2019-2020 MLB Offseason Thread

[Digby]

It wasn't clear to me in what I've read whether the Astros installed a closed-circuit camera for this purpose, or if they were using the usual video-replay feeds for more than intended? I guess that's my biggest question in all of this, is to what extent the top-secret video war rooms were tricked out.

 

If everybody's got their replay room but they're only allowed to give the skipper opinions on whether to challenge, I think that's insane. Use the intel at your disposal or don't. Some honor code on what types of intel are acceptable is asking for envelopes to be pushed.

 

What I'd vastly prefer is no hidden video rooms at all. Keep monitors in the dugout, let the coaches decide what to challenge from those, and anything else they can glean from that is fair game. But it keeps everything on the field/in the dugouts, and it also solves one of my least-favorite recent MLB trends, that of the manager standing at the top step with his hand out, making everyone stop play until he decides whether to challenge.

[Marlins93]

Television feeds of the game, even at the ballpark, are too delayed for the trash can scheme to work. They installed a dedicated camera. Or so that's what the reports said back in November. I didnt read all of Manfred's remarks.

[See Red]

2 hours ago, Digby said:

It wasn't clear to me in what I've read whether the Astros installed a closed-circuit camera for this purpose, or if they were using the usual video-replay feeds for more than intended? I guess that's my biggest question in all of this, is to what extent the top-secret video war rooms were tricked out.

 

If everybody's got their replay room but they're only allowed to give the skipper opinions on whether to challenge, I think that's insane. Use the intel at your disposal or don't. Some honor code on what types of intel are acceptable is asking for envelopes to be pushed.

 

What I'd vastly prefer is no hidden video rooms at all. Keep monitors in the dugout, let the coaches decide what to challenge from those, and anything else they can glean from that is fair game. But it keeps everything on the field/in the dugouts, and it also solves one of my least-favorite recent MLB trends, that of the manager standing at the top step with his hand out, making everyone stop play until he decides whether to challenge.

 

The Astros system wasn't in the video room.  It was a table with two chairs and a monitor right outside the dugout which, according to some MLB players who have chimed in, not something that's typical.

 

 

What the Red Sox did is far less egregious, and probably something all teams did (certainly prior to 2018).  Players are allowed access to the replay room for, I guess, film study during the game.  They would relay the signs to a player who would send them out to the dugout and from there you needed a guy on second base to make use of the stolen signs.

[pmoehrin]

5 minutes ago, See Red said:

 

The Astros system wasn't in the video room.  It was a table with two chairs and a monitor right outside the dugout which, according to some MLB players who have chimed in, not something that's typical.

 

There’s at least a couple grand worth of equipment in an area where it could easily be hit or bumped into and damaged.

 

Either the Astros are that stupid and careless when it comes to computer equipment, or there was a very good reason for that setup.

[See Red]

 

40 minutes ago, pmoehrin said:

There’s at least a couple grand worth of equipment in an area where it could easily be hit or bumped into and damaged.

 

Either the Astros are that stupid and careless when it comes to computer equipment, or there was a very good reason for that setup.

 

 

Speaking of careless, that's a screencap from their 2017 World Series documentary.  So their documentary shows their method of cheating.  The same documentary has another shot of the table completely clear except for something that vaguely resembles a laptop but I think it looks more like a box or something..

 

 

So not only is it a careless spot, but it seems like they packed the equipment up when not in use.  From what I've read I think most teams have replay rooms in the actual clubhouse.  It's shocking to me they didn't get caught sooner.  The banging on the trash can was loud enough to be picked up on television broadcasts.

[LMU]

 

[dfwabel]

I laughed at this...

 

[goalieboy82]

good luck with that:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-21/los-angeles-city-council-mlb-award-2017-2018-world-series-dodgers

[goalieboy82]

who on God's Green earth didn't think Derek Jeter wasn't a Hall of Famer.

 

[Shumway]

26 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said:

who on God's Green earth didn't think Derek Jeter wasn't a Hall of Famer.

 

 

My friend and I were talking about this earlier. It's a little surprising to me that literally only one player ever is a unanimous Hall of Famer. Like, how did Mays, Aaron and Ruth not go in unanimously? Hell, even more recent guys like Tony Gwynn...how did someone, let alone 13 people, not vote for him?

[SFGiants58]

I’m just happy Larry Walker is finally in! Now he’s first Rockie in Cooperstown.

 

That only leaves the Florida two without their cap logo in the hall, further proof that those teams were mistakes.

[floydnimrod]

24 minutes ago, Shumway said:

 

My friend and I were talking about this earlier. It's a little surprising to me that literally only one player ever is a unanimous Hall of Famer. Like, how did Mays, Aaron and Ruth not go in unanimously? Hell, even more recent guys like Tony Gwynn...how did someone, let alone 13 people, not vote for him?

Not saying I agree with this method, but if some voters were certain that Jeter would get voted in, maybe they cast votes for some more downballot guys to keep them on the ballot?

[BBTV]

51 minutes ago, fnz said:

Not saying I agree with this method, but if some voters were certain that Jeter would get voted in, maybe they cast votes for some more downballot guys to keep them on the ballot?

 

That's possible, but unlikely since it's only one ballot.  It's probably some writer who thinks he's more important than he really is and feels that it's his responsibility to create artificial tiers like "unanimous", "first-ballot", and "other".  There was a time that it happened and it was a St. Louis writer that did make some kind of case like that.

 

Writers should have their voting rights taken away in cases like this.  The only "defense" is the case you mentioned, and even that goes against what they're told - which is to cast votes for the most deserving people.

[AnPheitseog]

Are you a HOF?

 

Yes- Vote for them

No- Don't

 

That simple

[Digby]

There's a strong contingent of people who think Jeter wasn't that great statistically speaking, so I can imagine a voter making a big show over that.

 

I'll be over here, nostalgic for turn-of-the-millennium Nomar. Sigh.

[JayMac]

I, as many, am surprised someone didn't vote for him. I would guess maybe a Boston guy? But, when looking at the HOF as a whole, should he have been a unanimous HOFer? He is, at the very best, the 5th best Yankee of all-time. That is even debatable. 

[Digby]

It's going to make for a very interesting comparison when A-Rod is eligible.

[OnWis97]

It seems like the thing to do is to vote for the guys you think should get in...but there's a strange history of some voters who don't think anyone with the exception of the top few guys all-time should get in on the first ballot, don't think anyone should be unanimous (possibly because guys like Ruth, Mays, and Aaron were not). I was hoping that this nonsense was over after Mariano was unanimous.  The other thing is, I think there are voters that won't vote for anyone (well, any hitter, apparently) that played during the steroid era.

[pmoehrin]

5 hours ago, jmac11281 said:

I, as many, am surprised someone didn't vote for him. I would guess maybe a Boston guy? But, when looking at the HOF as a whole, should he have been a unanimous HOFer? He is, at the very best, the 5th best Yankee of all-time. That is even debatable. 

 

Give me a choice between Rivera and Jeter to have on my team for their entire career, and I would take Mariano. I think its funny that he got in unanimously minus one vote. It's a yes-no vote who's final tally means nothing, and yet people still try to find meaning it in.

 

There was a time I used to get caught up in these debates. Now I look at it as winning an Oscar. It's cool if you win one, but I don't regard it as a true standard of measuring greatness. The Hall can put in whoever they want at this point, and I will smile and be happy for them.

 

From my standards, both Jeter and Walker easily make it. Larry Walker had a higher OPS on the road than he did at Coors the year he won the MVP in '97. It wasn't Coors; the guy was that type of hitter everywhere he played, on top of being a solid defensive player.

 

Jeter is probably the most one-dimensional shortstop in Major League history. I say that both because he was a god awful defensive shortstop for the second half of his career, and because he was a career .310 hitter. Even when he was giving up roughly an extra-base hit a game compared to your average shortstop, I would still take him above said average shortstop in a heartbeat.

 

At his peak, he was a below-average defensive player who was capable of batting .340. From 1999-2000 Derek Jeter is in the conversation for being the best player in baseball. That's the guy I like to remember. Yes, the gold gloves are a joke, but there are few players I've seen in history who can beat you in more ways than Derek Jeter could. Two hundred sixty career home runs make him a slight power threat. A .310 average makes him a contract threat, 358 career steals make him a slight stolen base threat. One thousand eighty-two career walks mean he's not afraid to work the count. Five hundred forty-four career doubles mean he can drive one to the gap. He's not the best at any one of the skills, but he's one of the few who's at least average in all of them. Add that up, and you have one of the most dynamic offensive players ever to step foot on a diamond. That's why he's a HOFer. Now, if you excuse me if a have a simulation league to get back to where I've moved Jeter over to first base and traded Tino Martinez for a real shortstop.

[BBTV]

4 hours ago, jmac11281 said:

I, as many, am surprised someone didn't vote for him. I would guess maybe a Boston guy? But, when looking at the HOF as a whole, should he have been a unanimous HOFer? He is, at the very best, the 5th best Yankee of all-time. That is even debatable. 

Ultimately, what matters is that he got in. Should he have been unanimous? Of course. So should a lot of other guys. That ONE writer can vote against him shows that he or she has such poor judgement that they should have their credentials revoked. There’s some cases where it’s so clear that they really don’t even need to have a vote other than just to go through the motions. That he was the “5th best yankee” couldn’t be less relevant.