A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.

     


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     




    OK. Got it. This was your opinion, not fact. I am not sure why you think you know whats on Barry Zito's mind any more than I do. None of us know if he would have accepted a trade to Boston, so Moon's hypothetical proposal is not that far fetched. Thats one of the things we do here: propose hypothetical moves that could help the club. Your claim that it could never happen because Zito would never accept a trade to Boston is absurd as you have no clue what Zito would or would not accept.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    As far as pitchers 'going all out' for 5 innings or whatever because bullpens now are intended to be utilized more is not true.  Actually, it's the other way around.  Pitchers are asked to 'pace' themselves more.

    Non of this answers how a Verlander or Ryan slipped through.  Actually, Verlander's velocity increases as the game progresses.  And, these two guys I consider to be power pitchers from the 'modern' era.

    When did the ball change?  The height of the mound changed too, but I think that it was lowered to give a little more advantage to the hitter because, at that time, baseball was perceived to be a little boring and more home runs were needed to spice the game up.

    With the lower mound, I would think there would be longer home runs today.

    Incidentally, this is all off the top of my head.  So, I may be completely wrong on the mound issue.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.

     


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     

     




    OK. Got it. This was your opinion, not fact. I am not sure why you think you know whats on Barry Zito's mind any more than I do. None of us know if he would have accepted a trade to Boston, so Moon's hypothetical proposal is not that far fetched. Thats one of the things we do here: propose hypothetical moves that could help the club. Your claim that it could never happen because Zito would never accept a trade to Boston is absurd as you have no clue what Zito would or would not accept.

     



    Whatever Pumpsie...go back to whining, it's what you do best.  When I visit the Giants at the end of August, I'll ask some people their thoughts on the subject, just to get a few laughs.  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.

     


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     

     




    OK. Got it. This was your opinion, not fact. I am not sure why you think you know whats on Barry Zito's mind any more than I do. None of us know if he would have accepted a trade to Boston, so Moon's hypothetical proposal is not that far fetched. Thats one of the things we do here: propose hypothetical moves that could help the club. Your claim that it could never happen because Zito would never accept a trade to Boston is absurd as you have no clue what Zito would or would not accept.

     

     



    Whatever Pumpsie...go back to whining, it's what you do best.  When I visit the Giants at the end of August, I'll ask some people their thoughts on the subject, just to get a few laughs.  

     



    Personal insults: the last bastion for someone who is losing a debate. Let me know next time you sit down for a cup of coffee with Zito to pick his brain.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.

     


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     

     




    OK. Got it. This was your opinion, not fact. I am not sure why you think you know whats on Barry Zito's mind any more than I do. None of us know if he would have accepted a trade to Boston, so Moon's hypothetical proposal is not that far fetched. Thats one of the things we do here: propose hypothetical moves that could help the club. Your claim that it could never happen because Zito would never accept a trade to Boston is absurd as you have no clue what Zito would or would not accept.

     

     



    Whatever Pumpsie...go back to whining, it's what you do best.  When I visit the Giants at the end of August, I'll ask some people their thoughts on the subject, just to get a few laughs.  

     

     



    Personal insults: the last bastion for someone who is losing a debate. Let me know next time you sit down for a cup of coffee with Zito to pick his brain.

     



    Will do, Pumpsie, and if it's in SF, I'll invite you along and introduce you to Zito.  By the way, you know a heck of a lot less about me than I do about Zito, so please don't ever tell me that "I have no clue," and I won't call you an avid "whiner."  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    My suggested trade was really just an example put forth to find a way to get rid of CC's salary, but instead of just paying cash like we are doing to a small extent now with the Dodgers, but to get back someone else's salary dump in return who is owed less. The lessening of the financial hit was the "carrot" to the other team. I think my actualy suggested offer included other players and maybe even taking on Huff's contract as well.

    The idea was that SF "needed" offense at that time, and would have loved to have dumped Zito & his deal.

    The salaries owed at last year's deadline were about:

    Zito: $33.5M for 1.3 seasosn (assuming a no on the $11M differential on 2014 vs the buyout) of $44.5M for 2.3 seasons with the 2014 option.  

    CC: $108M for 5.3 years.

    Zito: 12:$19M,13:$20M, 14:$18M club option ($7M buyout)

    CC: 12:$19.5M, 13:$20M, 14:$20.25M, 15:$20.5M, 16:$20.75M,17:$21M

     

    I get the Barry might have not wanted to come to Boston. I respect that opinion, but one never knows. I do not think he was happy in SF. The media and fans must have been hard on him after several poor seasons at that cost. Although I did not mention it at the time, one could imagine us sweetening his salary to agree to the trade, if he was reluctant.

    The same with A Sanchez and B McCarthy. I think they might have come here if we offered significantly more money. Maybe not. My point is that there are many examples where a player was quoted as saying I want to play here or not play there, and they do the opposite for just pennies more. The Sox could offer more than pennies, so, yes, I do sort of have an attitude that nearly anything is possible.

    Unlike most trade suggestions made on this site, I will say with complete confidence that my trade suggestions are usually criticized for giving up too much rather than the other way around. I try to be realistic, but realize some of my offers may not have had much of a chance, even if Ben agreed with them.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Barry Zito:  Already explained how he wasn't waiving no trade for Boston, and not sure why Boston would have been interested last summer, even to dump Crawford.

    I don't remember ever reading that Zito refused to come to Boston. I live out here near SF and I don't think that such a trade was ever publicly discussed. Do you have a link to that interview? If not then I am going to assume that your "100% certainty" comment is just something you made up.

     


    I never said in any way shape or form that Zito "said" anything.  The "100%" was clearly stated as  an opinion from what I know about Barry Zito, which is obviously more than you and I don't "live" in San Francisco, but the Giants are one of my customers that I visit at least once a year.  Moon said the "100% was a joke," yet at the same time posted that Iglesias was "10 times better defensively than Drew." We all slighly exaggerate to make a point, but I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that Zito wasn't waiving his no trade to come to Boston last summer.  

     

     




    OK. Got it. This was your opinion, not fact. I am not sure why you think you know whats on Barry Zito's mind any more than I do. None of us know if he would have accepted a trade to Boston, so Moon's hypothetical proposal is not that far fetched. Thats one of the things we do here: propose hypothetical moves that could help the club. Your claim that it could never happen because Zito would never accept a trade to Boston is absurd as you have no clue what Zito would or would not accept.

     

     



    Whatever Pumpsie...go back to whining, it's what you do best.  When I visit the Giants at the end of August, I'll ask some people their thoughts on the subject, just to get a few laughs.  

     

     



    Personal insults: the last bastion for someone who is losing a debate. Let me know next time you sit down for a cup of coffee with Zito to pick his brain.

     

     



    Will do, Pumpsie, and if it's in SF, I'll invite you along and introduce you to Zito.  By the way, you know a heck of a lot less about me than I do about Zito, so please don't ever tell me that "I have no clue," and I won't call you an avid "whiner."  

     



    Its a deal. I should probably have asked you this before: do you have first hand knowledge (ie from Zito) that there is no way in hell he would ever pitch for the Red Sox. I assumed, perhaps mistakingly, that you do not personally know Zito well enough to have posed that hypothetical question to him.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Its a deal. I should probably have asked you this before: do you have first hand knowledge (ie from Zito) that there is no way in hell he would ever pitch for the Red Sox. I assumed, perhaps mistakingly, that you do not personally know Zito well enough to have posed that hypothetical question to him. 

    My point is that even if Zito said he'd never want to play in Boston, it doesn't mean he never would agree to a trade. People change their minds, money talks, and sometimes the situation may change from one day to the next.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Its a deal. I should probably have asked you this before: do you have first hand knowledge (ie from Zito) that there is no way in hell he would ever pitch for the Red Sox. I assumed, perhaps mistakingly, that you do not personally know Zito well enough to have posed that hypothetical question to him. 

    My point is that even if Zito said he'd never want to play in Boston, it doesn't mean he never would agree to a trade. People change their minds, money talks, and sometimes the situation may change from one day to the next.




    I understand what you were saying Moon. I am just challenging Jasko's statement. He was implying that he had some sort of inside information about Zito's desires that the rest of us are not privvy to. I asked him directly if he has that kind of information. Without it, his opinion is no better than mine or yours about what Zito would or would not do.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    Its a deal. I should probably have asked you this before: do you have first hand knowledge (ie from Zito) that there is no way in hell he would ever pitch for the Red Sox. I assumed, perhaps mistakingly, that you do not personally know Zito well enough to have posed that hypothetical question to him. 

    My point is that even if Zito said he'd never want to play in Boston, it doesn't mean he never would agree to a trade. People change their minds, money talks, and sometimes the situation may change from one day to the next.

     




    I understand what you were saying Moon. I am just challenging Jasko's statement. He was implying that he had some sort of inside information about Zito's desires that the rest of us are not privvy to. I asked him directly if he has that kind of information. Without it, his opinion is no better than mine or yours about what Zito would or would not do.

     

     



    I understand your inquiry.

    I'm not really hung up on the "what ifs" as some here think I am. I brought up the Zito suggestion I had made months ago more to stick it to softy than to cry about what ifs. 

    I'm still very happy with the Dodger trade. I'd rather have Webster and DLR than Zito and his contract anyways, but we still are paying part of CC's deal and we lost AGon and Beckett in the deal. (I know I'm in a tiny minority, but I'd still rather have Josh than Dempster, but I'm not sad to see him go.)

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    As far as pitchers 'going all out' for 5 innings or whatever because bullpens now are intended to be utilized more is not true.  Actually, it's the other way around.  Pitchers are asked to 'pace' themselves more.

    Non of this answers how a Verlander or Ryan slipped through.  Actually, Verlander's velocity increases as the game progresses.  And, these two guys I consider to be power pitchers from the 'modern' era.

    When did the ball change?  The height of the mound changed too, but I think that it was lowered to give a little more advantage to the hitter because, at that time, baseball was perceived to be a little boring and more home runs were needed to spice the game up.

    With the lower mound, I would think there would be longer home runs today.

    Incidentally, this is all off the top of my head.  So, I may be completely wrong on the mound issue.



    Amp, you are correct about the mound; it was lowered, I believe, between the 1968-1969 seasons. Yaz won the '68 batting title with a .301 average and was the only 300 hitter. Gibson had an insane season for St. Louis; I think he threw 13 shutouts. I think there have been a few ball changes, different manufacturers who wind the ball tighter.

    Last summer my son was the winning pitcher in the State American Legion semi-final game and he threw 149 pitches. We lost the finals the next day and he wouldn't have pitched then anyway, obviously. But had we won the finals, we would not have played for eight days, so there was no reason to not stretch him out. He's 6'3" and at the time weighed 175 lbs., long and lean. He throws year-round, one hour once a week in the off season, and has never had a sore arm. He also does an exercise where he makes and releases a fist inside a bucket of rice for about 15 minutes every day. He throws as many breaking balls as fastballs. It's all about conditioning. I understand the owners' feeling today about protecting their investments, but the best protection in my opinion is better conditioning and more work. There is certainly some credence to Crit's comments about the workout habits and just general strength of today's teens. They spend more time in the gym than they do actually playing their sport. And they certainly don't do the chores that we or our dads did!

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    As far as pitchers 'going all out' for 5 innings or whatever because bullpens now are intended to be utilized more is not true.  Actually, it's the other way around.  Pitchers are asked to 'pace' themselves more.

    Non of this answers how a Verlander or Ryan slipped through.  Actually, Verlander's velocity increases as the game progresses.  And, these two guys I consider to be power pitchers from the 'modern' era.

    When did the ball change?  The height of the mound changed too, but I think that it was lowered to give a little more advantage to the hitter because, at that time, baseball was perceived to be a little boring and more home runs were needed to spice the game up.

    With the lower mound, I would think there would be longer home runs today.

    Incidentally, this is all off the top of my head.  So, I may be completely wrong on the mound issue.

     



    Amp, you are correct about the mound; it was lowered, I believe, between the 1968-1969 seasons. Yaz won the '68 batting title with a .301 average and was the only 300 hitter. Gibson had an insane season for St. Louis; I think he threw 13 shutouts. I think there have been a few ball changes, different manufacturers who wind the ball tighter.

     

    Last summer my son was the winning pitcher in the State American Legion semi-final game and he threw 149 pitches. We lost the finals the next day and he wouldn't have pitched then anyway, obviously. But had we won the finals, we would not have played for eight days, so there was no reason to not stretch him out. He's 6'3" and at the time weighed 175 lbs., long and lean. He throws year-round, one hour once a week in the off season, and has never had a sore arm. He also does an exercise where he makes and releases a fist inside a bucket of rice for about 15 minutes every day. He throws as many breaking balls as fastballs. It's all about conditioning. I understand the owners' feeling today about protecting their investments, but the best protection in my opinion is better conditioning and more work. There is certainly some credence to Crit's comments about the workout habits and just general strength of today's teens. They spend more time in the gym than they do actually playing their sport. And they certainly don't do the chores that we or our dads did!



    Great post.

    I remember playing sports from sun up to sun down every chance I got. I never lifted a weight in a gym until my 30's.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Updated after the Rays game:

    Sox leaders in OBP:

    1) Nava  .483

    2) Iggy   .476

    3) Ciri     .429

    4) Pedey  .400

    5) S. Vict  .378

    6) Gomes .364

    7) Salty    .345

    8) JBJ       .313

    9) Ellsb     .286

    10) Midd   .262

    11) Drew   .250

    12) Napo   .233

    13) Ross    .167

    14) Carp   .000

     

    SLG%

    1) Nava  .826

    2) Midd   .575

    2) Iggy  .550

    4) Ciri    .500

    5) Salt    .480

    6) Ells    .447

    7) Ross   .417

    8) Napo  .405

    9) Vict    .366

    10) Ped    .316

    11) Gom   .235

    12) JBJ     .160

    13) Drew  .100

    14) Carp  .000

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Who needs Manny Ramirez when you have Daniel Nava?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    moon, you should really join us in the gameday chat. lots of great posters show up and discuss the game. you'd like it.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I'm hesitant to join chat lines I've never heard of. When I can chat right here just as well. Not going there.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    I'm hesitant to join chat lines I've never heard of. When I can chat right here just as well. Not going there.

     



    no worries. we only use it during the games anyway. the forum gamethreads are nice but having to constantly refresh your page gets annoying after awhile especially when the results are "NICE HIT!" or "good pitch"

     

    btw, you play ToR??

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I'm now a fully trained Jedi worthy of Softy's allegiance. Too bad the force is not strong in my disciple.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    I'm hesitant to join chat lines I've never heard of. When I can chat right here just as well. Not going there.

     



    no worries. we only use it during the games anyway. the forum gamethreads are nice but having to constantly refresh your page gets annoying after awhile especially when the results are "NICE HIT!" or "good pitch"

     

    btw, you play ToR??



    No I don't.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Jid, I applaud your son.  He certainly sounds talented, motivated, and hard working.  And, he's a great size to boot! Will the old man let him sign with someone if it interferes with college?(laughing and crying at the same time).

    I can relate to the difference in conditioning.  Me, like some of us older gas-bags, chopped wood, played baseball from day till night like Moon, hauled bales of hay, or carried bundles of shingles up ladders as our form of exercise. Like you, I didn't know about weights at all.

    It surprises me that Ryan, who's no kid and threw with longevity, can't share some of his conditioning techniques with Texas, if they were any different that the ordinary.  Actually, I read posts here where the Texas staff doesn't go longer into games than any other team.  It just surprises me.

    If the balls are wound tighter and the mound is lower, why are there not any more 500ft. homers?  If it's weights and conditioning, perhaps flexibility should looked at.

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Great move by Farrell today taking Hanrahan out. I couldn't watch it...we only get network west coast feeds out here.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from youkillus. Show youkillus's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    Jid, I applaud your son.  He certainly sounds talented, motivated, and hard working.  And, he's a great size to boot! Will the old man let him sign with someone if it interferes with college?(laughing and crying at the same time).

    I can relate to the difference in conditioning.  Me, like some of us older gas-bags, chopped wood, played baseball from day till night like Moon, hauled bales of hay, or carried bundles of shingles up ladders as our form of exercise. Like you, I didn't know about weights at all.

    It surprises me that Ryan, who's no kid and threw with longevity, can't share some of his conditioning techniques with Texas, if they were any different that the ordinary.  Actually, I read posts here where the Texas staff doesn't go longer into games than any other team.  It just surprises me.

    If the balls are wound tighter and the mound is lower, why are there not any more 500ft. homers?  If it's weights and conditioning, perhaps flexibility should looked at.

     

     




     "500 foot homeruns";  Adam Dunn 504' 9-27-08, A. Ramirez 495' 9-21-07, W. Balentien 495' 10-2-09, G. Stanton 494' 8-17-12 According to ESPN hit tracker. Looks like it happens more than you might think.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to youkillus' comment:

     

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Jid, I applaud your son.  He certainly sounds talented, motivated, and hard working.  And, he's a great size to boot! Will the old man let him sign with someone if it interferes with college?(laughing and crying at the same time).

    I can relate to the difference in conditioning.  Me, like some of us older gas-bags, chopped wood, played baseball from day till night like Moon, hauled bales of hay, or carried bundles of shingles up ladders as our form of exercise. Like you, I didn't know about weights at all.

    It surprises me that Ryan, who's no kid and threw with longevity, can't share some of his conditioning techniques with Texas, if they were any different that the ordinary.  Actually, I read posts here where the Texas staff doesn't go longer into games than any other team.  It just surprises me.

    If the balls are wound tighter and the mound is lower, why are there not any more 500ft. homers?  If it's weights and conditioning, perhaps flexibility should looked at.

     

     

     




     "500 foot homeruns";  Adam Dunn 504' 9-27-08, A. Ramirez 495' 9-21-07, W. Balentien 495' 10-2-09, G. Stanton 494' 8-17-12 According to ESPN hit tracker. Looks like it happens more than you might think.

     

     




     

    Maybe I'm delusional, but 5 of them(1 actually) since 2008 doesn't, to me, seem like 'more than you might think'.

    Mickey Mantle's 10 Longest Home Runs Index
    (Click on the Distance to Go to that Home Run)

    RANK DISTANCE DATE OPPONENT BALLPARK PITCHER HR SIDE

    1.

    734 ft. 5/22/63 Kansas City A's Yankee Stadium Bill Fischer Left 2. 656 ft. 3/26/51 U.S.C. Bovard Field Tom Lovrich Left 3. 650 ft. 6/11/53 Detroit Tigers Briggs Stadium Art Houteman Left 4. 643 ft. 9/10/60 Detroit Tigers Tiger Stadium Paul Foytack Left 5. 630 ft. 9/12/53 Detroit Tigers Yankee Stadium Billy Hoeft Left 6. 620 ft. 5/30/56 Washington Senators Yankee Stadium Pedro Ramos Left 7. 565 ft. 4/17/53 Washington Senators Griffith Stadium Chuck Stobbs Right 8. 550 ft. 6/05/55 Chicago White Sox Comiskey Park Billy Pierce Right 9. 535 ft. 7/06/53 Philadelphia Athletics Connie Mack Stadium Frank Fanovich Right 10. 530 ft. 4/28/53 St. Louis Browns Busch Stadium Bob Cain Right

     

    P.S. This was with the higher mound, so the pitcher had an 'advantage'.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share