 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
how many "good teams" do you think there are with that kind of pitching depth? a half dozen would be generous...you know that's 1/5 of the league?Originally Posted by 2daBank
you have guys on here complaining nightly about one out of any of 15 closers who fukkin suck
there are some guys who come out of the bullpen who are lights out....theyre the exception rather than the norm
they claim said reliever sucks cause they all expect them to come in and not allow a run every night, lol...if i went pen to pen id guess there at least 10 w 3 really good nasty pitchers, 15 teams that have 2 with filth, and what 20 with closers w nasty stuff? bottom line is there a reason teams go this route now instead of leaving a guy in and it cause they know their chances of success are greater using the pen...for every stud from way back when how many scrubs were throwing full gms despite not having it in the late innings? lets not talk bout yesteryear like every pitcher was clemons, cy young, bob gibson, ect ect,, for all those guys there were tons of guys not scaring anyone who prob pitched longer into gms than they should have..
there were less spots in baseball on pitching staffs so your chance of facing guyse like gibson is better
do you really think that starting pitching hasn't been watered down through the years? and yes more guys in the old days could be better because they cheated their fukkin ass off
pitchers are ALL on pitch counts these days...the rangers philosophy since ryan took over ownership has been to force their pitchers to go deeper into games and not rely on pitch counts nearly as much...seems to be working well in that organization
and ya know what else youre forgetting? starting pitchers often CANT pitch 100 pitches because they suck and bullpens get overused....drastically in a lot of cases
bottom line is there's good and bad in every generation....there are certain evolutions in the game that affect performance, i.e. blacks being allowed to play, higher mounds in the 60s, splitter in the 80's, etc
lets also remember that maple bats only started being used in 1997....that could be considered like giving players free fukkin steroids...every little bit of extra pop helps
lol..fair enough..like i said it really hard to compare..
Drinker gettin buried here
Don't kid yourself...there is not a pitcher in the game today who could not have pitched in the "old days." Almost all old timers will tell you that. If you read Glory of Their Times by Lawrence Ritter, most of the old stars of the dead ball era admit just how good the players of the 1950s and 1960s are compared to their era. Imagine what they would think if they saw today's pitchers. Baseball is exponentially better than it was in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, etc...
The reason nobody can (or ever will) hit .400 is because baseball is so much better than it was back then. There is less variance in the quality of the players as it has become much more efficient. The difference between the best player and worst player in MLB today is not much compared with 50-100 years ago. It's safe to assume that any player on an MLB roster today could make a roster back then and probably dominate.
Actually, there is nothing physiological that says a pitcher can't throw 100+ pitches a game BUT because teams have so much invested financially in these players they do not like to take chances. Plus, with the bullpens these days there is really no need to have them throw that much. The game has evolved in a way that incorporates multiple pitchers per game usually.
Sure, in an absolute sense, there are many elite players in every generation. But comparatively speaking, the players of today are just much better in every aspect of the game: Strength, endurance, speed, fundamentals, etc...
you really think the aces back in the 30s pitched like today?
Not even close. Babe Ruth wouldnt hit king Felix, Keyshaw, verlander. Etc etc
Drinker check in guey
Drinker your butthole is gettin owned by men left and right
Drinker stick to golf hueye
felix kershaw and verlander would shit themselves if they saw ruth come up to the plate
Who Haw Hee. What the fukk is all that.
Drinker who the fukk is the best hitter you seen with your own eyes.
smoker thats hardly the case
smoker i know your cok gets hard when i fuk your butt
smoker relax son
barry bonds
by a lot
you?
I think he saying that more do to ballpark dimensions, strike zones, ect, more than particular pitchers of today or then...that how I took it anyway..
Probly so.. That Griffey kid had a ok swing himself, to bad he didn't go the extra mile like bonds..lol
Ruth is interesting. My hunch is he would be able to make an MLB roster today but he would not be able to dominate like he did. Actually, in the book, The Babe Ruth Story as told to Bob Considine, there is a story that checks out that Ruth was examined by researchers at Columbia University in New York City and they found that his senses were off the charts. Senses like his sight were 7 or 8 standard deviations above the mean, his hearing was like that of a rabbits, etc... He was actually a very solid all around player besides just his offense. I would always caution people that records pre-integratoin should be taken in context. Really anything prior to the 1960s, baseball was very watered down by today's standards. The only similarity between those early eras and today's era is the structure of the game (e.g. 9 players on each side, 4 balls/3 strikes, bases are 90 feet, etc...). In terms of the quality of the players, no comparison.
pujols is/was certainly a better hitter than griffey
people (like smoker) swear pujols hasnt ever touched the juice
Albert juiced no doubt. That why he breaking down already..pujols is/was certainly a better hitter than griffey
people (like smoker) swear pujols hasnt ever touched the juice
dont tell smoker that
he says these gueyes get tested too often to not get caught
well clearly he not juicing now, lol.. But far as when he played in stl we kinda had management who knew what they were doing when it came to juicing and not getting caught..dont tell smoker that
he says these gueyes get tested too often to not get caught
There's another bomb...... Not just power though. His average is quite high year after year. Not just 300
I haven't read the thread, or even the OP.
My contribution is based on the thread title, and remains the same regardless what has been said:
Bonds is the best player I've seen in my lifetime. Pre or Post Steroids.
Pujols juiced. Bonds juiced. Miggy didnt
Drinker you know jack about baseball
Drinker stick to golf hueye
if miggy juicing he doing something wrong, like not lifting ? I guess u can argue Albert but there really no denying bonds, ppls heads don't just grow like that naturally.
tell drinker that. Hes too busy dating men and watching golf to kno anything about baseball
I will say Ken Griffey Jr. is by far my favorite elite hitter I have witnessed personally.
How many of us tried to emulate that swing in the backyards and ball-fields across the nation?
Bonds was not better pre steroids, then Cabrera is now though....
yeah manny was a bulked up monster
smoker knows his baseball
miggy
Griffey had sweetest swing in that generation. Just think if he would of juiced kike Bonds and half the other players from that generation of baseball. Might been able to over come all his injuries a little better.
common billy gtfooh
Drinker drunk again
Most be from the anal pounding he took in this thread
Spread them cheeks boy
smoker knows dick about baseball
smoker knows dick in his butt
smoker knows hockey though and helped me earn my red wings
Reply With Quote
