- Joined
- Nov 3, 2013
- Messages
- 40,545
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #181
2001 Mariners2001 Mariners?
2016 Warriors in the NBA
16-0 Patriots in 2007
And for NHL the 1995 Red Wings lost to the New Jersey Devils in the finals after posting 62 wins.
2001 Mariners2001 Mariners?
I remember that team well. It was a juggernaut!
Mariners broke the Yankees record which was only like a year old when they won 114 games AND the World Series!2001 Mariners
2016 Warriors in the NBA
16-0 Patriots in 2007
And for NHL the 1995 Red Wings lost to the New Jersey Devils in the finals after posting 62 wins.
Plus the Dolphins went undefeated and won the Super Bowl but played 2 less games. Also the NHL team with the most points won the Cup but not the team with the most wins.Mariners broke the Yankees record which was only like a year old when they won 114 games AND the World Series!
Crazy fact though that the best reg season in all 4 sports didnt win
Yeah the last chance for Yaz.I will never forget it either, they beat the Sox that year
I'm thinking that would give advantage to the hitter which in turn could have more balls hit hard at the pitcherHey, guys. Just wanted to get your opinion on something. My dad's been watching baseball since 1964, and he had an idea about the pitcher's mound. As you all know, there's been a few hit pitchers by the batted balls, including some in the head. The players are bigger than ever, are stronger than ever, hit harder than ever, pitch faster than ever.
The average fastball when the mound was constructed was something around 88-90 miles-per-hour. Now the average fastball is around 94 miles-per-hour, with guys consistently topping triple-digits.
His idea was to consider moving the mound back a bit, maybe to 62",. According to him, it would give pitchers more time to react to batted balls, focuses on defensive play, puts the ball in play more often, and make it a safer game.
So, thoughts?
I'm thinking that would give advantage to the hitter which in turn could have more balls hit hard at the pitcher
Honestly, I'm more concerned about the fans getting drilled with foul balls. At 3 Yankee games I was at this year a liner screamed into lower deck 1b side and somebody got hurt....My dad also mentioned something about making the balls less juiced? I'm guessing that helps in some way? Sorry, just trying to troubleshoot because I think that it's a good idea, at least, in theory.
Honestly, I'm more concerned about the fans getting drilled with foul balls. At 3 Yankee games I was at this year a liner screamed into lower deck 1b side and somebody got hurt....
That is an interesting idea. They lowered the mound after Gibby's 1.12 ERA in '68 so moving it back isn't such a stretch. Lowering the mound was to increase offense but over the years the batters and I believe the ball and bat have changed too. Players are stronger, bats are lighter with thinner hand holds so bat speed has increased and the ball is livelier. I suspect they will cage a pitchers head before they relocate the mound. But who knows?Hey, guys. Just wanted to get your opinion on something. My dad's been watching baseball since 1964, and he had an idea about the pitcher's mound. As you all know, there's been a few hit pitchers by the batted balls, including some in the head. The players are bigger than ever, are stronger than ever, hit harder than ever, pitch faster than ever.
The average fastball when the mound was constructed was something around 88-90 miles-per-hour. Now the average fastball is around 94 miles-per-hour, with guys consistently topping triple-digits.
His idea was to consider moving the mound back a bit, maybe to 62",. According to him, it would give pitchers more time to react to batted balls, focuses on defensive play, puts the ball in play more often, and make it a safer game.
So, thoughts?
Every year it seems the netting extends further down the foul lines.Honestly, I'm more concerned about the fans getting drilled with foul balls. At 3 Yankee games I was at this year a liner screamed into lower deck 1b side and somebody got hurt....
Yup, and I'm totally with you on that. Its just so silly that it hasnt changed. The only level of baseball above little league where pitchers hit is the National League......I'm also a fan of the DH in the NL, as you probably know by now.
And its the only TRUE baseball played today.Yup, and I'm totally with you on that. Its just so silly that it hasnt changed. The only level of baseball above little league where pitchers hit is the National League......
And its the only TRUE baseball played today.
True to whom? Little League?And its the only TRUE baseball played today.
Nonsense. Too much of the game is lost.And it's obsolete. The pitchers tend to hurt themselves while hitting. And with a DH, Jose Martinez could play and not be a complete liability in the field.
There are pitchers that are not automatic outs. Sacrificing an at bat is a skill. Managing a bullpen and bench is a skill. AL game is sophmoric by comparison.True to whom? Little League?
Its not baseball when there is an automatic out in the lineup
Nonsense. Too much of the game is lost.
"I think there should be the same rule for both (leagues), and I'd vote for cutting the DH. ... I think you see more of the total game (in the NL). There are a lot of parts of the game that are really beautiful that you don't see that often in the AL ... a lot of the offensive and defensive things you use to make or stop a single run."
— Tony La Russa, manager of the St. Louis Cardinals, who managed Oakland and the Chicago White Sox in the AL.
That's why ERA in National league is like 1 point lower than the AL.There are pitchers that are not automatic outs. Sacrificing an at bat is a skill. Managing a bullpen and bench is a skill. AL game is sophmoric by comparison.