MLB Off-Topic

[DrJones]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I still hate that guardians name.

Should've been Spiders.

I don't hate the Guardians name, but yeah, it's pretty bland (yes, I know there's a local connection). Spiders has local history, a ton of clever design opportunities - A LOT of neutral fans would be wearing Spiders merch. Mid-market clubs like Cleveland really shouldn't be leaving so much money on the table.

[zello144]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I still hate that guardians name.

Should've been Spiders.

Cleveland Barons

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I joke when I say Cleveland Rocks (especially when there is already Rockies), but that would've been an easy go-to.

I don't hate Guardians, but I personally miss Indians and Chief Wahoo all the same. Spiders would've been cool I'm sure. I'm probably overthinking it altogether.

At least it's not Cleveland Baseball Team.

[l3ulvl]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

the only reason I don't like Guardians is it's too similar to Indians



why change the name to distance yourself from Indians and then make it so similar?

Spoiler

[Jolly Roger]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Spiders are gross though, so there's that. Shoulda went with The Tribe. Tribe could refer to anybody.

[dubcity]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Spiders are gross though, so there's that. Shoulda went with The Tribe. Tribe could refer to anybody.

People would still have a problem with that, I'm sure. In this day and age going with boring is the only call, seems like.

[DubsHuskyTV]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Cleveland and Francona closing in on a new 2 year contract with a 3rd year option

[Picci]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Cleveland and Francona closing in on a new 2 year contract with a 3rd year option

I'm sure he'll be a positive influence for the kids but his reputation took a hit for me with his moves and decisions during playoffs.

Speaking of inking a new contract, John Schneider just signed a 3-year contract with the Jays. I find this strange without any other serious considerations. Their last game was crushing. Wondering what Jay fans think of this move?

[bhurst99]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I'm sure he'll be a positive influence for the kids but his reputation took a hit for me with his moves and decisions during playoffs.

Speaking of inking a new contract, John Schneider just signed a 3-year contract with the Jays. I find this strange without any other serious considerations. Their last game was crushing. Wondering what Jay fans think of this move?

Not a surprise. I'm okay with it. They finished 46–28 with him managing after starting 46–42 under Montoyo.

He also knows a lot of the young Jays since he managed a lot of them in the minor league system.

Personally, I believe the Jays are like a lot of teams -- the manager simply acts on the GM's instructions. There isn't a lot of in game management going on. I doubt Schneider determines the day-to-day lineup without input from the front office. When pitchers get pulled when they hit a certain pitch number -- no matter how well they're doing -- you just know that's a decision made by the front office prior to the game that isn't to be disobeyed.

I thing a manager's major role these days is to make sure the players get along, their giant egos don't clash and any beefs are resolved internally and don't hit the media. I don't think that's an easy thing over the course of 162 games.

[Amoo316]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Was having a discussion with a friend about Miguel Cabrera walking back his retirement comments.

I realize Albert is an inner circle HOF 1st ballot 95+% votes guy.

My argument was Miggy is a 1st ballot 90% of the votes guy.

His argument was he dodged Pujols to up his chances. First of all, I don't think it's worth discussing if he dodged Pujols or not.

My question is, am I in left field thinking Miggy is a 90%+ 1st Ballot guy regardless of who's on the ballot with him?

[reyes the roof]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Anyone that doesn’t vote for Pujols or Cabrera the first time they’re on the ballot should lose their vote

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Anyone that doesn’t vote for Pujols or Cabrera the first time they’re on the ballot should lose their vote

Another part of HOF voting I think needs to happen.

If you don't vote a certain percentage of HOFers in during a specific span, you lose your HOF vote.

So if 7 guys get in during a 4 year span, and only 3 of them were on your ballot during the year they went in, you lose your vote.

[Speedy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Anyone that doesn’t vote for Pujols or Cabrera the first time they’re on the ballot should lose their vote

Well...some voters may skip a locked candidate to keep another one on the balllot.

Or, that's my only acceptable reason.

[Amoo316]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Another part of HOF voting I think needs to happen.

If you don't vote a certain percentage of HOFers in during a specific span, you lose your HOF vote.

So if 7 guys get in during a 4 year span, and only 3 of them were on your ballot during the year they went in, you lose your vote.

Personally I would modify this to: Any writer who doesn't vote in a player that receives 95% of votes or higher in their first ballot year, loses their vote.

If you're so our of step you can't agree with 95+% of your peers on a first ballot guy, you don't deserve to a voter.

[Master Live 013]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Nah, I don't agree with this forcing of conformity. Voters should be free to make up their mind and let the chips fall where they may.

I would change the rule that limits the number of players a voter can vote for, if you think there are no HOF players on the ballot, vote 0, if you think there are 20 HOF players on the ballot then vote for all 20. No need for artificial limits, one thing I dislike a lot from the NFL HOF.