s greatest predator!
Mike Shannon: "That strikeout was brought to you by...by...well, I don't know what it was brought to you by!"
John Rooney: "It wasn't brought to you by anything Mike."
I think I would rather re-imagine the Civil War as a hilarious unintentional conflict
I like the “brothers shed each other’s blood” thing, so let’s pretend it starts out as a family business snafu. It ends when the president is assassinated by ‘Gob’ Wilkes Bluth.
"I'll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missoura!"
Bill Cunningham!
Secretary of WAR and Defense of the Tyler Greene Fanclub.
by vivaelpujols on Dec 22, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
Tangential
Beware: Velociraptors may be present.
by azruavatar on Dec 22, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Cardinals' talks with Beltran intesify
The Cardinals intensified their talks with the agent for switch-hitting outfielder Carlos Beltran late Wednesday night and into Thursday morning. Beltran has been a target of the team since Albert Pujols signed with the Los Angeles Angels.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
so they just started using all caps
WE WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO BE A CARDINAL. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO SIGN YOU?
I smacked Rickey right in the face when he told me this idea.
All I want for Christmas is Carlos Beltran
When the Cardinals won the World Series, Ryan Theriot was batting lead-off.
Bilingual Twitter
let's get Stan to call him
11 in '11, Check.
12 in 12, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
by I-Musial-ly-Am on Dec 22, 2011 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
HAY GUYS THERE’S A NEW THREAD WHERE WE AREN’T TALKING ABOUT COLLEGE SPORTS
RJ Swindle for LOOGY
I have a man-crush on Peter Bourjos
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Viva El Birdos
Related FanShots on Viva El Birdos
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
