The Sir

🙄

I see what you’re saying, but all of those prospects looked pretty bad last year, except Walker. And he’s got an ETA of late 2021, tops. We don’t need to give up on any of them (if they work out and we sign a big fish, then they’re trade bait), but I don’t want to sign a stop gap if we can land a Castellanos or Betts and be serious contenders this year.

Am I the only person out there who thinks that Grandal is the type of player to come here and hit .210 with a mediocre to bad OPS? Everyone acts like he's amazing at getting on base, but it was only 2017 when he had an OBP of .308. I was excited about Dunn, and then Laroche, and then Frazier, and I think they were all better hitters (although bringing less with the glove). I'm happy they're doing big things (and I want more of them) and I'll give the benefit of the doubt, but so much of our recent history with big FAs makes me nervous that this will blow up in our face. I'll show myself out.

OK, I'll take you at your word on the first one. There are definitive evils that have happened in history. As long as there's not some hyperbolic attempt to cheapen those evils by connecting them to normal things in the country today, then OK, fine. Second, maybe that wasn't you, but the question is still valid. Who determines what is "reasonable" and what's not? If discussion is a good thing, then we should be able to discuss with anyone. Right?

I was somewhat with you until this point. What is the wrong side of history? I don't want to politicize this thread but if I stated what I wanted (which is far different from what you want) because I believe it is the best way to help people, what are you gonna do- mark me as the wrong side of history and hold it against me years down the road? I mean, if that's what you want to do, then do it, but don't act like it's helping us find a better path. And the qualified "actually reasonable" is a bit weird. Who isn't reasonable? Who determines that? I'm pretty sure you've previously mentioned that college should be free and debt forgiven (please correct me if I'm wrong). Am I unreasonable if I don't feel that my taxes should go up to pay for someone else's degree? Am I to be left out of the conversation as a result? The point here isn't whether we agree- we don't and that's fine. But if you really want to discuss, then why qualify it and how are you going to determine those qualifications? I think, for example, socialism is an awful philosophy, but I'm not going to say, "Oh, a socialist? Well, you're not actually reasonable and I'll wait to discuss this and create resolutions with people who are."

I'm genuinely curious: why do you think this? What do you think us hashing our disagreements out in public actually helps? I much prefer that there can be places that are free from politics, where a bunch of guys from different walks of life can just talk about sports and not worry about the BS. Maybe that's just me.

Smart move. Tons of players currently on contracts that are already ugly for teams, and will last for several more years (Miggy and Pujols come to mind). I don't know if teams will be wise enough to stay away, but 35 year old Bumgarner is not going to be worth $29 million. The FA market is terrifying for this reason.

So the Expos are going to win it all. Lame.

Just setting up the come-from-behind walkoff that I’m dreaming of! ALL IS WELL!

Not until Game 7. Strasburg’s gonna have to keep ‘em alive.

I suppose that's fair. Have a nice day!

I was going to make a response, but actually, I'll decline. I've said that this controversy is idiotic and distracts from a great World Series, and I'm going to stick to that. I'm done with this one.

You blocked me and then bragged about it in your sig like a tool. But go ahead, keep telling yourself it’s because you like laughing at me and has nothing to do with your overall fragility.

Eh. I've got more thoughts on this, but I'll silence them so this thread doesn't get further politicized. Who wants to talk about how the Astros are going to destroy the Nats and win it all tomorrow night?

Christ Almighty. Is it your desire to politicize absolutely everything? The controversy was stupid, the articles were stupid, and no, there is NO chance the Astros, who are one game away from winning the World Series, care how political events in this country affect coverage of their own actions. Can you actually just talk baseball? I think this place did ban political discussion, and honestly, it's for the better. Go comment at CNN if that interests you so much.

How much space do I take up in your head? Get help, dude.

Uh huh. She wrote 17 paragraphs about it. And you're correct- it's not a complex situation. Taubman did something that was taken out of context by a couple of reporters who doubtfully produced any actual sports benefit by being in the locker room, the Astros denied it, and then they reversed course and fired the guy. It is simple. Yet this lady approached it like she was analyzing the Great Depression. You're free to disagree. I still don't want people who majored in journalism trying to explain things to me. I'll come up with my own conclusions based on the objective details of what actually happened.

So, if the Nats lose this game but manage to come back and win the series, it’ll be the first time EVER that the road team has won every game in the World Series. The home team won every game in 1987, 1991, and 2001.

Who? Also, who cares? Seriously, this controversy is idiotic. Taubman wasn’t seriously yelling is support of domestic violence. He was sarcastically and excitedly supporting the acquisition because the dude’s meltdown paved the way for one of the most epic moments in team (and MLB) history. Just like one of us might have shouted, “I fucking love Bobby Jenks” in the wild moments after Scotty Pods’ home run. But because we’ve inserted this inane context, everybody’s now focused on this stupid outrage culture bullshit, and on all of the idiot nobodies whom we absolutely must know are sitting this out in protest, rather than a baseball series that is shaping up to be pretty great.

That’s probably the stupidest article I’ve ever read. First off, you could find discussions on the causes of World War I that aren’t as long. Yet Hannah dashes in to the fray to write 17 paragraphs about her idiotic feelings. Second, this Vox-style explanatory journalism needs to end already. The one remotely intelligent thing this lady writes is this: “My job is to see and hear things and then relay them to the public.” Great point! So do that. If I want a complex situation explained to me (and the firing of Brandon Taubman is not such a situation), I’ll find an appropriate expert. Journalists have no real talent to offer beyond writing ability, and from what I’ve seen, somebody who sends professional emails in the armed forces or corporate America probably does that better anyhow. Fuck the haters. Go ‘Stros!

Back in the day, Joe Crede hit a home run but Eric Cooper called it foul. Clearly fair. I kept Cooper on my umpiring shitlist ever since. Anyways, RIP. Prayers for family and friends.

Maybe I'm old school, but I still follow the lineup construction that was the norm when I was a kid in the 1990s. Leadoff: Your speedster. If he has power, that's a bonus, but if he has tons of power, bat him somewhere else. This guy gets on base and steals more. Scott Podsednik of 2005, Luis Castillo and Juan Pierre, but probably best of all, Ray Durham. .360+ OBP from 1998-2000 = perfect. Some people like this Acuna/Robert idea. Why would you guarantee that an incredible power hitter comes up with nobody on as many as 162 times in a season? Bat them lower. 2-hole: Best OBP guy. Probably hits left handed, can bunt, pull off hit-and-runs, perhaps some speed but not absolutely necessary. Ideal would be 2000 Jason Kendall or Yoan Moncada. Between this guy and your leadoff guy, the point is to have your three-hole up with RISP as often as possible. 3-hole: This is your best overall hitter. Frank Thomas of the 1990s. Ken Griffey. Ted Williams. Roid-raging Barry Bonds. This "3rd worst hitter" idea is nuts. You want your best hitters to get on base and then let them be driven in by...Yolmer Sanchez? 4-hole: Your best raw power hitter. Adam Dunn, pre-White Sox. Prince Fielder, or better yet, his dad. Average might not be great, but he'll hit a ton of bombs. 5-hole: Your second best raw power hitter. 6-9: Everybody else, in order of decreasing ability. Ninth batter can be your second best leadoff hitter. So if you have Scotty Pods and Ray Durham, let Ray lead off and Pods hit ninth. On shitty teams like ours, this section IS indeed a free inning because we have so much garbage. On a good team like the Astros, it's not because you've still got hitters like Gurriel, Chirinos, and Reddick coming to bat. Ideally, I think our 2021 lineup looks like this: Madrigal Moncada Robert Jimenez Vaughn Abreu Anderson Collins Walker

Elimination games in the NL this year have arrived at some quick conclusions. Seven runs in the first, now the Cards understand how the Braves felt.

Multiple World Series victories? No way. But I expect that by 2025, this whole “the White Sox have never gone to the playoffs twice in a row” thing will be history.

I can’t imagine getting amped for a game five in your own house and the whole damn thing (including your season) is over before you even get to hit. That’s rough.