• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Official 2011 MLB Thread - Scott Proctor on to get some posts in

Status
Not open for further replies.
To replace Peter Moylan (DL) on the Braves. He will join them in San Francisco:

This will be Gearrin's first chance to prove himself in the Major Leagues. The 25 year old groundball specialist was a fourth round pick by the Braves in 2007. He spent all of 2010 with Gwinnett, with a 3-5 record, a 3.36 ERA, and a 1.30 WHIP in 80.1 innings over a team high 52 appearances. After the game today, he had a 1-1 record, a 2.61 ERA, and a 1.36 WHIP in 10.1 innings over 6 appearances with Gwinnett this season.
Click to expand...

One of the comments said Venters's arm was sore. I did not know that.

I searched via Google for "Atlanta Braves April Slump", it seems to be a passage fo spring for the Braves to do bad in April. There were articles about "bad April Braves" for 2010, 2007, 2006, and 2004.
From 2010:
The Braves went 9-14 in April and plummeted to the cellar of the division.
The hitting was atrocious as most of the team fell into a slump at the exact same time, and it just didn’t seem fair. Everything that could go wrong was, and the Braves couldn’t seem to buy a victory.
The Braves weren’t getting production out of the leadoff spot in the lineup, and weren’t producing a whole lot of power in the middle of the lineup. Frustration built. A lot of the blame was placed on the shoulders of Troy Glaus, who was signed in hopes of providing power. He hasn’t thus far, but the good news is that he is beginning to hit.
Click to expand...
Replace Glaus with Uggla, it's deja vu all over again.
 
CygnusXS said:
Gearrin? Well, he's basically a non-Australian version of Moylan. Still... Marek?
Click to expand...
Yami_Marik.jpg
 
What the mother fuck?

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/4/22/2126853/mike-leakes-gentle-eyes

“Usually, you can look in a person’s eyes and read that person at that moment. His eyes were gentle eyes, which lets me know that he knows nobody knows joy and bitterness in anybody’s heart but that person. No matter how their face looks. His eyes were gentle to the point of pain and embarrassment.”
Click to expand...

I hate everything about you, Dusty Baker...you creepy son of a bitch
 
eznark said:
What the mother fuck?

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/4/22/2126853/mike-leakes-gentle-eyes
“Usually, you can look in a person’s eyes and read that person at that moment. His eyes were gentle eyes, which lets me know that he knows nobody knows joy and bitterness in anybody’s heart but that person. No matter how their face looks. His eyes were gentle to the point of pain and embarrassment.”
Click to expand...
I hate everything about you, Dusty Baker...you creepy son of a bitch
Click to expand...
kXHOX.jpg


awww look at those sweet and gentle eyes of that filthy criminal.
 
eznark said:
Yes! Dave Cameron doesn't like the deal, which means the Braun extension will almost surely be amazing.
Click to expand...
He'll break Bonds' records. All of them. First-ballot unanimous Hall of Fame vote. MVP award gets renamed the "Braun".
 
Natinals-age: Why should I keep believing Espinosa is gonna steal 20+ bases? He's attempted one this season, what's the manager's "running philosophy?"
 
Lambtron said:
Twins win two games in a series for the first time all season. Hallelujah.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we split the series. I'll take that. Both teams needed it haha.

Ninja Scooter said:
the Braun deal still has me scratching my head. He's going to be 32 when that extension STARTS. WTF? Isn't it almost Ryan Howard bad?
Click to expand...

Yep, terrible deal.
 
Jangocube said:
Yep, terrible deal.
Click to expand...

Only if you 1. assume Braun will have a similar deterioration trajectory to an overweight, long swinger and 2. assume salary inflation will be below projected trends.

I don't think the deal was a slam dunk (that's a lot of years) but it's not particularly terrible. Much of the contract is deferred to later years and can be further deferred should team needs warrant it. Sure the Brewers will be stuck with Braun for what are likely to be two average-at-best years but that's a reasonable price to pay. The alternatives are overlong/lucrative deals to 30+ guys like Soriano or taking a flier on a 36 year old free agent and ending up with Vlad Guerrero. The Brewers are not going to be in a position to sign a Braun should he go to free agency, so why give him the option?
 
Doytch said:
Natinals-age: Why should I keep believing Espinosa is gonna steal 20+ bases? He's attempted one this season, what's the manager's "running philosophy?"
Click to expand...
Don't steal unless you're Nyjer Morgan or Willie Harris.
 
Damn. It's a gorgeous day outside and I'm stuck in this stupid office when I could be at a vacant diamond practicing my pitching!
 
eznark said:
Only if you 1. assume Braun will have a similar deterioration trajectory to an overweight, long swinger and 2. assume salary inflation will be below projected trends.

I don't think the deal was a slam dunk (that's a lot of years) but it's not particularly terrible. Much of the contract is deferred to later years and can be further deferred should team needs warrant it. Sure the Brewers will be stuck with Braun for what are likely to be two average-at-best years but that's a reasonable price to pay. The alternatives are overlong/lucrative deals to 30+ guys like Soriano or taking a flier on a 36 year old free agent and ending up with Vlad Guerrero. The Brewers are not going to be in a position to sign a Braun should he go to free agency, so why give him the option?
Click to expand...

Hey now. Even though Vlad isn't doing much, at the time, I still think it was a great signing. But I digress.

I just don't think it's a great deal for a team to ever pay someone that much money when you already have him locked up for a good amount of time now. It just seems like the money could have eventually been spent elsewhere and received more in return then Braun in his mid-30's.
 
Jangocube said:
Hey now. Even though Vlad isn't doing much, at the time, I still think it was a great signing. But I digress.

I just don't think it's a great deal for a team to ever pay someone that much money when you already have him locked up for a good amount of time now. It just seems like the money could have eventually been spent elsewhere and received more in return then Braun in his mid-30's.
Click to expand...

That only makes sense if you don't look at the structure of the deal. As I said, it gives them a ton of flexibility to shift money as late as they want to. What it doesn't do is hamper their ability or hamstring their finances in any of the next few years, so the impact is really minimal.
 
I don't really understand why you'd give someone a 9 year extension under any circumstance though. Braun is good...but 9 years?
 
Y2Kev said:
I don't really understand why you'd give someone a 9 year extension under any circumstance though. Braun is good...but 9 years?
Click to expand...

No doubt it is strange and possibly not the smartest thing to do, but Braun started the talks and pushed them so the Brewers probably figured why the hell not, based on the structure.
 
Here is a look at which teams, from 1995 to 2010, would have made the playoffs under a format of two wild card teams. These results aren't set in stone, because teams might have played entirely differently in September if a second wild-card was up for grabs. But all we can go by is the standings as they existed, and here are the results:

1995

American League

Wild card: Yankees 79-65 (.549)
Extra wild card: Angels or Mariners 78-66

National League

Wild card: Rockies 77-67 (.535)
Extra wild card: Astros 76-68 (.528

1996

American League

Wild card: Orioles 88-74 (.543)
Extra wild card: Mariners 85-76 (.528), White Sox 85-77 (.525) or Red Sox 85-77 (.525)

(Note: The Mariners had a rain out they didn't make up because it didn't impact the standings. But if there had been expanded playoffs, they would have had to make up the game. If they won, they would have been the second wild-card team. However, if they lost, it would have created a three-way tie with the White Sox and Red Sox for the second wild-card, wreaking havoc with the postseason.

National League

Wild card: Dodgers 90-72 (.556)
Extra wild card: Expos 88-74 (.543)

1997

American League

Wild card: Yankees 96-66 (.593)
Extra wild card: Angels 84-78 (.519

National League

Wild card: Marlins 92-70 (.568)
Extra wild card: Dodgers, Mets tied at 88-74 (.543)

1998

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 92-70 (.568)
Extra wild card: Blue Jays 88-74 (.543)

National League

Wild card: Cubs and Giants tied at 89-73 (.552)
Extra wild card: Cubs or Giants.

Note: The Cubs defeated the Giants in a one-game playoff to determine the NL's wild-card team. The playoff would have been unnecessary if there were two wild-card teams.

1999

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 94-68 (.580)
Extra wild card: A's 87-75 (.537)

National League

Wild card: Mets and Reds tied at 96-66
Extra wild card: Mets or Reds.

(Note: The Mets defeated the Reds in a one-game playoff to determine the NL's wild-card team. See 1998 note).

2000

American League

Wild card: Mariners 91-71 (.562)
Extra wild card: Indians 90-72 (.556)

National League

Wild card: Mets 94-68
Extra wild card: Dodgers 86-76

2001

American League

Wild card: A's 102-60 (.630)
Extra wild card: Twins 85-77

National League

Wild card: Cardinals 93-69 (.574)
Extra wild card: Giants 90-72 (.556)

2002

American League

Wild card: Angels 99-63 (.611)
Extra wild card: Red Sox or Mariners, 93-69 (.574)

National League

Wild card: Giants 95-66 (.590)
Extra wild card: Dodgers 92-70 (.568)

2003

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 95-67
Extra wild card: Mariners 93-69 (.574)

National League

Wild card: Marlins 91-71 (.562)
Extra wild card: Astros 87-75 (.537

2004

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 98-64 (.605)
Extra wild card: A's 91-71 (.562)

National League

Wild card: Astros 92-70 (.568)
Extra wild card: Giants 91-71 (.562)

2005

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 95-67 (.582)
Extra wild card: Indians 93-69 (.574)

National League

Wild card: Astros 89-73 (.549)
Extra wild card: Phillies 88-74 (.543)

2006

American League

Wild card: Tigers 95-67 (.586)
Extra wild card: White Sox 90-72 (.556)

National League

Wild card: Dodgers 88-74 (.543)
Extra wild card: Phillies 85-77 (.525)

2007

American League

Wild card: Yankees 94-68 (.580)
Extra wild card: Tigers and Mariners tied, 88-74 (.543)

National League

Wild card: Rockies and Padres tied, 89-73 (.549).
Extra wild-card: Rockies or Padres.

Note: Rockies defeated Padres in a one-game playoff to determined NL's wild-card team. The playoff would have been unnecessary if there were two wild-card teams.

2008

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 95-67 (.586)
Extra wild card: Yankees 89-73 (.549)

National League

Wild card: Brewers 90-72 (.556)
Extra wild card: Mets 89-73 (.549)

2009

American League

Wild card: Red Sox 95-67 (.586)
Extra wild card: Rangers 87-75 (.537)

National League

Wild card: Rockies 92-70 (.568)
Extra wild card: Giants 88-74 (.543)

2010

American League

Wild card: Yankees 95-67 (.586)
Extra wild card: Red Sox 89-73 (.549)

National League

Wild card: Braves 91-71 (.562)
Extra wild card: Padres 90-72 (.556)
Click to expand...
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...014846694_1995_american_league_wild_card.html

edit: looking at the extra wildcard teams, the average winning % would be .548 or 88-89 wins. The worst winning % was .519, 84 wins (angels 1997). The best .593, 96 wins. (Reds 1999)

edit: mode = .543 (88), median = .546 (88)
 
Interesting. Maybe worth comparing how many <90-win division champs there have been since realignment, too?

That said, I don't think the major concern is that there are going to be particularly bad teams regularly making the playoffs, it's just the issue of dilution in general. An 89-win team can certainly be "good enough" for the playoffs but that doesn't mean it's unfair if they don't.
 
Y2Kev said:
I don't really understand why you'd give someone a 9 year extension under any circumstance though. Braun is good...but 9 years?
Click to expand...
The only reward for the Brewers would be if in the next 5 years Braun goes from great to historically great. The odds of this happening at age 32 are minuscule. Probably less than the odds that he blows out a shoulder or a knee and becomes an albatross. It makes no sense.
 
After getting Brad Emaus back from the Mets, the Blue Jays traded Emaus to the Rockies today for 27-year-old minor league relief pitcher Chris Malone.
 
Listening to my dodgers, and i hear from the cubs organ player.. Blister in the sun from the violent femems,, lol is this new? or a cubs thing.. was really odd...
 
AnEternalEnigma said:
After getting Brad Emaus back from the Mets, the Blue Jays traded Emaus to the Rockies today for 27-year-old minor league relief pitcher Chris Malone.
Click to expand...
Bunch of walks, average strikeouts, in AA atm. Whatever, can't get gold for coal.
 
ProtoCents said:
Dude must really love Milwaukee.
Click to expand...
Well he does have a restaurant downtown...and he's buddies with Rodgers to top it off. I think the deal was a bit much, but I think he'll be fine.
 
Enron said:
tbh, i might be better than Ronald Cedeno.
Click to expand...
Factually correct.

Also, this is pretty sick:
The Rays have the only completely homegrown rotation in the Major Leagues, and they've also gone an incredible run of 621 starts without a game started by someone 30 or older. The last 30-year-old to start for Tampa Bay was Jae Seo during the 2007 season. The closest big league team -- the Blue Jays -- is barely within 500 games of the Rays' streak.
Click to expand...

Finally, Frank, is that supposed to be about Emaus or something? The grammar was more broken than the Mets' chances of competing this decade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Unhinged Bios Official Thread
10
148
SJRB replied
RIP Scott Adams
2
61
1K
negator2vc replied
The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping | Official Trailer
3
191
Coconutt replied
  • Locked
I'm never really one to cheer on someone getting fired, but..
2
86
941
Esca replied
Ridley Scott says Hollywood is “drowning in mediocrity”
2 3
112
1K
Men_in_Boxes replied
Top Bottom