Olerud363

Allowing everyone to go to beer stores may add some extra cases. It's a pretty small chance but could happen. Same with restaurants, takeout, beaches. There are at least 10000+ active cases in Canada anyway. If the goal is to very quickly get rid of these, then other strategies, in addition to banning the Jays are needed. If we accept some things are open and we will get rid of these 10000+ cases slowly, then letting the Jays play in Toronto isn't going to change the situation much. Just saying if you are for more serious measures to quickly reduce the case load, you need a lot more than just banning the Jays.

You could say that about anything. Why allow the beer stores to be open?? You don't need beer. Incremental risk of keeping beer stores open is greater then letting the Jays play. So if you are an incremental risk guy I hope you also want the beer stores closed. Not to be rude. I actually appreciate the Wuhan solution, and sometimes think we should go for it. Weld the doors shut, deliver breakfast lunch and dinner with drones. However we are not doing the Wuhan solution so it's crazy that some risks are allowed but others not.

Small numbers?? This is America. They should be allowed to fill the place up. Standing room only. Full concessions. No masks. Autographs from the players and hugs. And we welcome our friends from Canuckastan with open arms. You should be allowed to come too (good luck getting back though)

I agree that was probably the thinking behind it. I think this why it bothers me. Everyone doesn't get a medal. Exceptions can be made for the best in the world. You might let North Koreans in for the Olympics even if you don't let their jr level bowling team in.

That's why it's relatively safe to bring in the team even if there is a very small chance they will bring in an existing case. Since people are following strict protocols it will prevent existing cases from transmitting. People in Canada are smart, so they aren't crowding the bars, so hypothetically if a baseball player came in with a case (undetected), broke the local quarantine and went out on the town, he won't find a crowded a bar to give it to 20 people anyway.

No real expertise on the lighting, but I would think it would be a pretty big project.

I understand that people wanted the culture of the board to change a bit. However isn't this a pretty big decision and a topic people should be able to vent on a bit?? No need to call each other morons, but shouldn't it be OK to discuss the wisdom (or lack of) of the decision and how it could effect the future (free agency etc.)?

Here is what people don't get. There are 0 cases in New Zealand. The r value in New Zealand is probably about 3 (because they can now act normally). If a sports team brought in 5 new cases they would grow like crazy in New Zealand, and force them to go back to their old and strict lockdown. A sports team could restart the Pandemic. There are 10000+ active cases in Canada, many undetected. The r value in Canada is probably about .9 (because we are still under restrictions). An additional 5 cases in Canada would be inconsequential, it would move cases 10 weeks from now from ( 10000*10^.9 = 3486 ) to (10000*10^.9 = 3485) Am I wrong?? I mean my math is highly simplified of course. But is the general idea wrong?

There is already an outbreak. There are a few hundred detected cases a day, probably a couple thousand undetected, and several thousand active cases, many undetected. It would be different if Canada was New Zealand and there were no known cases. The r value determines the course of the pandemic. Not the (unlikely) addition of a few extra cases, on top of the existing thousands, that the Blue Jays _could_ bring. Am I wrong? Where is the math and modelling that shows the (unlikely) number of new cases the Blue Jays bring in matters?

It's not the right decision because it's emotion based not science based. There are still 300-400 cases being detected in Canada each day, they don't detect all the cases, so this represents between 1000 and 2000 new cases a day. How many additional cases will allowing the Blue Jays to play in Toronto cause?? Likely none. These players are being tested all the time and you will have almost perfect contact tracing. It's extremely low risk. Am I wrong?

I know... baseball shutdown, world shutdown, crazy pandemic, humanity on the brink, Olerud363 not seen for weeks, mention the 90s Jays... boom there he is (Hurl has pointed out this before) But anyway the 95 Jays are by far the most talented team ever to suck. Could of easily had the opposite record they did, if the luck went the other way. At least that's my impression Rotation - David Cone, Pat Hentgen, Juan Guzman, Al Leiter All Stars, ERA Champions, Cy Young winners, big parts of big teams both pre and post 95 Infield - Olerud, Alomar, Alex Gonzales, Sprague I guess Not as strong as rotation, hall of famer, border line of famer, two servicaeble dudes DH - Paul Molitor (had a .340 season with 200 hits ahead) Outfield - Carlos Delgado, Devon White, Shaun Green Here's where old wounds open up. Throw Joe Carter off the boat, and give Delgado and Green a full shot earlier.

2039 Blue Jays message board - "Anybody taking this new virus seriously. They are saying this one is dangerous for younger people unlike the one from 2020... what do you old dudes think??" Poster who was here in 2020 - "We fought together and defeated the virus and by late June it was getting under control.. we wanted a ball game even without fans, but then they closed baseball for the whole year anyway. DO NOT LISTEN. DO NOT OBEY. ONCE YOU LOCK DOWN THEY WILL NEVER LET YOU OUT." 2039 Blue Jays message board - "Thanks old dude... I'd lock down if I thought I could trusth them, but can't trust the government." (Humanity dies)

That would be insane unless the data shows otherwise. Toronto and Ontario have done a great job at containing this not quite at South Korea level but good. South Korea will have a 2 month head start on getting baseball going... if they do it successfully, and Toronto is still tracking on a good path it would be insane not to have baseball. In fact in the long run it would hurt virus control... Lockdowns are a temporary measure. People need to trust that the government can use them responsibly. If there are very few virus cases, but still no baseball the people will revolt and won't listen when a worse virus comes in 2039.

Seems a lot of people are missing the point... things ARE NOT returning to normal anytime soon, so it's a choice between new normal or nothing... if 'nothing' goes on too long there will be other problems. 3 phases 1. Virus propagation phase - r = ~ 2.5 - Virus grows uncontrolled, BJ Message board poll reveals no one cares about nothing burger virus. Few hundred thousand or so in North America get virus. 2. Virus reduction phase - r = ~ 0.5 - Extreme lockdown. Doors welded shut. People may hang out on Blue Jays Message Board but no where else 3. New normal phase - r ~ 0.9 - Somehow lead semi-enjoyable life... baseball in empty stadiums could be part of that. 4. Back to normal?? - months and months probably before this happens.... I don't claim to know the true r values, or optimal lengths of each phase... except that Phase 1 went from about Feb 1 to March 20th or so... Phase 2 is really only 3 weeks old and probably should go another 3 weeks... then it would be nice to get to phase 3. Don't know anything really... but if people think phase 2 should go on much longer that's OK... just keep in mind quality of life, Economy, etc. etc. etc. Also - I do not want virus to grow... so I'll take the best options that give us r=0.9 or so... if Arizona baseball can't be played within a system with r of 0.9 we shouldn't have it... if it can be played in a system with r = 0.9 we should have it.

How have the shifts changed all this?? Does any one of the three still have that much more responsibility?? Third basemen now play where th traditional short stop used to, a good percentage of the time. Second basemen can end up in medium right field where they have to range more and make longer throws.

Please. As others have mentioned no politics here. Go to the politics thread. It is all pointless anyway. Comrade Andrew Stoeten and the Bernie Bros will be our next rulers. Andrew will be getting a lake house I bet... the rest of us... no more chance to make our way in the world. Our fate is simply what Andrew and the rest of the committee decides for us. I wonder if they will shut down BJMB?? Don't answer here take it to the politics thread.

See. I knew a smart guy told me this once. Just didn't notice it was yesterday.

I think this also is the optimal new age sabermetric lineup because Vlad either hits with men on base or leads off the second, or you already scored a run. At least that's what I was told by smart guys when I wondered why Bellinger hit fourth a lot.

Kind of like Jose Cruz JR. In 1998/1999 Jose Cruz JR had a couple of seasons sort of like Cavan did last year... but instead of getting called up he got called down He got replaced by ... some one terrible... can't remember who but (looks it up Brian McRae, Jacob Brumfield, and a young and not ready Vernon Wells) This cost the Jays 2 wins or so probably. Anyway after getting called down for being Cavan Biggio sort of like, Jose changed his approach... it didn't really make much of a difference in his WAR... he managed to hit with more power with half the walk rate. Here are some basic guidelines as to whether a change is good or not... 1. Anything that increases Cavan's on base percentage is good. If a new approach changes his walk rate to 0, but his average (and thus on base percentage) to .380 that is good. 2. Anything that decreases his on base percentage is bad, unless it increases his slugging by roughly twice as much. If a change makes him go from a .230 .360 .400 guy to .240 .340 .440 it probably isn't worth it. 3. Sitting him for Brandon Drury would be bad (Both Jose Cruz and John Olerud were sat for Jacob Brumfield, a good comparable would be sitting Cavan for Drury)

I think people must be underestimating Grichuk's power. Biggio is projected to have an on base percentage 40 points higher, but Grichuk is projected to have a slugging 80 points higher. Grichuk's power advantage (at least in the projections) is really big

Do you think he can hit 50+ doubles in that park?? I think so. And I think he will have dynamite defensive numbers in that park. It's just that he's such a smart guy, I think he'll play all the nooks and crannies well. Where do you think they will hit him in the line up?? Do you think he is a good leader?? Just wondering what your thoughts are on all this.

I mean if he actually got a vote for last years season.... How many votes does he get if during one of his good defensive years he... 1. Squeaked over .300 2. Got 700 plate appearances in the lead off spot on a good team

I've always thought Kevin Pillar was a candidate for an undeserved MVP, especially at his peak. The path would be awesome defense, combined with a high babip to get him just over .300. Hit him in the lead off spot over 162 games on a good team... kind of take his 2015 and boost it just a bit so he hits .300 and gets 100 more at bats high in the order. And he's a no nonsense kind of guy... though looking back on it, I'm not sure that type of player has gotten the MVP before... Undeserved MVPs I guess used to be RBI guys, but now the WAR and it's precursors eliminated that.

I believe so.. and it was dismissed as crazy talk until the Mitchell report I think...

Of course as others have mentioned just give pitchers and catchers their own encrypted buzzer system... that ends it I guess