Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The worst innovation in baseball?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by Buzzaldrin View Post
    The Red Sox invented the Yankees.

    Babe Ruth, Wally Schang, Everett Scott, Carl Mays, Herb Pennock, Sam Jones, Waite Hoyt, Joe Bush, Duffy Lewis, have a nice week
    Thats true but the Yankees after Ruth were even more successful, very successful, late 1930s, some 1940s and great 1950s, late 1990s.

    Yea for sure clown Harry Frazee started the ball rolling, what was he thinking, was he thinking. He was a business man knew nothing about the game.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buzzaldrin
    replied
    Yeah, but you catch my drift.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chickazoola
    replied
    Originally posted by Buzzaldrin View Post
    The Red Sox invented the Yankees.

    Babe Ruth, Wally Schang, Everett Scott, Carl Mays, Herb Pennock, Sam Jones, Waite Hoyt, Joe Bush, Duffy Lewis, have a nice week
    Joe Dugan didn't want a piece? And Duffy Lewis wasn't particularly crucial to the Yankees dynasty.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buzzaldrin
    replied
    Originally posted by Yankees2k6 View Post
    The invention of the boston Red Sox.
    The Red Sox invented the Yankees.

    Babe Ruth, Wally Schang, Everett Scott, Carl Mays, Herb Pennock, Sam Jones, Waite Hoyt, Joe Bush, Duffy Lewis, have a nice week

    Leave a comment:


  • Yankees2k6
    replied
    The invention of the boston Red Sox.

    Leave a comment:


  • Iron Jaw
    replied
    Originally posted by HomeRunHomer View Post
    I NEVER want to go to the 'one division' fornat again.
    I enjoyed baseball much more under that format. Now I started watching the game at the age of five in 1961. The Yankees won five pennants from 1960-64, but they were often challenged within their own league during that period. The Tigers gave them a run in 1961 and the White Sox and Orioles had a great shot at winning the 1964 pennant, missing by one and two-games respectively. The O's led for most of the season, but had a very young pitching staff (except for Robin Roberts) and couldn't overcome a NY rally in September.

    But the Yankee success ended in that decade. After 1964 they were pretty much, awful. By 1966 they finished dead last - 10th place. So during the last decade of straight league baseball (1959-68), we saw six teams win the AL pennant (White Sox, Yankees, Twins, Orioles, Red Sox and Tigers). And the National League had five teams win - Dodgers, Pirates, Reds, Giants and the Cardinals. There were some great pennant races during that period too.

    The leagues played a balanced schedule - after the 162-game schedule was implemented (1961 AL, 1962 NL), each team played the other nine opponents in the league 18-times. Thus, the team that won the marathon was the best team in the league that season and earned their trip to the World Series, instead of winning 83-games and getting hot for one or two weeks.

    It's a heck of a lot harder to win a real pennant than it is to get hot for a few games. ANY team in baseball is capable of getting hot for a few days. Great teams win 100 games. Awful teams win 60 games - meaning, even the awful team has a few winning streaks during the regular season and are quite capable of winning a short series.

    With the current setup, it's possible for a team to finish under .500 and win a division. Now I don't care what type of playoff setup a league has, but a sub-.500 team absolutely does not deserve a trip to a playoff. In 1994, the strike-season, the Texas Rangers were in first place in their division with a "tremendous" 52-62 record at the time the players walked and ended the season. Perhaps the ONLY good thing about the strike was the fact that a sub-.500 team was not allowed to win the division (now they may have rallied, and finished over .500, but they were not a very good team and ten games under .500 so who knows?). The leagues have come close in recent years. The Padres won their division in 2005 with an 82-80 record. The team I root for, the Cardinals, not only won their division by backing in with an 83-79 record, but they won the playoffs and the World Series. The Mets went to the World Series back in 1973 during the two-division setup, with a record of 82-79, and took the A's to 7-games. With front-line pitchers like Seaver and Koosman, they were quite capable of winning a short series where a team doesn't have to go that deep into the starting staff.

    Anyway, I liked and prefer the straight league with no divisions or playoffs. I wish baseball would have never interrupted the continuity. But they did. I tolerated the two division setup which, initially, was more balanced than the current system. But much preferred the pre-1969 system.

    At least, that's my opinion of things. Many of you on the board grew up long after the move to divisional play and have no experience with pre-1969 baseball.

    Leave a comment:


  • hellborn
    replied
    Originally posted by HomeRunHomer View Post
    I NEVER want to go to the 'one division' fornat again.
    Do you REALLY want to go back to the days when the Yankees were in almost every World Series?!
    13 pennants from 1949-1964- talk about uninteresting.
    Lord knows how many Yankees/Braves series we'd have to watch.
    I think there are just too many teams now for eliminating the playoffs. Made more sense with 8 team leagues.
    The wildcard system is unfair in many ways, but I think that it makes things more exciting for most fans...including me.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Looks like the DH is just as popular as ever.

    Leave a comment:


  • HomeRunHomer
    replied
    Originally posted by Buzzaldrin View Post
    I can't stand the division system and playoffs. The NL and AL should be one division each. You have 162 games to win first place- if you can't do it in that time you don't deserve to go to the series.
    I NEVER want to go to the 'one division' fornat again.

    Do you REALLY want to go back to the days when the Yankees were in almost every World Series?!

    13 pennants from 1949-1964- talk about uninteresting.

    Lord knows how many Yankees/Braves series we'd have to watch.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by wardawg View Post
    The DH took the strategy out of the game. Instead of the manger deciding whether to use a pinch hitter, to sac bunt, or hit away, the DH makes the decision much easier for the manger, even more so in the late innings.
    My view the same. I miss the strategy that was brought up that was once part of the game in certain game situations, late. The manager and the decision he had to make, still does in the NL. Made it more interesting, pinch hit for the pitcher, not pinch hit, the manager actually had to think, DH took that away.

    Sorry for the double post. Love this board but one bad feature, a poster can not delete "his or her" own post. It was that way I assume it still is.
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 05-18-2008, 08:44 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by wardawg View Post
    The DH took the strategy out of the game. Instead of the manger deciding whether to use a pinch hitter, to sac bunt, or hit away, the DH makes the decision much easier for the manger, even more so in the late innings.
    My view the same. I miss the strategy that was brought up that was once part of the game in certain game situations, late. The manager and the decision he had to make, still does in the NL. Made it more interesting, pinch hit for the pitcher, not pinch hit, the manager actually had to think, DH took that away.

    Leave a comment:


  • hellborn
    replied
    The developments of the specialist reliever and one-inning closer are, by far, the worst changes in the game for me.
    Constantly interrupting the game for new pitchers drives me insane. Managers cycle through the pen until they find the one guy who just can't throw that day and let him blow the game.
    I say anybody who comes in during an inning gets no warmups on the mound, he should be warm from the pen. Why should I pay $125 to sit at Fenway late at night and watch some scrub practice?

    Leave a comment:


  • Buzzaldrin
    replied
    I can't stand the division system and playoffs. The NL and AL should be one division each. You have 162 games to win first place- if you can't do it in that time you don't deserve to go to the series. if someone won more games out of 162 than you, then you don't deserve to go to the series. That is a hell of a lot of games, and if you win the largest percentage of them it is really difficult to argue that you are not the best team, and having to win several best of seven series afterward to prove the point is silly- I mean, what was the whole point of playing 162 games in the first place, just securing a home field advantage?

    Leave a comment:


  • Steve Jeltz
    replied
    Pitch counts. Nothing more aggravating than watching a pitcher having a good game getting removed in the 7th or 8th because they have passed the magical 100 pitche mark.

    Leave a comment:


  • wardawg
    replied
    The DH took the strategy out of the game. Instead of the manger deciding whether to use a pinch hitter, to sac bunt, or hit away, the DH makes the decision much easier for the manger, even more so in the late innings.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X