The Major League record is 191 by Hack Wilson of the Chicago Cubs in 1930. The American League record is 184 by Lou Gehrig in 1931. Ain't no way in hell that A-Rod's gonna come close to either of those. In fact Wilson's record is -- like DiMaggio's hit streak -- unlikely EVER to be broken.
The Joe.T Memorial Yankees Suck Thread for 2007
- Thread starter rumpleforeskiin
- Start date
For the record ...
The most RBI by an active ML player is 165 by Manny Ramirez in 1999. The most Alex "Mr. April" Rodriguez has ever hit is 142 in 2002. Manny has had THREE seasons with more RBI than A-Rod -- 165 ('99), 145 ('98), and 144 ('05). David Ortiz also hit 148 in '05, so A-Rod isn't likely to end up breaking any of those marks, given his late summer and fall annual failures.
The most RBI by an active ML player is 165 by Manny Ramirez in 1999. The most Alex "Mr. April" Rodriguez has ever hit is 142 in 2002. Manny has had THREE seasons with more RBI than A-Rod -- 165 ('99), 145 ('98), and 144 ('05). David Ortiz also hit 148 in '05, so A-Rod isn't likely to end up breaking any of those marks, given his late summer and fall annual failures.
In Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa, you are speaking of three of the greatest hitters of their time and one of, in Bonds, the greatest hitters in the history of the game. It's quite sad in my eyes that their accomplishments are being disparaged by the steroid controversy. How many HRs would Bonds have hit had he never taken "the cream." I'd guess probably about as many as he's actually hit, possibly a few less.
The primary reasons for the surge in home runs:
1. Dilution of talent. Prior to 1961, there were approximately 160 pitchers in MLB, 16 teams each employing 10 pitchers. Today there are approximately 360 pitchers in the game, 30 teams each employing 12. There were 24 pitcing jobs added to the rolls in 1998 with the last expansion. All of these pitchers would have been in the minor leagues in 1997. McGwire and Sosa broke Maris' record in 1998. When did Roger Maris break Ruth's record? 1961. When did the American League expand from 8 to 10 teams? 1961.
What I can't address is the effect of demographics in this matter. While baseball has more foreign players than ever before, particularly from the Carribbean, there are few American players going into the pro game. There are not only more jobs in baseball than before, but more jobs in hockey, football, basketball, and soccer.
2. Bats. Until the last decade or so, most power hitters used heavy bats in the false belief that the bigger the bat, the more power it would generate. Modern thinking now has taught us that the biggest factor in power generation is bat speed. Players have gone to much lighter bats and are generating more bat speed than ever before. This is also why you have seen a vast increase in broken bats in the last decade or so. In the effort to remove as much weight as possible, modern bats have handles that are almost pencil thin. The second factor is maple. Prior to 2000, most bats were made of ash. There has been a strong shift to maple and most major leaguers are using maple bats. While maple is no heavier than ash, it is denser and the ball flies off it. The action generated by a maple bat is closer to aluminum than it is to ash. I was shocked when I saw this first hand, having bought my son a maple bat several years bat.
Like Bonds or hate Bonds, he is one of the greatest hitters in the history of the game and his accomplishment should be celebrated. And would be celebrated if Bud Selig and Henry Aaron weren't buddies.
The primary reasons for the surge in home runs:
1. Dilution of talent. Prior to 1961, there were approximately 160 pitchers in MLB, 16 teams each employing 10 pitchers. Today there are approximately 360 pitchers in the game, 30 teams each employing 12. There were 24 pitcing jobs added to the rolls in 1998 with the last expansion. All of these pitchers would have been in the minor leagues in 1997. McGwire and Sosa broke Maris' record in 1998. When did Roger Maris break Ruth's record? 1961. When did the American League expand from 8 to 10 teams? 1961.
What I can't address is the effect of demographics in this matter. While baseball has more foreign players than ever before, particularly from the Carribbean, there are few American players going into the pro game. There are not only more jobs in baseball than before, but more jobs in hockey, football, basketball, and soccer.
2. Bats. Until the last decade or so, most power hitters used heavy bats in the false belief that the bigger the bat, the more power it would generate. Modern thinking now has taught us that the biggest factor in power generation is bat speed. Players have gone to much lighter bats and are generating more bat speed than ever before. This is also why you have seen a vast increase in broken bats in the last decade or so. In the effort to remove as much weight as possible, modern bats have handles that are almost pencil thin. The second factor is maple. Prior to 2000, most bats were made of ash. There has been a strong shift to maple and most major leaguers are using maple bats. While maple is no heavier than ash, it is denser and the ball flies off it. The action generated by a maple bat is closer to aluminum than it is to ash. I was shocked when I saw this first hand, having bought my son a maple bat several years bat.
Like Bonds or hate Bonds, he is one of the greatest hitters in the history of the game and his accomplishment should be celebrated. And would be celebrated if Bud Selig and Henry Aaron weren't buddies.
rumpleforeskin,
I completely agree with everything you have said in your post above. It also should be noted that even if those guys were using steroids, like McGwire in 1998 and Bonds in 2001, it was not illegal to do so at the time. I think a lot of people have lost sight of this. MLB acted very slowly to regulate performance enhancing substances, in comparison to the other professional sports. Thus the records of Bonds, Sosa and McGwire, even if deemed questionably enhanced due to steroid use, should nevertheless be viewed as being "grandfathered" in because to the extent those substances helped, they were legal at the time.
A lot of casual fans perhaps overlook the fact that what is the key attribute to Bonds' success is his pitch recognition. Many scouts have said his pitch recognition is the best of any hitter they have ever seen.
In watching him against the Yankees this weekend, I see his one weakness as a hitter, which is if you can get him to swing at a good fastball up in the zone, he has lost the bat speed necessary to do something with it. Yesterday Bruney threw Bonds a couple of fastballs up in the zone and completely gassed Bonds. The problem is Bruney could not control his fastball sufficiently so as to make it look like it was a borderline pitch up that Bonds would have to swing at. As a result, he walked Bonds. It's the same story with many other pitchers with less than stellar control. Bonds will not offer at pitches that are just up or just in or just outside, and the umpires will back him up because his eye is so good. Look at Bonds' walk totals the last few years, they are off the charts and he had one season where he drew a ML record 232 walks and had less than 400 ABs. So basically most pitchers are not able to exploit his weakness on fastballs borderline up, because they lack the necessary pinpoint control.
I agree with regnaD about the dilution of pitching talent. The problem is the way pitchers are coached in my opinion and scouts' lust to draft guys who can throw hard but can't pitch. I think scouts overlooks guys who can pitch but don't bust a fastball over at 95 mph plus, in favor of the radar gun superstars who can't necessarily pitch. There are way too many of the latter in the majors right now.
I completely agree with everything you have said in your post above. It also should be noted that even if those guys were using steroids, like McGwire in 1998 and Bonds in 2001, it was not illegal to do so at the time. I think a lot of people have lost sight of this. MLB acted very slowly to regulate performance enhancing substances, in comparison to the other professional sports. Thus the records of Bonds, Sosa and McGwire, even if deemed questionably enhanced due to steroid use, should nevertheless be viewed as being "grandfathered" in because to the extent those substances helped, they were legal at the time.
A lot of casual fans perhaps overlook the fact that what is the key attribute to Bonds' success is his pitch recognition. Many scouts have said his pitch recognition is the best of any hitter they have ever seen.
In watching him against the Yankees this weekend, I see his one weakness as a hitter, which is if you can get him to swing at a good fastball up in the zone, he has lost the bat speed necessary to do something with it. Yesterday Bruney threw Bonds a couple of fastballs up in the zone and completely gassed Bonds. The problem is Bruney could not control his fastball sufficiently so as to make it look like it was a borderline pitch up that Bonds would have to swing at. As a result, he walked Bonds. It's the same story with many other pitchers with less than stellar control. Bonds will not offer at pitches that are just up or just in or just outside, and the umpires will back him up because his eye is so good. Look at Bonds' walk totals the last few years, they are off the charts and he had one season where he drew a ML record 232 walks and had less than 400 ABs. So basically most pitchers are not able to exploit his weakness on fastballs borderline up, because they lack the necessary pinpoint control.
I agree with regnaD about the dilution of pitching talent. The problem is the way pitchers are coached in my opinion and scouts' lust to draft guys who can throw hard but can't pitch. I think scouts overlooks guys who can pitch but don't bust a fastball over at 95 mph plus, in favor of the radar gun superstars who can't necessarily pitch. There are way too many of the latter in the majors right now.
Last edited:
11.5 and moving on uprumpleforeskiin said:
BTW, who was that fat redneck pitching like shit in relief for the Yankees today and why are they paying this guy with a 5.09 ERA $28 million?
Last edited:
Buerlhe changing his Sox?
What are your thoughts on this Rumples and what our Sox may have to give up to get him?
http://www.realgmbaseball.com/src_wiretap_archives/6512/20070624/buehrle_to_red_sox/
What are your thoughts on this Rumples and what our Sox may have to give up to get him?
http://www.realgmbaseball.com/src_wiretap_archives/6512/20070624/buehrle_to_red_sox/
Had a long talk about this with a friend earlier this evening. Tell me this, K, how would you feel about a rotation like this for years to come:Special K said:
Matsuzaka, 26, signed through 2012
Beckett, 26, signed through 2010
Buehrle, 28, assuming will be signed through 2012
Lester, 23, under Sox control through 2011
Buchholz, 22, under Sox control through at least 2013.
Buchholz, btw, if you're unfamiliar with him, now at Portland is probably the best pitching prospect in all the minor leagues (ERA 1.82 in 74 IP, 49 H, 18 BB, 100 K)
When you consider that they signed Matsuzaka for less than market value (including the posting fee), that they have Beckett for way less than market value, that Buchholz and Lester will be cheap for several years, they can certainly afford to give Buehrle the money it will take to give him the 5 year extension that's being discussed. The Sox, with this deal, stand to put together a starting rotation that will dominate the AL for years to come.
Two comments, though. 1) This deal has to be done without Buchholz and Ellsbury for it to work. 2) All this talk could be spin being put out by the White Sox front office simply to drive up the price on Buehrle.
If you want more information, more up to date, and more accurate, please consult Joe.T. Joe and Buehrle were seen together earlier today at a tailor shop in Ottawa where Buehrle was being fitted for his pinstripes. Oh, Dontrelle Willis, was there with them.
rumpleforeskiin said:
I think it would be great...but the price of Buckholz and Ellsbury might be too much for someone Buerlhe's age. If we could get him w/o giving up those prospects then I say great but I don't know if I'd part with them at this point.
Very funny about Joe.t...LOL.
rumpleforeskiin said:
Big deal so they have one good prospect in their failing farm system
According to Espn's Peter Gammons the Yankees have the best minor league pitching prospects in all of baseball, if anybody is set for the future it is the Yankees my fellow delusional Red Sox lovers, if anybody knows anything about baseball i would think that it would be Peter Gammons.
Buehrle's only 28 and you can bet your bottom dollar (or one hour with Joe.T's favorite escort) that Buchholz and Ellsbury won't be included in any deal. As likely as not, if this deal is for real, the price will be Lowrie and Bowden.Special K said:
As for Joe's comment about Gammons' remarks, Joe pulled that one out of his ass. The Yanks starting rotation for 2009 will look something like this:
Clemens, 47
Pettitte, 37
Schilling, 42
Blyleven, 58
Ryan, 62
btyger said:
What's with Crisp hitting with power and getting some hits all of a sudden? maybe he should pass some of that "cream" stuff to Lugo.
A change in batting stance was all he needed. As for the corpse of Johnny Damon, he needs a change in body. See you Saturday, Joe.Joe.t said:What's with Crisp hitting with power and getting some hits all of a sudden? maybe he should pass some of that "cream" stuff to Lugo.
rumpleforeskiin said:
You coming up to Ottawa this Saturday rumples? give me a shout if you do because i owe you $160.00, i hate waiting forever to pay a guy when i lose a bet.
Moving right along ...
Great discussion of the possibilities of a Buehrle deal. What a powerhouse starting staff that would be. Would make the Sox the dominant team in the AL for the next five to seven years. I agree completely with Rumples analysis, and if the deal could be done with Bowden and Lowrie, I'd do it in a heartbeat. The Sox have shown they are willing to pay money for good young talent. This deal won't be made unless the Sox negotiate an extension with Buehrle before the trade is finalized. Interesting stuff....
It may be time to admit not only that the Sox are in a commanding position but that the rest of AL East has gone into a steep decline. It's hard to imagine any one of the other teams making a serious run at the Sox, so I'm going to start keeping my eye on the other divisions. Right now the Angels are, like the Sox, 22 games over .500, so I'm going to keep an eye out for how the two teams match up. Fortunately I have tickets for one of their games later this summer, so I'll see with my own eyes how good the "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" are.
Great discussion of the possibilities of a Buehrle deal. What a powerhouse starting staff that would be. Would make the Sox the dominant team in the AL for the next five to seven years. I agree completely with Rumples analysis, and if the deal could be done with Bowden and Lowrie, I'd do it in a heartbeat. The Sox have shown they are willing to pay money for good young talent. This deal won't be made unless the Sox negotiate an extension with Buehrle before the trade is finalized. Interesting stuff....
It may be time to admit not only that the Sox are in a commanding position but that the rest of AL East has gone into a steep decline. It's hard to imagine any one of the other teams making a serious run at the Sox, so I'm going to start keeping my eye on the other divisions. Right now the Angels are, like the Sox, 22 games over .500, so I'm going to keep an eye out for how the two teams match up. Fortunately I have tickets for one of their games later this summer, so I'll see with my own eyes how good the "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" are.
I'm not saying that these guys didn't use performance enhancers or or am I condoning their use. What I'm saying is that the use of these enhancers did very little to boost their statistics, that other factors had a MUCH greater impact. And don't forget, pitchers used enhancers as well.
Last edited:
EagerBeaver said:
Steve Lyons was on TSN's Off the Record last week & surprised Michael Landsberg when he told him he'd be surprised Sammy Sosa ever was on steroids. When asked why, Lyons responded by stating that Sosa's name never appeared in Jose Canseco's book of suspected & known steroids users and one other important fact in that Sosa was once caught using a corked bat & Lyons has yet to hear of someone on steroids ever using a corked bat. And finally, Sosa was never associated to Balco & never refused to get tested. When asked if McGwire & Bonds belong in the Hall, Lyons indicated yes.....McGwire (along with Sosa) saved baseball the year he broke the HR record & if he & Bonds ever were on steroids (as strongly suspected), it wasn't their fault that baseball turned a blind eye to it & never banned them at the time (or tested for them). Major League Baseball simply didn't care who was & who wasn't on steroids. So why should its players be paying the price for its own negligence?
Last edited:
does that mean current players shouldfemaleluver2 said:
1. carry their own equipment,
2. ride the bus,
3. stay in shitty hotels,
4. eat shitty food, and
5. not use the latest training techniques
out of respect for the jackie robinson's of the past?
> So your point is....?
no point. just being sarcastic.
> That anyone can juice up and no one should care?
come to think of it, yeah. why should we care that much? it's entertainment, nothing more.
frankly i'd love to see someone hit 100 hrs in a season, and a few 600' hrs while they're at it. how about an 8 second 100 metre dash? that'd be entertaining, too. considering the price of a sporting event ticket nowadays, i want value! i'm paying to see outstanding feats of athleticism! wheeeee!
it's the athletes choice if they want to fuck their bodies up in the long run for short term gains.
as for being an influence on kids in sports, that's the parents responsibility, not the athletes.
no point. just being sarcastic.
> That anyone can juice up and no one should care?
come to think of it, yeah. why should we care that much? it's entertainment, nothing more.
frankly i'd love to see someone hit 100 hrs in a season, and a few 600' hrs while they're at it. how about an 8 second 100 metre dash? that'd be entertaining, too. considering the price of a sporting event ticket nowadays, i want value! i'm paying to see outstanding feats of athleticism! wheeeee!
it's the athletes choice if they want to fuck their bodies up in the long run for short term gains.
as for being an influence on kids in sports, that's the parents responsibility, not the athletes.
johnmbot said:
I totally agree with everything you have said. I should also mention that I really get pumped watching a woman dunk a basketball. Candace Parker has done it 5 times in games. She is 6'4". There is a 6'4" girl on UConn's team, Tina Charles, who threw down a one hander in a high school game and I am waiting to see her do it at UConn. I will pay to see such outstanding feats of athleticism.
Similar threads
