Jump to content

2023 MLB (non-Tigers) catch all thread


Tigeraholic1

Recommended Posts

Good news!
 

An arrest has been made in the case involving the theft and destruction of a Jackie Robinson statue from a park in Wichita, Kan., the Wichita Police Department said Tuesday.

The suspect is charged with felony theft (value over $25,000), aggravated criminal damage to property, identity theft and making false information.

"The investigation has not revealed any evidence indicating that this was a hate-motivated crime," said Aaron Moses of the Wichita Police Department. "We believe this theft was motivated by the financial gain of scrapping common metal."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 1776 said:

Good news!
 

An arrest has been made in the case involving the theft and destruction of a Jackie Robinson statue from a park in Wichita, Kan., the Wichita Police Department said Tuesday.

The suspect is charged with felony theft (value over $25,000), aggravated criminal damage to property, identity theft and making false information.

"The investigation has not revealed any evidence indicating that this was a hate-motivated crime," said Aaron Moses of the Wichita Police Department. "We believe this theft was motivated by the financial gain of scrapping common metal."

 

I'm not sure which is worse - a hate crime or just cold heartless greed.  Probably the former, but the latter is not much better.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GoBlue23 said:

How was it a fair assumption?  

Because Jackie Robinson was a very famous and historically important Black man.  It makes sense that if someone targeted that particular statue that racism would have been one of the most likely motives. There are different reasons why the statue might have been stolen, but I don't think that concluding that racism was the reason was "silly" in this case.  I know that steaing things for scrap metal has become common,but why specifically target the Jackie Robinson statue for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

Because Jackie Robinson was a very famous and historically important Black man.  It makes sense that if someone targeted that particular statue that racism would have been one of the most likely motives. There are different reasons why the statue might have been stolen, but I don't think that concluding that racism was the reason was "silly" in this case.  I know that steaing things for scrap metal has become common,but why specifically target the Jackie Robinson statue for that?

Really, I'd have been glad to to have him take the Joe Louis Fist instead. Probably more metal to harvest too.....

Detroit Fist: The Little-Known Story Behind the Massive Joe ...

?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is an apology expected because someone thought a thief was also a racist?

I don't feel silly in the slightest for assuming it was racist.  The only reason one would feel silly about it is if it turned out to be a municipal action for maintenenace reasons, like they were moving it or cleaning it, or whatever.  Otherwise, it was vandalism and theft of an icon on race issues so assuming racist intent is perfectly logical and nothing to apologize for.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason it was logical to assume, or at least wonder about, racist intent is because of all the politicized kerfuffle involving statues during the last ten or so years. It's not as though it all came out of ... ahem ... left field.

Edited by chasfh
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I think the two most likely expansion scenarios more are that either the A’s welsh on Vegas and stay in Oakland, and Vegas and Nashville get the new franchise; or else the A’s go through with the Vegas move, and Nashville and (Oakland or San Jose) get the new teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

FWIW, I think the two most likely expansion scenarios more are that either the A’s welsh on Vegas and stay in Oakland, and Vegas and Nashville get the new franchise; or else the A’s go through with the Vegas move, and Nashville and (Oakland or San Jose) get the new teams.

While it might be lower odds, I wouldn't rule out a 6 pack of expansion teams.  6 divisions of 6 teams each.  Can't do it?  Well, baseball expanded by 4 teams twice before.  The short term cash influx would be too much for the current owners to pass up and it might be a way for baseball to rip up the current television contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, casimir said:

While it might be lower odds, I wouldn't rule out a 6 pack of expansion teams.  6 divisions of 6 teams each.  Can't do it?  Well, baseball expanded by 4 teams twice before.  The short term cash influx would be too much for the current owners to pass up and it might be a way for baseball to rip up the current television contracts.

I don’t see the player talent to make that viable.  I think two teams is more likely.

I hate the idea of Oakland getting another team, if they depart for Vegas.  If I’m picking two, I’d like to see some combination of Nashville, Portland, Salt Lake City or Montreal (for sentimental reasons).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

I don’t see the player talent to make that viable.  I think two teams is more likely.

I hate the idea of Oakland getting another team, if they depart for Vegas.  If I’m picking two, I’d like to see some combination of Nashville, Portland, Salt Lake City or Montreal (for sentimental reasons).

Charlotte?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

I don’t see the player talent to make that viable.  I think two teams is more likely.

I hate the idea of Oakland getting another team, if they depart for Vegas.  If I’m picking two, I’d like to see some combination of Nashville, Portland, Salt Lake City or Montreal (for sentimental reasons).

If adding six teams would make them money, they would not care about player talent.  

They will add two teams though.  I have no interest in any location other than Montreal.  Other than that, I favor anything in the eastern time zone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

If adding six teams would make them money, they would not care about player talent.  

They will add two teams though.  I have no interest in any location other than Montreal.  Other than that, I favor anything in the eastern time zone.  

Allez les Expos!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, chasfh said:

FWIW, I think the two most likely expansion scenarios more are that either the A’s welsh on Vegas and stay in Oakland, and Vegas and Nashville get the new franchise; or else the A’s go through with the Vegas move, and Nashville and (Oakland or San Jose) get the new teams.

Did I say (Oakland or San Jose) earlier today? I meant Sacramento!

https://x.com/EvanDrellich/status/1758616226958397480?s=20

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is plenty enough talent for 36 teams, let alone 30. Seeing as how there are so many more international players coming into the majors from baseball-first countries, in addition to there being twice the population in the US there was during the first expansion, and topped by the practically exponential advances in training, nutrition, etc., the talent level in big league baseball today is far greater than it has ever been.

The $64 (billion) question is, will Baseball accept lower attendance figures that will surely come with the expansion to 36 teams? Given how high a share their revenue coming from non-gameday sources is, I think they might. Economists within the game can determine the marginal revenue calculus needed to price tickets such that they can make more money selling out 28,000-seat stadiums versus 42,000-seat stadiums. Once they fully embrace that, hell, they could go to 40 teams, who knows.

The fun part is figuring out where to put the six teams. Nashville and Vegas/Oakland/Sacramento/San Jose are basically gimmes. Portland and Charlotte should probably get in. Salt Lake could quite possibly make that cut. Indianapolis would be a dark horse but within the realm of possibility. A darker horse would be a third new York team, maybe western suburbs into Jersey, like West Orange or something, but they certainly have the population to sustain a franchise. I don't think Raleigh gets one if Charlotte does. Orlando? I don't know, maybe. Feels unlikely, though. San Antonio is a downscale dump, so that's probably a no. I think Austin would be more likely than San Antonio.

I think Montreal loses out even in a six-team expansion scheme, for reasons beyond history and population. Expand to 40 teams, though, and they'd probably sneak in along with Vancouver.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...