702 wrote:Would love to have a futures bet for when the Marlins will move and the Dolphins move into the baseball stadium.

Their new baseball stadium will seat less than 40,000, so... never.

mozartpc27 wrote:

702 wrote:Would love to have a futures bet for when the Marlins will move and the Dolphins move into the baseball stadium.

Their new baseball stadium will seat less than 40,000, so... never.

Was a joke but okay!

philliesphhan wrote:Jim Bowden's hilarious suggestion

Aside from the absurdity of having the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, AND Phillies in the same division

Now, I hate the idea of two 15-team leagues, as I hate interleague play with a passion, but if baseball was going to realign radically, there is a fairly decent argument to be made for putting the Phils, Mets, Yankees, and BoSox together: realign based on market size/financial resources. It's weird to say it, but the Phillies are in that group with the Yankees and Sox: none of these teams are playing the same game as, say, the Athletics or Indians at this point. They just aren't.

702 wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:

702 wrote:Would love to have a futures bet for when the Marlins will move and the Dolphins move into the baseball stadium.

Their new baseball stadium will seat less than 40,000, so... never.

Was a joke but okay!

Oh. Sorry.

I'd rather have the Phils be in the same division as the Mets, Pirates and Nats

BigEd76 wrote:I'd rather have the Phils be in the same division as the Mets, Pirates and Nats

Frankly, I was fine with the old divisions:

NL East:

Phillies/Cardinals/Cubs/Mets/Pirates/Nationals/Marlins

NL West:

Dodgers/Reds/Giants/Padres/Astros/Braves/Rockies

Brewers could slide nicely into the NL East, the D-Backs the NL West. The obvious problems are the Braves and Reds in the West; easy enough to say "move the Cardinals and Cubs to the West, and the Braves and Reds to the East," but then the Brewers would complain (I am sure they want to be in the same division as the Cubs). The Reds having to play a bunch of games on the West Cost would suck for them.

Eh, I'm fine with the way it is now. I'd just like less interleague play, not more.

mozartpc27 wrote:

BigEd76 wrote:I'd rather have the Phils be in the same division as the Mets, Pirates and Nats

Frankly, I was fine with the old divisions:

NL East:

Phillies/Cardinals/Cubs/Mets/Pirates/Nationals/Marlins

NL West:

Dodgers/Reds/Giants/Padres/Astros/Braves/Rockies

I would be too, only this time can we please call them the Giamatti and Miller divisions so we don't further corrupt the youth of America's woeful geographic knowledge?

swishnicholson wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:

BigEd76 wrote:I'd rather have the Phils be in the same division as the Mets, Pirates and Nats

Frankly, I was fine with the old divisions:

NL East:

Phillies/Cardinals/Cubs/Mets/Pirates/Nationals/Marlins

NL West:

Dodgers/Reds/Giants/Padres/Astros/Braves/Rockies

I would be too, only this time can we please call them the Giamatti and Miller divisions so we don't further corrupt the youth of America's woeful geographic knowledge?

I was kinda hoping for Legends and Leaders.

mozartpc27 wrote:Now, I hate the idea of two 15-team leagues, as I hate interleague play with a passion, but if baseball was going to realign radically, there is a fairly decent argument to be made for putting the Phils, Mets, Yankees, and BoSox together: realign based on market size/financial resources. It's weird to say it, but the Phillies are in that group with the Yankees and Sox: none of these teams are playing the same game as, say, the Athletics or Indians at this point. They just aren't.

It would suck for the Phillies, but I agree.

1)Tony Gwynn was 3 hits short of .400 in 1994

2)Jonny Venters has an ERA+ of 854. Very curious as to whether or not their is a precedent for injury with a guy who has so much mileage put on him out of the pen at a relatively young age

Soren wrote:1)Tony Gwynn was 3 hits short of .400 in 1994

2)Jonny Venters has an ERA+ of 854. Very curious as to whether or not their is a precedent for injury with a guy who has so much mileage put on him out of the pen at a relatively young age

The sooner Venters arm explodes in a shower of bone, muscle and cartilage, the better.

Right with you on Venters, Soren. On pace for almost 100 IP this season.

Soren wrote:2)Jonny Venters has an ERA+ of 854. Very curious as to whether or not their is a precedent for injury with a guy who has so much mileage put on him out of the pen at a relatively young age

It's an interesting career, that's for sure. Pertinent of nothing, he is still a relatively young pitcher and yet he's only three months younger than Lebron James.

Soren wrote:1)Tony Gwynn was 3 hits short of .400 in 1994

2)Jonny Venters has an ERA+ of 854. Very curious as to whether or not their is a precedent for injury with a guy who has so much mileage put on him out of the pen at a relatively young age

There have been bunches of reliefers who have been great for a year or three and then poof -- gone. John Rocker; Dick Radatz; Rob Dibble; Calvin Schiraldi. Even Mark Davis was kinda like that.

Sometimes it's because of overuse and sometimes not. Reliefers being really good for a lot of years is fairly rare.

Guy is Johnny with no h, another red flag

Two years ago if you had told me that in 2011 David Ortiz was going to have a much better season than Ryan Howard I wouldn't have believed you. Ortiz has a 174 OPS+ this season.

Grotewold wrote:Guy is Johnny with no h, another red flag

A rebel!

JFLNYC wrote:Two years ago if you had told me that in 2011 David Ortiz was going to have a much better season than Ryan Howard I wouldn't have believed you. Ortiz has a 174 OPS+ this season.

28ks. His K rate has dropped from 28% last year to 11.8% this year. Not sure how that happens. Also surprised that he is only 35. Thought he was like 37 or 38.

So you're saying if only Ryan would just focus on making a little more contact...

Woody wrote:So you're saying if only Ryan would just focus on making a little more contact...

I can't believe Ortiz is only 4 years older than Howard.