gotbeer

You know their next step will be they are going to charge for booze next. At that point, I really don't see the purpose of there vs the Indian casinos. At least for me, since I don't really do the show/club/buffet stuff.

Source: Antonio Bastardo’s Market Heating Up; Four Teams Interested And in case you were wondering. Sounds like the answer is no here too.

Yoenis Cespedes rumors: Which team could land the slugger? I think the pilot lamp to the stove has gone out a while ago. Quick, someone light a match and check.

Yankees view Aroldis Chapman as 'innocent until proven guilty'

Guess the other threads about this wasn't enough.

The new Las Vegas parking fee shows what happens when competition disappears

2015 is warmest year on record, NOAA and NASA say

If it is, Tank is compensating for something with the driver.

VIDEO: Enforcer Brian McGrattan knocked unconscious in AHL fight Damn.

Screw the Cactus. How was the shot?

StubHub Canceled A Fan’s Tickets To Kobe Bryant’s Last Game When Their Value Increased 664% Lakers fan says StubHub canceled his tickets to Kobe Bryant's last game when prices rose Guess the press worked for him. They updated his situation. Stubhub is backpedaling. The fan got tickets from Tickets for Less. Also had offers from Budweiser.

Track. Is that really his/her name? At birth like legal name? And these are people making decisions?

Very interesting article. From his analysis, I wonder what the percentage was north south of the strike zone. And by that I mean, area below the knee. How many strikes/balls were called in that grey area. And when he says say 80% of umpires call strikes correctly, If you took out the grey area pitches of below the knee and midway from belt to shoulder and say used knee and belt. What % of strikes would that would be. Are balls that are closer to the grey areas north and south, and the borders of the strike zone more likely to be missed? The other interesting thing, if the writer dares to even approach. Is how much an effect the catcher has on the call. And not by framing, but by blocking the view. Looking at the umpire, he can only call what he sees or thinks he sees. If the umpire was there without a catcher, he should be able to see the entire strike zone. But he has a catcher in front of him. And catchers for the most part shift right when the ball is going to be thrown, so as not to give away the location they are thinking of. In this shift, the catcher forces the umpire to move. And maybe this is the point of the catcher. This is hard to explain. But say an umpire is looking right down the middle of the plate for strikes and balls. In theory, he should have be able to see the balls and strikes on the corners well. Now shift that view from middle of the plate due to a catcher adjustment, and now the umpire is looking from one side of the plate. Now you have a cutter moving away. Based on angles, I would think it is much more difficult to determine the path of the ball relative to the zone. Add into the mix, the catchers glove, head, parts of the body blocking the view. This would actually support the need automated calls route, since in theory the computer should never be blocked or hindered.

For better or worse. IMO, if you are going to have robotic calls for home, again, IMO, you have to change a very fundamental rule of the game. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/umpires/strike_zone.jsp And that is the strike zone cannot be based on a very judgemental below the knee to the area that is the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the pants. This is also based on the batters stance as he is about to hit a pitched ball. So even this point may move. I'm trying to remember, but I think it's the munchkin in Boston that likes to dive down, so that his stance is lower than the pitched ball. Again, IMO, if you are going to have a robotic call for home, you have to specify a specific zone of just throwing out numbers, but 2 feet above the plate, to 4 feet above the plate. As an example. This way, for every batter, the strike zone is the same. It might make the game better. It might make it worse. I'm thinking long term, under this scenario, you will have the ideal batter height get factored in. You will also have the MLB system, that will be vastly different than what batters had coming up from little league to pony, to high school, to minors. Since this type of system really can't be used at all levels. I guess umpires can learn it. But then you will get the subjective back of 2 feet - 4 feet, by eyeballing it. By the way, from 1907-1950 those hitters were boss. Every pitch that Trumbo has swung at that we groaned about would be considered a strike back then.

And already you are incorrect. The strike zone is three dimensional, not 2 dimensional plane. A ball curving in can miss the front of the plate completely, but can curve in and hit the back of the plate for a supposed strike. Just like a pitch can curve downward and hit the strike zone at the front of the plate and pretty much be in the dirt when it reaches the catcher.

Nope against it. I've seen too many pitchtracks that were so off. I don't trust them. In some of the past gameday threads, would have people come in that was watching the pitch track and asking how all these strikes were not being called. All the while the pitcher was wild and missing the plate by a good distance. For Tennis and Soccer, it was either past or not past the line. The line doesn't move. The camera doesn't move. With baseball you are dealing with a three dimentional box. In which, depending on the batter, and really the umpire the strike zone will vary on top to bottom. And unfortunately with some umpires, it varies from side to side also.

It wasn't beer. That damn hippie.

You knew it was a matter of time for the A's to trade him. They trade everyone. Red Sox to Tigers, Red Sox had too many OF'ers and not enough pitching, and Cespedes didn't acclimate well there. So they traded him to the Tigers for Porcello and signed him to a 4 year contract. Tigers then sent him to NY, which probably wasn't a bad move since they are a top 10 pick and he was a FA after the year. Of course the Tigers also traded Price and Soria at about that time also. They got two minor league pitchers in Fulmer and Cessa for him. According to Baseball America, Fulmer is the #1 prospect in the Tigers organization. So the price was quite high.

Yu Darvish Under MLB Investigation After Brother's Arrest on Gambling Charges

People also forget that he has been in the MLB for a total of 4 seasons. He did well his rookie season. Not so well his second season. Third season, A's sold like they usually do to Boston. He looked like he was going to have a good season in Oakland up until the trade, and 1/3 of a season in Boston I more attribute to getting used to. 4th season, Boston then trades him to the Tigers, and Tigers trade him to the Mets. He had good numbers in both those lots. The other thing regarding Cespedes and his age is, he doesn't have as many miles as most players that signed this offseason. He played mainly 90 game seasons in Cuba. So he may age better than most of the players. Of course it's all a moot point, because we won't sign him.

On the bright side, if Trump works for the Angels. Maybe he will put a wall around Arte, to prevent him from making another impulsive acquisition.

In Murray I trust. I mean that dude seems to only make lopsided trades, and the other team just bends over and takes it. If the Ducks scouting department was on the Angels, we would be #1 in prospects, and making moves that Beane would give a high five over.

Supposed to rain today. Probably like it was supposed to rain yesterday. I will water my drought plants today.

Looking at MLBTR's predictions. They have been pretty close on their predictions. Price 7/$217 actual 7/$217 Heyward 10/$200 actual 8/$184 - Yearly $20 vs actual of $23 for less years Greinke 6/$156 actual 6/$206 WTF Upton 7/$147 actual 6/$132 - yearly $21 vs actual $22 Davis 6/$144 actual 7/$161 - yearly $24 vs actual $23 Cespedes 6/$140 So for Cespedes, looking at $23 was what MLB trade rumors was projecting. Looks like the actual contracts these guys got if lower in years is a bit higher in AAV. So probably 5 @ $24 for a total of $120 is what they are looking at. 6 @ $23 for a total of $140, and 7 @ $22 for a total of $154. In other words, About $20 million too much per year for the Angels.

That's a big signing. $22 million per season. If he can't handle AL pitching, that deal is going to suck big time. If his OPS is in the low to mid 8's, should be an ok signing.