Can you point out where myself or anyone claimed him being a godsend? I believe that's just what you're interpreting but I've yet to see anyone praise him as anything other than a very,very good player who's about to get paid.

And yes, numbers do matter, nobody's using intangibles or hyperbole to describe him. They're using numbers.

http://deadspin.com/and-now-curt-sch...t-m-1726385341

<font color=goldenrod>Curt Schilling is such an asshole. How he only got suspended by ESPN for this is beyond me. Bill Simmons got fired for way less.</font>

whatever, he is still badass for going all vigilante on a bunch of Twitter scumbags for creeping on his daughter

Remember Vito, Curt needs money. Bad.

Probably begged for a suspension at the very least.

also, this definitely falls under pfwd's thread about the internet in general

OH MY GOD HOW COULD CURT SCHILLING SAY SOMETHING ABOUT MUSLIMS #hottake

Because he has cancer. I cannot see any other reason other than sympathizing for his recently conquered illness.

First off, you don't know what WAR stands for or at least comprehend the concept. If you did, you wouldn't say "a pro is better than a scrub off the street" because that's not what it means.

What Damian and I are arguing is that you're using antiquated metrics to quantify a players performance. We've given examples of why batting average is only a small piece of the pie. Ex: Kris Bryant is hitting .262 right now....if he were a free agent, what kind of contract do you think he would get this offseason? $200 mil would be a home town discount to put it mildly.

No one compared Hayward to Trout or Cabrerra. His scouting report was summed up and supported by data which all comes out to "hes getting paid very well" after this season.

<font color=goldenrod>I dunno...comparing an entire religion to Nazis kinda something that people can justifiably get angry about.

Much more than the minute bullshit people love to rave about online.</font>

Kris Bryant is so dreamy. Those eyes, tho! And yeah, he'd be getting Cano money if he was a free agent right now. Can you imagine what Bryce Harper is going to get? He might set a record.

Nah...Bryce Harper isn't even top 20 in RBI. He's just ok. I would take Kendrys Morales over him any day since he passes my eye test.

<font color=goldenrod>Harper will get like $300 million from the Yankees and he'll hit 50 HR a year into that Little League porch</font>

lol...he might make that during his arb years alone.

(thats a joke, screech)

<font color=goldenrod>Normally I'd groan at the thought of the Yanks getting a guy like Harper. But screw it. I don't want to have to watch him play against the Mets 18 times a year.</font>

I was being facetious with the WAR remark. I am not only looking at average and the like with this, that was just the first thing that came to mind, plus it's not something to be ignored (which you both seem to be doing in shitting on me for pointing to it).

Since you missed it, I'll say again: I did not compare Heyward to Trout or Cabrera, nor did I say anyone did. The point was that those guys have produced enough to be worth $200 million. From what I've seen from Heyward, which is quite a bit since he played for a rival for 5 years, he hasn't and isn't worth $200 million right now.

As much as I love Harper, he kills the Phillies so I'd be happy to see him leave the division.

Who doesn't kill the Phillies these days, amirite?


:(

Isn't Harper like a total headcase? If I were the Yankees, I'd pass on him.

Early on he was, but I think he's "grown up" a lot this year.

i.e. I haven't heard any stories lately.

Batting average has lost value and relevance in recent years because getting a hit is nice, but avoiding outs is more important. On base percentage is far more important and telling than batting average.

Red Sox working out Hanley at first base. I guess he can't do much worse than LF.

Should have done it earlier in the season had Cherrington not created a log jam at the position (and DH). Outside of some stretches, he's been pretty bad at LF compared to what they have available for that spot.

They signed him knowing full well he was pretty poor at SS and had someone better there nor could move him to 1B since a few guys already took that spot. Couldn't give him the DH spot either since Ortiz and 1-2 other guys were already set there.

Yes, but whats his batting average?

Need to know his BABIP to be positive.

It was really a matter of time before he was moved. Weren't they talking about trading him, or was that just a rumor?

Can imagine that conversation: "You suck at half your job. Go do it somewhere else."

Mostly just rumors and same about them trying to do another salary purge like a few years ago. Read somewhere a while ago that the money they currently have tied up already puts them in the Top 5 for the next several seasons.

If they wanted to trade Hanley or Panda any time soon, they'd have to be the "Dodgers" of any deal in the sense of them eating most of the salary and tossing in prospects. Already had to with the Napoli trade earlier in the month by sending cash to help cover what he's owed.

BABIP could help you predict his batting average.....:shifty:

Jays win again with 2 in the 9th!

:-\ NESN getting rid of the Don Orsillo and Jerry Remy commentary team after this season. Orsillo got officially fired today but staying till end of the season while Remy's own contract is up after next season so he could be next.

Those two were great together in the booth and made horrible seasons feel at least a bit more enjoyable with their comedy antics and stories.

It is, but being barely above average still doesn't make Heyward worth $200 million. He has been consistently good at everything. Not great (well maybe defense), not excellent, but good. Should he get a raise based on that consistency? Sure, but $200 million is a leap.

Phillies need 12 wins to finish with fewer than 100 losses on the year. This is what I have to be excited about

Also holy shit at how bad Jerome Williams has looked compared to the second half of last year. He was at least serviceable.

You should root for them to lose to ensure a better draft pick. Avoiding an arbitrary number of losses doesn't do any good.

I was hoping the Padres packed it in July but alas, they decided they could pretend they could still compete.

<font color=goldenrod>Never really understood how any fan could openly root for their team to lose. I understand the logic behind it but even if I were in a situation where losing would help my team I could never sit there and cheer when the other team does something good.</font>

I've convinced myself that the season won't be a waste if they lose fewer than 100. I had low expectations, obviously.

Plus I proclaimed on my show that they would not finish with the worst record in the league lol

Also what Vito said. I can't actively root against my team. I just can't. Especially since a lot of their remaining games are divisional.

I was rooting for the Cubs to lose the last few years. They were doing a top to bottom rebuild and were in no way competing anytime soon. They needed top draft picks. Sure, you want to see good things from some of the guys who might be around for the long run, but in hindsight I'm sure happy they lost those few extra games otherwise no Bryant or Schwarber.

Can't cheer for my team to lose no matter how lucrative the draft pick is.

I'd like to think at least the players on the team would be actively trying not to lose as well. You figure on top of everything else there'd also be the thought that, "Hey, if we lose more we'll have more chance of drafting a guy that will potentially replace me" so more incentive to keep winning

Players get paid regardless. From a player standpoint, winning 81 games instead of 75 doesn't do much for them neither financially or from a job security standpoint.

Maybe root was the wrong word. I am not rooting for the Padres to lose nor do I cheer when the other team gets the upper hand. However, if and when they lose I don't care and in th long it's better for them anyways. Especially if they furnish the bottom ten. They get a top ten pick and can sign free agents without surrendering their first rounder.

Gotta think long term of you're a losing team. For instance, what reason do the Phillies have for revoking Francouer from waivers? What benefit does he provide that they can't be without? The answer is nothing.

Only sport that seems ok to do is with basketball but even in the NBA it gets ridiculous at times with teams tanking right at the start. Then again they also have a lottery that feels more rigged than legit so no guarantees tanking would even be worth it.

Jeff Francouer is a hero and you will respect him as such

Plus the more he plays the less I have to see Domonic Brown, who is my least favorite player.

(maybe not ALL his fault, but that's another discussion)