1 hour ago, Shumway said:

 

For the record, Estevez has an ERA just above 2 and nearly a strikeout per inning pitched since joining the Phillies while converting 6 of 7 save opportunities.

 

Edit: My stats were a little off (looked at an old page), but he's been pretty good for the Phillies.

He's been bailed out by robbed home runs, inherited runners scoring that aren't charged to him, and getting in and out of trouble.  He's certainly not Kimbrel level of scary when he comes in, but by no means does anyone feel confident.  It's such a shame that Alvarado reverted to his early '22 self and has basically lost every high-leverage opportunity.

2 hours ago, Partycrasher said:

 

the funny thing is that this is exactly what I expected. the Angels will see that something fun is about to happen, throw a gigantic hissyfit, and do everything in their power to ruin it for everybody. every single time.

 

contract this franchise. the foundation is compromised. throw this one in the dumpster and give SoCal a completely new, mold-free AL team. I'm getting really tired of nothing ever happening.

That's why nothing that happens there matters, and nobody that plays there should be trusted.  Ohtani obviously proved, to nobody's surprise, that he's legit.  But other clowns that have been good there and since left have been jokes, like this "unhittable" Estevez loser that forgot how to pitch as soon as he's playing in front of 44k on an nightly basis for a team competing for the top seed.  

1 minute ago, Gary said:

Meanwhile in Los Angeles 

For everyone in the comments that's laughing and saying he has no case, that's likely not what this is about.  He probably knows he has a very weak case (if any at all) but probably hoping that they settle for like 5% or 10% of the sale price just to make it go away.  Pretty smart on the kid's part.

52 minutes ago, Anubis2051 said:

 

Except for, you know, playing there since 1996...

They have zero stake, zero say, and contributed nothing towards the renovations.  Their presence as tenants (and someday, their lack of presence) has no bearing on the fact that the arena won't be replaced for decades.

The only connection that I can think of between decisions made on the arena that the Sixers "influence" is the income Comcast gets from their rent check, which will be going away.  So technically some of that private financing is 3-degrees of separation from the Sixers, but the Sixers are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

HOWEVER... the new arena still has one more approval to get, which isn't just a formality.  I think it's going to happen, but it's certainly not a certainty and it's about the most divisive project I can remember here in a longgggg time... if ever.

3 hours ago, TheBigFiz21 said:

As far as Camden Yards goes, it is just as wonderful of a ballpark as when I first walked in 20 years ago. A lot of the criticisms and complaints from fans across the Internet that I hear the most are:

• The CF scoreboard being the smallest in the league
• A sound system that somehow can't reach some parts of the ballpark
• The LF upper deck being closed off for most games outside of Opening Day, weekend regular season, and postseason games

Now, I'm absolutely positive that Rubenstein's ownership team will have solutions, both short-term and long-term, to keep the yard amongst the best of MLB. I've heard some fans notice some improvements in the sound system in flag court, but nothing since then, so maybe the fixes on that will come soon. As for the LF upper deck, I think those seats will be removed, likely for some kind of party deck a la Coors Field. The big challenge with things like that and redoing the concourses, as was suggested earlier, is how to successfully add that and catch up with what newer stadiums have while also maintaining its timeless, retro-classic look as a ballpark that is just as amazing as it was in '92. Maybe during this offseason, we will see them get together with the Maryland Stadium Authority to announce those future plans for any changes.

I forgot about the sound system but yeah that was another thing. It was very difficult to understand. I forget if it was because of it being too faint, or echoey, but I definitely remember us commenting about it. 
 

I think Citizens Bank Park has done its concourses to achieve the best balance between modern and retro. Overall it’s certainly not as retro-ish as Camden Yards - I’d call CBP a modern park  covered in retro materials - but the concourse thing can be achieved (though probably not due to the way the seating is and how much they’d lose and how long an effort like that would take, if  it was even feasible from an engineering standpoint. 
 

EDIT: giant 40k scoreboards are overrated. Half the space is taken up with ads, and baseball doesn’t show as many replays as any other sport  it’d be nice if it showed you the live pitch from the TV angle so you can see balls/strikes (don’t need the white box tho) but it’s basically, at least in CBP (which has one of the largest in the league) just for ads and sabrbetric stats that nobody at the game cares about. 

Again, not sure if I can post other stadium / relo stuff here but I’ll stop if so. 
 

The Sixers EFFFFFED over the flyers. Royally. It’s become so petty, but man did they get them. 
 

1. They committed to play in the new place for a minimum of 30 years, so to 2061. It’s built 100% with their own money (debatable with PILOTs) so I’m not sure what happens after that, but that’s good. 
 

2. They had a provision that since they’re not using any public money, if ANY other team gets public money for their stadium/arena, then the city has to match it and write the Sixers a check for that amount. 
 

That was thought to be a poison pill, but PLOT TWIST - they dropped it for the Phillies and Eagles, and only included it for the Flyers / Comcast, essentially prohibiting them from getting public funding forever. 
 

Not sure how much it matters because everything the Flyers have done has always been private money, but the pettiness to explicitly block them from EVER getting public money is amazing. 

1 hour ago, Anubis2051 said:

 

Aren't the sixers actively attempting to build a new arena downtown? Even Camden was in the hunt from what I understand. 

The sixers have nothing to do with the fka Wells Fargo center. 

26 minutes ago, MJD7 said:

d Camden Yards are my two favorite ballparks I've been to, besides Target Field

The problem with Camden Yards is that it still has the dark concourses that are totally cut off from the field, so that if you go to the bathroom or get a beer, you are missing the game.  Also other than the designated areas, you can't just hang out against a rail and watch the game - you need to be in your seat... which is the other problem - due to the cut-off concourses, there's reduced airflow in many sections which makes the seating area muggy af.  Not just hot, but muggy.  I've gone to a lot of games in >90 degree weather, and I don't even think my trip to Camden Yards was even close to that, but it was among the least comfortable seats I've had due to the lack of air flow (when you entered the vomitory to go to the concourse, the difference was night and day.

4 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I am not bothered at all by catchers wearing single-digit numbers.  I mean, Yogi, Johnny Bench, Gary Carter, Steve Yeager, later on Benito Santiago.  Even one of the numbers of my hero Rick Cerone was a single-digit number!  It never even occurred to me that that is any kind of issue.

 

But what I absolutely cannot live with is a single-digit number on a pitcher.  And that brings us back to the topic of the thread!  Hammaker wore number 14 with the Giants; he was wearing that number when he gave up the historic grand slam to Fred Lynn in the 1983 All-Star Game.  Then he committed a crime against humanity by switching to number 7.

 

 

 

 

We need a rule against that.

 

Santiago switched to 09 specifically because he didn't want the strap cutting the 9 in half.  That's why I hate single-digit catchers (even though it's not perfect when the first number is 1, it's still better than a single digit.)  Also as the backstop, I just think there should be something... I don't know, more substantial behind the plate than a 7.  Save 7 for position players.

I think the only thing you and I agree on in any aspect of life is the single-digit pitcher.  There absolutely should be a rule against it.  Also, I think the pitcher should look the most "classic" on the field, so I kinda hate when starters wear 82 or 93 or when they keep their spring-training number in the 60s.  I don't even like starters in the 50s.  They should stick to 30s and 40s.  I certainly wouldn't enforce this via legislation, but if I was the team manager, I'd rip the jersey right off of his back and slap him until he fell in line.  That's exactly what I'd do.

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Oh, you're just wrong about 15. It's a solid, powerful number.

 

When I was a kid, the fact that that number was worn by both New York catchers cemented it in my mind as a catcher's number.  It was worn also by Tim McCarver, and later by Darrell Porter.

 

 

 

So, naturally, while catching in little league and for my school, I did everything I could to get that number, including arranging multi-player shirt-swaps, and also subjecting my mother to hours of sewing. 

 

In addition to the fact that the number was worn by cool players, it's also just aesthetically pleasing the way the forms of the numbers sit next to one another.

 

In the the varsity font it communicates robustness.

 

 

    

 

 

While in the standard block font, it can have a kind of a lithe sleekness.

 

 

 

Even though my first choice in numbers is now 10 (thanks to Rick Cerone and other factors), the number 15 remains in the very top tier of numbers.

 

You make a valid point about how they sit next to each other, at least with traditional fonts. I could see it for a catcher or maybe a first baseman. But that’s about it for me. 
 

And again, this isn’t about great players that wore the number, my points are simply about the aesthetics of it and subliminal implications (which you’ve also articulated in your counterpoints.)
 

Mahomes is like a total mind F for me. My brain sees 15 and imagines a statue, yet he’s anything but. He should be in what is to me a more dynamic number. When I see him do what he does, I can’t get over the fact that he’s in 15. 

Same with 5. It doesn’t bother me too much in baseball, at least for an infielder, but I also think of it as very static, especially when the left side descends, like it does in the Eagles font. I always thought it looked like how I described 15/Mahomes when McNabb was fast and dynamic, before he turned more statuesque after injuries and a determination to be viewed as a pocket passer started to mount. 
 

I at least hope we can agree that catchers should never wear single digits. 

4 hours ago, GrayJ12 said:

Ryan Newman's number of choice has been 39, and when he drove for Tony Stewart, he actually had that number. I don't know why, it doesn't look like a number that communicates speed.

I’m only talking about sports numbers. 

7 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The number 39 feels like a power number, thanks entirely to one guy: Dave Parker . That's why it felt right for Strawberry with the Yankees.

 

 

 

 

Though there was one Yankee who made number 39 feel fast.

 

 

 

 

There's going to be countless examples of guys who were great but wore numbers that I think are awful.  The Flyers just got some Russian kid that's supposed to be a cornerstone player and wears 39, but I still think it's bad.  The 3 and 9 are too far apart, just like 2 and 9 are (numbers that start with 1 are different for reasons I can't explain, except for the same rule about ending in 5 or 8.  11 good, 12 good (football QB only - GTFO with receivers wearing it, and it's not my favorite in baseball), 13-14 good, 15 barf, 16-17 ok, 18-19 barf in football, meh for baseball).  Dick Allen wore 15 and should be in the HOF, but I still don't think it's a great number.

Speaking of numbers ending in 9, one of my top 3 football players of all time Seth Joyner wore 59, so I'm partial to that number, but if I take emotion out of it, it's an awful number for what used to be a linebacker's number.  58 should be the highest a LB should go up to, with the exception of 57 which is another of those bad numbers.

Of course now these kids want anyone to wear anything, so we'll soon have QBs wearing trash like 39, and a lot of the context is lost.  Changing the number rules is worse than changing to this ridiculous kickoff system that's eliminated squibs and surprises, and made the game 10x more confusing than other rules already have.

9 minutes ago, schlim said:

My family moved to Massachusetts when I was young so I went to a lot of games at Fenway, surviving the round communal urinals, bad, poorly aligned seats, crowded concourses and the bleachers being segregated away from the people with real tickets (for good reason, the bleachers are not only awful but the crowds were worse).

 

I finally got to Wrigley for the first time about ten years ago and thought that was a dump, so I guess which one you prefer is  whichever park you discovered first and found charming for all its awful quirks.

 

Despite the aborted plans to build a new Fenway next door in the late 90s, I think Fenway is here to stay, especially with the Sox' ability to close off the streets and turn them into a defacto concourse during games.

 

Besides Wrigley, Fenway and Dodgers Stadium , there are probably just a few other stadiums that are historical and will last. Lambeau will probably continue to survive the 30+ year lifespan new parks have now, maybe Arrowhead will survive all the dumb machinations the Chiefs are trying now, but besides that, are there any other parks that will last? SF, Baltimore? Or are we in for an endless stream of ever changing malls ala new Yankee Stadium?

 

 

The owners (or owner-ish people) of each team in the Phila Sports Complex has said that they have no plans to seek a new stadium any time soon, and in one case (Citizens Bank Park, which just turned 20) "no reason it can't last another 20 at least."  Lincoln Financial is 21 and there's no plans or even hints of any, and the No Sponsor Center (formerly Wells Fargo Center) just went through a $500M (maybe more) privately-financed renovation and is pretty awesome, so there's zero chance of it being replaced even though it's now nearly 30.

On 9/23/2024 at 10:29 AM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Rickey Henderson 

 

(The A's retired his second number.)

 

Thank you for following the rules I made for the thread I didn't start . 

I remember the first time I saw Henderson in 35.  I only knew him in 24, but maybe it was an old baseball card or somewhere where I saw him in 35 and it just looked so wrong.  35 is one of the worst numbers for a position player.  It's "slow".  Maybe it works for a pitcher, but that's about it.  24 is much speedier.  I can't even say it's an even number thing, because I don't feel the same about numbers that end in 8.  Something about 24 in baseball is just so classic.  It seems like one of those numbers that most players should desire.  It's an elite baseball number.

I feel the same way about 35 in football - it's a slow number that rookies get and then change after final cuts (although these days a goddam DT can wear it.)

It's like the 3 indicates some speed or motion, and the 5 is like the stop sign.  30 is meh, 31 is OK if you're a pitcher and maybe a backup DB, 32 is ELITE - you should be a great pitcher or great RB to have the balls to wear 32.  One of the best numbers.  33 is fitting for any baseball player at any position, and is a top-tier football number too.  34 is an all-time baseball number - suitable for both star pitchers and power hitters.  It's also great for football too, but more for RBs than DBs.  We've discussed 35.  36 is meh.  It's fine for DBs in football, and pitchers, but that's about it.  37 is an all around ugly-ass number.  Suitable for every player on the Mets, but not anyone else in any sport.  38, like many (but not all) numbers that end in 8 is slow and prodding.  39 is awful.  

That's a shame.  Fenway is a dump.  It's not old and charming like Wrigley.  It's just old.  The last time I was there was 2010, but the concourses reminded me a lot of some older AA stadiums I went to back when I was a lowercase g.  I wonder if the player facilities - lorckerrooms, clubhouse, indoor cages, training rooms, etc. are up to par with the rest of the league, or if they're lousy too.  I know the history and all that, but even if they built a replica but with open concourses, no supports, a modern scoreboard, and random parts of the green monster that shoot flames if an outfielder gets too close, it would be worth it.  I guess there's no temporary place they could play for three seasons so it's a moot point, but it'd be nice.  

I also thin Camden Yards needs a pretty major renovation, but that's a different story.

Doesn't WM actually advertise on some team's uniform?  That gives me an idea... maybe this year I'll be a big IBX sign.

National league is wild.

All three wild-card teams have better records than the top AL WC team, the Phillies are competing for a bye with a team that's behind a WC team with 90 wins, and there's literally no team that any team wants to face.  It's not like in years past where there's at least one or two jabroni teams that and low odds.  Every single series could go either way, and bye or no bye, I'm terrified of any matchup the Phillies might have.  I could even see the Mutts in the NLCS, and any of the other teams winning the pennant.  The pessimist in me ranks the Phillies 5 of 6... but they just lost 3 of 4 to the team I'd rank 6, so that says something.

Not that I pay attention when the Phillies aren't in it, but I can't remember a stronger field.

10 minutes ago, The_Admiral said:

My new favorite nickname for Watson is "Groper Cleveland." That's all I have at this time.

Funny, because depending on how things shake out in November, that nickname could apply to someone else.

1 minute ago, SFGiants58 said:

I’m imagining a Prince Fielder situation where he can’t play football anymore and the contract is insured. I don’t know how insurance works in football contracts, but I can’t imagine it’s that different from baseball.

 

Maybe the Browns encourage him to take up rally car driving or motorcycling in the offseason?

I think I've read that there's cap implications even if the guy retires, even if it's because of injury.  When they wrote the CBA, they intentionally tried to eliminate any chance of either foul play or for a guy to "retire", come off the books, then magically find his smile and come back for his old or even a new team.

Basing anything, even tiebreakers, on run differential is silly.  Silly silly silly.  Just silly.  I just tinkled a little big because I'm giggling so much at the silliness.  

I don't care that soccer does it.  Not disagreeing that run differential (or point differential in football) is typically an indicator of who the better teams are, but the goal is to win games, and good teams figure out ways to win the close ones.  Sometimes it might be dumb luck that they come out on top of the 6-5 games, but it could mean that they're actually good and always rally when down 1 in the 9th.

10 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I’m just imagining the Browns contemplating all possible schemes to get rid of Watson. Seeing if Tepper is stupid enough would be perfect.

the Browns are hoping against hope that there's some legal thing that comes out of nowhere (maybe this latest accusation... but probably not) that voids the thing. 

But contracts are pretty iron clad.  It blew my mind that baseball players could get contracts that were based on their stats when they were on roids, and then they had to stop juicing so of course their stats declined, but the contracts were still valid even though they were essentially given to a different human being.

I can't imagine the union or his agent allowing for there to be an "out".  

24 minutes ago, Sport said:

 

I wonder if the Panthers would be dumb enough to trade him for Deshaun Watson.

I'm not sure if this is serious or not, but if so, I think there's insane cap hits for trading someone with Watson's contract (something like his remaining guarantees would all be added up into dead cap next year) and the Panthers would have to take on those guarantees (I think... I'm not sure if Cleveland would still be on the hook for anything.)

BUTTTTT... Carolina has proved themselves to be one of the dummy teams, so they might actually do that if it was proposed!

2 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

Giant “background” ads that appear as if the forums are overtop them while scrolling are a tad frustrating to say the least.

I just don't think anyone's going to get anywhere with the ads.  I totally realize it's not in everyone's budget, but the ad-free experience is noticeably better than even other forums that I go to that have a normal ads and not the "tie you up and slap you in the face repeatedly and then kick you in the balls before you can read anything, and then do it again 10 seconds later, oh and maybe we'll try to sneak a virus in there too if you're not careful" kind.

Been getting more and more database errors over the past couple of weeks.  Today received the following.  Can't quantify the number of these or total down time.  It's not much.  I think the most down time has been around 10 mins.  But enough that it's worth pointing out.

An error occurred (500 Error)

Speaking of 3b and MJ, probably the most famous example of them all (I think this should count, as it was intended to be a permanent switch.)