MrRain422

Supposedly Turner Field's location is problematic, though the Braves did have input in it's placement.  I think the real issue is that the Braves are stuck in a TV deal that is paying them way less than other teams with better, newer TV deals (200m/year for most teams vs like 10-20 for the Braves) and are looking for another stream of revenue.

Braun didn't get off because of a loophole. He got off because MLB didnt follow the process they had agreed to follow. If he hadn't gotten off, the drug testing program would have lost its credibility. I don't have a problem with punishing players according to the proscribed rules, but the rules apply to the league too, not just the players. It's not a loophole because it was exactly the intended result of that part of the agreement.

At this point MLB hasn't claimed to have any evidence other than a list of names.  Gio Gonzalez has already been exonerated as everyone seems to agree that he only bought legal supplements from Biogenesis.   I don't see how MLB can claim to know that that isn't true of anyone else on the list too.  Even if Bosch has some notes on what he gave to each of them, it's still just one guy's word.  There's no way that can stand up against a collectively bargained agreement that lays out exactly what is punishable and exactly how those things should be punished.  If they suspend players for this (at least based only on the evidence that has been made public so far), then there would be nothing stopping Selig from suspending players based on any person's claims, baseless or not.  Shouldn't  there be a standard of proof for things like this?

Also, for all we know, whatever steroids transaction Braun did with Biogenesis was exactly the same one that resulted in the failed drug test.  Same with Grendal and Melky.  Should they be suspended again for the same offense?  If they get suspended again, it would be a more severe punishment than other people who have been suspended for failed test who just happened to have bought their 'roids from someone else.  That doesn't make sense.  I'm all for players getting suspended for failing a test, or maybe if there was some more conclusive evidence, but I think that the players are entitled to the certain rights and to the process that was agreed to in their union contract.  I don't think that suspensions should just be by Bud Selig's proclamation.

I don't see how MLB can suspend a bunch of guys based on the word of a single person (a person with huge credibility issues, and a lot to gain by talking).  

I agree with most of this:

10 Or So Thoughts on Biogenesis, A Scandal For All the Wrong Reasons

Especially this part:

3) The idea that baseball can actually secure suspensions against 20 or more players on the basis of sketchy records and a canary's say-so is self-evidently preposterous. The text of the drug agreement between labor and management can be found  here; page seven spells out punishable acts, among which “Be accused of buying drugs from a wellness quack with his head in a hangman's noose” is not to be found. There is a handwaving "just cause" clause mentioned, but one would have to be a very particular sort of lawyer invested in a highly perverse type of tendentious misreading to convincingly argue that this applies to the random collection of notes and birdsong on offer here.

Ryan Braun, one of the players under suspicion here, actually tested positive for banned substances recently, and escaped punishment because the proper protocols for the handling of his bodily fluids weren't followed. (This was, incidentally, not a technicality—the integrity of any system of drug testing is entirely reliant on letter-perfect adherence to technical procedure.) Given that precedent, any suggestion that “This minor character from a Charles Willeford novel said so” will hold up in arbitration as strong evidence is laughable on its face.

 

3a) The logical follow on to a claim that Bud Selig can suspend Braun or Alex Rodriguez because there is circumstantial evidence they possessed proscribed drugs at some point is a claim that he can suspend any player who has admitted to doing so. Andy Pettitte's confession that he used human growth hormone is rather more powerful proof of guilt than anything so far provided in the Biogenesis case, after all. What would stop the commissioner from whimsically banning him down the stretch, perhaps costing the Yankees a pennant? (For that matter, what would stop him from suspending Derek Jeter or Mike Trout on the basis of your assurances that you totally sold him Deca-Durabolin this one time?)

 

3a-a) Any system of punishment that entirely relies on the presumed prudence and restraint of one person should be scoffed at by the public and actively resisted by those subject to it.

It seems pretty unlikely to me that these suspensions will happen at all, but if they do, it will only be after MLB produces a lot more evidence than what they purport to have right now (and after a really long fight with the union, followed by a lengthy appeals process). 

President Obama didn't break any laws in Benghazi, but if it can be proved that he and his administration didn't act on requests for more security, then he needs to be called on the carpet for it. 

But it was congress that rejected funding for more security at the embassies.  So what's this really all about?

Shaughnessy explictly said that one of the reasons for suspicion is that he's Dominican.  The accusation may not be racist, but it's not not racist.

No brainer is overstated. But I do not think it is controversial to raise the issue specific to Ortiz.

 

If Sosa were still hitting .421 in 2013, I would feel the same way.

Sammy Sosa is 7 years older than David Ortiz.  Of course it is controversial to make an accusation with no evidence other than speculation and innuendo.  Are you serious?

The NL will have the DH within 5 years. Probably less.

Yu Darvish just lost a perfect game with 2 outs in the 9th.  Still, a 14 K one hitter is pretty solid.

Even if being gay was a choice, that wouldn't make it morally wrong.  Of course being gay is not a choice, and I understand the necessity and desire to point it out to people who oppose gay rights, however I think that even if it were a choice, it would be a completely acceptable one. Spending too much time and effort hammering home the point that it is not a choice concedes too much because to those who oppose gay rights and marriage equality because it implies that making a choice to be gay would be wrong.  The fact that homosexuality is innate is immaterial to the fact that people should be allowed to make a life (or have a meaningless fling) with whoever they want, provided that other person is a consenting adult.  Choice or not, it's no one else's business.

Philip Roth

John Irving

Haruki Murakami

Jeffrey Eugenides

Michael Chabon

Norman Mailer

Saul Bellow

As it turns out, not only did the Pirates reject the idea, but so did the Canadian WBC team, so no Martin isn't going to play at all.  I thought he'd at least run the idea by the Canadian team before talking about how he was going to do it.

When I was in college, this group of inbred dickheads came to Ann Arbor to protest the general gayness of Ann Arbor.  As I was walking to class, I was approached by a young boy, probably around 7 or 8 years old, who reached his arm out to me to hand me a flyer.  I politely said "no thank you" and continued on my way.  As I passed, he yelled at me, "You're a dirty sinner and you're going to hell."  On a reflex, I said "Fuck you."  I felt kind of bad about it for the rest of the day, as I don't normally talk to children like that.  Later I forgave myself though, as I realized that he was one of Fred Phelps's grandchildren and would no doubt still be a gigantic asshole as an adult.

There's no way the Pirates don't kill this idea, right?

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/pittsburgh-pirates-catcher-russell-martin-shortstop-canada-world-baseball-classic-021813

Alright,  I guess I'll do my predictions

Rays

Jays (WC)

Yanks

Sawx

Orioles

Tigers

Indians

Royals

White Sox

Twins

Angels

Texas (WC)

Oakland

Seattle

'Stros

Nats

Braves (WC)

Phillies

Mets

Marlins

Reds

Cardinals (WC)

Brewers

Pirates

Cubs

Dodgers

Giants

D'backs

Rockies

Padres

Jays beat Rangers

Braves beat Cardinals

Tigers beat Jays

Angels beat Rays

Braves beat Nats

Reds beat Dodgers

Tigers beat Angels

Braves beat Reds

Braves beat Tigers

What the hell is wrong with you KevinG? Because I said it would cost more I'm not being nice? Gimme a break. They are losing money and I don't care if you live in NYC or on a secluded ranch in Montana, they better start charging more. If I need to ship something I always go UPS or Fed Ex. 2 well ran private shipping companies. They are dependable and the USPS is not!

Just last week a friend tried to mail me my iPad charger through the post office. They weighed it charged her the postage and a week later it came back to her due to a lack of proper postage!! She only lives 5 hours from me.

Can you tell me why you think privatization would be bad for the country?

So the USPS needs to be privatized because one stupid person who works there made a mistake in weighing your friend's package?  I've got several stories about UPS messing up deliveries, but won't bother because they aren't indicative of anything systemic, just like your story.

 We'll see how well he does  in the bright lights of LA. He had issues in Dallas,There are a lot more opportunities for getting in trouble in LA.

The Angels don't play in LA.

The Tigers are a confusing bunch.

With that lineup, you'd think they would just rake and run away with the Central.

I think they probably will.  They won by a few games last year, and should be better this year than last.  They upgraded a lot in RF (from a black hole to Torii Hunter), at DH (from Delmon Young to Victor Martinez), and at 2B (Omar Infante for a full season).  Infante is probably the weakest overall hitter in the line-up, but still a huge improvement over the Ramon Santiago/Ryan Raburn/Brandon Inge combo that they used at 2B before they acquired him.  The ace is maybe the best in baseball, and the

1-4 starters are among the best rotations in the game (and a not bad #5 if either Porcello or Smyly get the job). The bullpen has some question marks but should be decent, especially considering they shouldn't have to work a very heavy load. The infield defense will still be bad, but I don't think bad enough to sink the team, just as it didn't sink them last year.

Also, the team that was closest to them last year, the White Sox, didn't really do much this off-season to improve.  The Royals have definitely improved since last season, though I don't think enough to make a run at the division just yet.  I think the Indians are still another year or two away, and the Twins are just bad right now.  Of course there are things that could happen that could stop the Tigers from running away with it (injuries, slumps, all the Royals young guys all breaking out in the same year, etc.) but I think the Tigers running away with it is probably the most likely outcome.  

 

Seriously though, even though Cruz is really inconsistent, I don't want to even begin to think how the Rangers replace him for 50 games in RF.

Maybe the Rangers will be kind enough to accept Brennan Boesch?

Oh, not "us guys".  I'm not a Phillies fan, just a jerk who wanted to point out their crazy off season.  I'm a Tigers fan, so no actual World Series win in 29 years (though it sure feels like it's gonna happen one of these days, maybe?)

The Phillies got old fast and spent too much money on their starting rotation. They would have been better off trading Cliff Lee at the deadline for some sweet prospects.

They also acquired within just this off-season, Michael Young(!), Delmon Young(!!), and Yuniesky Betancourt!!! 

I know there are some Fire Joe Morgan fans here.  The Classic is running an oral history on FJM right now.  Lots of good stuff.  I don't think it had been previously revealed that America's Sweetheart was Seth Meyers.

But both the Angels and the Rangers will play the Astros an equal amount of times.  So it won't play into who wins the division at all.  Rather it could help in the Wild Card race.  See the AL East are gonna beat up on each other, and in the Central, is there a chance that other then the division champ anyone else will make the playoffs?  

The games the Rangers play vs. Houston also mean less games against Anaheim, Oakland and Seattle.  This means less travel for the Rangers, and less games where they will 2 time zones away from where they played the night before.  It will only make a small difference, but I think a real one.

Yeah, the AL East will be really interesting this year.  I could see any team other than probably Baltimore winning the division. I could also see any team other than maybe Tampa coming in 5th.

Here's a writer who won't vote for Craig Biggio, because he played with Roger Clemens.  The self-righteous douchebag writers are really getting out of hand.

http://www.macombdaily.com/article/20121201/SPORTS03/121209961/#full_story

I wasn't referring to the lesser players who won't get in. I meant the guys who are already in or will someday get in who managed to get that far without getting caught or arousing major suspicion. It is impossible to know with any certainty that anyone didn't use PEDs. Why should anyone be honest and come clean about their PED use if doing so will automatically disqualify them for the HoF while less honest guys get in.

It's not even just a matter of not caring, it's also recognizing that we'll never really know who used and who didn't.  Sure, some of these guys got caught or admitted to it, but what about all the guys who didn't?  The players who admit to it end up getting penalized more than those who don't cop to it and don't get caught.  And for any individual writer to decide that he knows who did or didn't use is arrogant and stupid.

Every HoF candidate should be judged based on the context in which they played.  For the guys who played in the '90s and early '00s, that means a high offense environment, fueled yes (maybe) by steroids, but also by several other factors.  All we can do is judge the players of that era against each other and put the best ones in.  History will still record who was a known PED user (it's already the primary narrative about that part of baseball history) and I'm sure Barry Bonds, for one, will never be remembered as one of baseball's good guys.  But he was also the best player of his era (and among the best of any era). A Hall of Fame that includes Jim Rice but not Barry Bonds ceases to really mean anything at all.  A Hall of Fame that may end up inducting Jack Morris but not Roger Clemens doesn't really come close to honoring the best players in the game.

And that's all aside from the fact that, though steroids and HGH were perhaps new to the game in the so called steroids era, they are not the first performance enhancing drugs.  Amphetamines have been a part of the game for a long, long time, and there are already plenty of guys in the Hall who used speed to get through the long season (including inner circle guys like Willie Mays, if I'm not mistaken).  It's pretty dumb when writers decide who used and who didn't, but it gets beyond stupid once they start deciding which PEDs matter and which ones don't.