My name isn't Rich. It's not even close.
The consistency wasn't there. And it's got to be zero-defect to make it worthwhile. What we saw was the numbers about how the umpires get whatever it is 98.9, 98.7, 99.2 percent of the calls right, or if it's 96.5, whatever. I can't remember the exact number. But it was high. And the tech either wasn't as good, or it wasn't perceptibly better. One reason is because of all the variables that go into it. We were shown an example where the pitch was right down the middle for a strike and the TV box said it was high and outside. Lying eyes! Nope, something interfered with the tech -- could have been a bird, could have been a hot dog wrapper. We saw several examples of this. Each time the ump was right -- not distracted by the hot dog wrapper -- and the TV tracker was way off. The question is if tennis can do it, why can't baseball? We saw this last night with Nadal at the U.S. Open. One big big big big big factor is how the tennis courts are uniform. Baseball is not. It's 30 different shapes, 30 different sizes, 30 different ways cameras have to be positioned to all arrive at the same consistency. That's been the trick. That's where the tech is making its advancement now, and rapidly, for sure.
Yes. This could be their strength. Eager to see how Helsley lines up in coming weeks.
Interesting question. I do not know. Probably not because of the local revenue lost by 30 teams losing eight games -- so a total of what 120 games being lost? That's a lot of programming that not be covered by the new playoff additions. It's an interesting idea. Maybe onto something. I'm not one beating the drum for 154 games season, but you could sway me with the carrot of a three-game wild card and not the play-in nonsense we have now.
He's a classic Cardinal college pitcher pick. Straight from central casting. They usual contribute, and some turn out to be reliable and standout starters.
When the tech is 100 percent accurate, I'll be for it, and only then reluctantly so. I am not in the camp for robot umps now, and it would take -- well, perfection for me to get there.
Sure. Houston and the Cubs were ahead of the curve in that regard. Baseball has changed how the draft works since then, and the separation of bonuses from the top to the middle to the end aren't as wide, and thus the strategy isn't as compelling. Plus, more teams are doing that, and if there's suddenly a race for the bottom, then you're in the race. When Houston did it, they were alone in wearing fashionable concrete shoes. The Cubs did it then, with their own twist. And then the Yankees did the quick reboot. Now there are multiple teams trying to do that and it assures that a few won't be successful, or they'll all be stuck in the same pattern because now there is even competition to be the worst.
I do not. But that info should be coming shortly. It usually does for all teams.
I know who loses: Catchers. One of their skills will be wiped out over night.
This chat! Also geography. Name recognition. Publicity. It's his homestate. All things line up. Not sure there's much more to that then the Q-rating that would come after a difficult, disappointing season. He'd be a change in voice, change in face of the franchise, that kind of thing. Marketing opportunities.
A promise is a promise, and though it took me longer than expected -- I am getting back to these questions, including a few that I tried to answer before the wi-fi conked out on my at the trusty coffee shop. Thanks for the patience. And look at this as lagniappe for anyone who stumbles about the chat ...
Some of that may depend on the opponent, but when it was mapped out for me, Mikolas could start as high as Game 2. Hudson would be a bit of a flex starter then, and Wainwright would come back in Game 4 (or Game 3, depending on need earlier in the series). A short series is going to invite such fluidity to the rotation because Game 3 is the marble game, and there's going to be a want by either team to seize control of the series there.
The Cardinals have been very clear with their pledge that eventually there will be a benefit to the baseball team and baseball organization from Ballpark Village. I asked chairman Bill DeWitt Jr, for fans who see the those buildings as "rising ATMs" for the club how soon they could expect a spillover onto the team, onto the product on the field, into the spending on players and infrastructure for the baseball club. He said that would be for someone else to judge because it's in the distant future. He wasn't saying it wouldn't happen -- that is, after all, part of the advertising of the project -- but that it would be on the distant horizon as the debt on the actual construction is paid down.
Six years of Dylan Carlson vs. One year of Mookie Betts? You aren't high enough on Dylan Carlson. That's all I'll say.
You're right. It's a bad habit that pops up in the chat, and I wish I could keep my fingers from making that mistake on the keyboard. Thank you for the reminder.
No. That's not how this works.
The MLB.com advanced stats and metrics that are available on their site, and that is part of the logo, I believe. It's also an explanation what powers the info on exit velocity, launch angle, homer distance, run efficiency, etc., etc. So it's both an ad and also a nod to the source of the information. It's an attribution.