chasfh

Not the majority. But yes, a lot, including names we all know.

2002 for pitch type, pitch value, and plate discipline; 2007 for velocity and movement; 2008 for contact and strike zone location; 2014 for spin; 2020 for arm angle Pre-2007 was measure by Sports Info Solutions; 2007 and on, Statcast and Pitch Info started measuring.

Most of them didn't fight in WWII on the front lines. Most of them primarily played baseball for other military personnel.

Or Finnegan may have walked the first three guys then given up a slam. We’ll never know. In a 162-game season, there are frequently considerations that come up during a game about how to use the bullpen, and more exactly this pitcher in this exact circumstance, other than he’s struggling at this moment and must be replaced. And here I am going to push back some on the fully-rested bullpen narrative. The Tigers did have the day off Monday, but all four of their best bullpen options pitched on Sunday, three of them over 20 pitches. Vest was the only one who didn’t pitch at least 20, so that’s likely why he was the one who got the call on Tuesday. He came in with one out in the seventh and got two outs on six pitches. Obviously he was coming back out for the eighth. For the first three pitches in the eighth he got a ground out and gave up a single. That’s nine pitches. Then he got Walton on five pitches. Now he’s at 14 pitches, and is now maybe one pitch from starting the ninth on 15 pitches with five outs under his belt, or handing it off to one of the other three. Then O’Hoppe bangs the double over Wenceel’s head on the second pitch. We are now still up one. Vest is still only at 16 pitches, and again, potentially one pitch from handing the game off. At this point, Hinch’s main consideration is probably stretching Vest as much as possible to keep the other back of the bullpen guys fresh for the rest of the series and this weekend. The next two hitters are the disaster. Nine pitches to Neto results in a single, six pitches to Trout in a walk. Now there’s a real decision to make with 31 pitches thrown by Vest. Bring in Holton now to face Grissom? Or go to Vest for one last batter and hopes he gets you to the ninth with the lead? We all have 20-20 hindsight on what happened there. I do think it’s fair to criticize Hinch for sticking with Vest for one more hitter. He’d already given up a run, had put the tying and lead runs on base, and thrown 15 pitches just to the previous two guys. It’s fair to expect another guy to come in at that point. The one thing we don’t know is what condition the other three guys were. Hinch may have seen up close that some of the other three were gassed or something and would not be great options if he can avoid it. And I’m pretty sure guys like De Jesus and Vanasco were not in consideration to relieve. So, cross your fingers and hope Vest gets you to the ninth with the lead. Well, we saw what happened. The grand slam, Hinch’s hand was forced, and here comes Holton in to relieve now down three. And Holton wasn’t perfect either—he gave up a home run as well. But the decision on Vest was made, and it backfired on us. I think we can criticize Hinch for staying with Vest one batter too long. That’s fair. But I myself wouldn’t criticize Hinch for not yanking Vest after the O’Hoppe double, when we still had the lead and he was still on only 16 pitches. A big league manager has to manage his roster, his bullpen, for the full 162-game schedule, not just for this inning, just for this batter, right now. That’s what Hinch was doing, and speaking only for myself, I can’t fault that overall strategy, even if it sometimes bites us on the ass.

Beat a woman with a pistol yet. How on brand is every part of that? "President Trump" is a gift to certain types of criminals and maniacs who can simply insinuate themselves into a government of fellow travelers in order to melt into society presumably unnoticed. It's the ultimate reputation laundering.

Probably all of it, but that doesn't matter as it relates to the point I was making, which is, pitchers have to throw 100% max on every pitch to every hitter today to avoid giving up the home run, and they didn't have to do that in 1968. If your point is that pitchers in 1968 were better than pitchers today, that's a different discussion. Pitchers from when we were kids are always better than pitchers we're older than. I mean, them's just facts. 😉

the rate of home runs hit today versus fifty-eight years ago

I think this is really instructive in that this shows you exactly how run-of-the-mill red hats can honestly believe Democrats are just itching to genocide them out of existence. Don't let it escape your notice that this is not data, or even anecdotes, about violent Democrats being shared here. They're just words being said. But that's enough.

I would not underestimate the ability of the Trump machine to get red hats out to the polls. Pay close attention to October.

There probably is, for many reasons.

I think pitchers were able to do that because they could lay up on at least half of any lineup and then pitch to contact, because they knew most players could not reliably hit homers off them, so in most cases it was, "here you go, hit it and get yourself out." Today? Nobody pitches to contact anymore. In 2025, a guy who hit 1.46 home runs per 100 ABs would rank in the 10th percentile among qualified batters; in 1968, that figure would have placed him close to the 50th percentile. This is the difference between Patrick Bailey in 2025, who's considered a banjo hitter, and Jim Fregosi in 1968, who was considered an average power hitter. The cost of pitching to contact now is too high. Every pitcher is chasing swing and miss now, which requires velocity if you have it, and massive movement if you don't, and both of those strategies taxes the arm way more than here you go hit it and get yourself out. Back in 1968, pitchers didn't have to put max effort on every single pitch of every single game starting with pitch number one. They could ease up on certain guys and in certain situations. That's a key reason so many more guys could throw 200+ innings back then, but almost no one does now (56 pitchers did so in 1968, almost three per team; only three in all of baseball threw 200+ in 2025).

I think it's due mainly to 20-20 hindsight. After all, we can clearly see which players have been non-productive and Harris should never have signed them, and which players are productive and why didn't Harris sign them? And we can see now that we have a record-threatening number on players on the big league IL and how could Harris not have created the roster depth made up of big league starters to cover it? And we can all see how Kenley blew the game on Sunday after six nearly perfect appearances preceding it, and how could Hinch have been so stupid as to put him in the game in the first place? We can all see what our record is now, and we all have opinions on what should have been done over the winter to forestall that, and now we think management is stupid for not having done whatever our idea of the moment that was posted is. It's a tale as old as organized professional sports. Maybe OOTP has something to do with it. A certain subset of fans think it's super easy to make trades and signings IRL because it's so easy to do in OOTP (especially once you jiggle the settings handle). Maybe those fans' frame of reference has been altered. Who knows.

This bill will make it 150% easier to transport cash to the laundry.

And here, Trump reveals why he will never fire Hegseth. Not because Hegseth "loves war", but because he's from "central casting". How his people look is the second most important thing to Trump (after "they are loyal and will never question any of my orders").

It practically destroys the dignity of the White House and, by extension, the office of the president. It’s fair to speculate as to whether that’s been the actual goal the whole time.

Are you suggesting an elaborate black flag op here?

If there were born in a different period, they would be different people.

The other thing that gets ridiculous are the implications, and flat out statements, that Hinch and Harris make decisions reflexively and without any forethought while simultaneously overthinking everything so they can show off and come off as the smartest people in the room. And that’s not the only contradictory line of complaint. Others include: Hinch is too into analytics, and also, he has no plan; Hinch is too cute with his moves, and also, he’s nothing but a pushbutton manager; Hinch doesn’t make the most of the players he has, and also, it’s so aggravating how he plays everyone in every position all the time because everyone is a utility player to him. Same with Harris, who should be making big trades, but then, do we really want him to be the one making the deals? Also, how could he waste our money on players he knew would not be productive instead of players he knew would be productive? And sometimes we damn both of them simultaneously for both ends of the same thing, my favorite being that Harris is a terrible GM because he puts poor players on the roster, and also, Hinch is an incompetent manager because he can’t figure out how to put a winning lineup on the field out of this roster. I guess it’s hard to avoid randomly lashing out when everything goes wrong on every front with our favorite team.

I think pitchers today transported back in time would put at least 80% of those pitchers in 1968 out of a job in no time flat.

Man, even when we win, we lose. Now I’m gonna have to update my table.

Now there's a good debate to have: were pitchers in 1968 tougher to hit than pitchers in 2026 are?

"Being a Harris lackey". "Lackey" is a pejorative name. I did not call you any kind of name at all, and certainly nothing like this. Please, just stop already.

Except it's the 28th batter who will get us.

Oyler also had an on base of .213 and a slug of .186. So, Tork is a better hitter than Ray Oyler was.