Brownie19

And now I just read that Wasaga is going to close the beach. Nice.

Spanky - you can crack jokes at my expense all you want. Good luck with the surgery. Get well.

Well with the high water levels (we're almost at record highs in the Great Lakes - close to 1986), there really isn't a beach right now. Notice the streetlights in the picture...storms have deposited sand over the road and they've just closed the road and left the sand on it so there's actually some sand (and room) for people to enjoy. The streetlights are about where the edge of the road is (below the sand). Town has put up concrete traffic barriers to block wave uprush in front of The Dard (the main bar) as it's the low point. Before it was there, the waves/water would hit the front of the buildings during heavy storms/wind events. Mother Nature's been tough on the old main end lately...

Wouldn't player question the decision making of an organization if they didn't make logical decisions about controlling service time? I mean he may not like it, but players should respect FO's that make good decisions.

You don't have to worry. All of Toronto is now in Wasaga Beach.

you spelt cocaine wrong....

You guys have my support. Hopefully with baseball starting back up there's more focus on baseball talk anyway.

Baseball needs more Billy Wagner's...

I was just curious what the numbers said (and yes I could have Googled it, but thanks for doing that). I honestly had no idea what % of the population was black in 1970. I guess if you told me that 25% of the population was black in 1970, I would have argued the ratio of black MLB players to the % of black population hadn't changed much (but who knows - I'm just winging it). The % of black americans playing baseball is down (both in general and at the MLB level). OK. I would have to assume the % of Latino and Asian players has playing at the MLB level has skyrocketed and generally replaced the black americans? Hasn't that increased diversity? I mean I guess in someones perfect world, the number of white americans playing would decrease significantly? I think the focus has to be on growing the game in general and not focusing on making sure that all races are covered equally. As someone pointed out, nobody complains there's a disproportional # of white people in the NBA and claims they should change their marketing and funding. Nobody seems concerned there's a disproportional # of mexican american players at the MLB level.

What was the % of black americans in 1975 and 1980? Has that changed significantly? Shouldn't we be looking at the % of black americans between the ages of like 19 and 40 and comparing that to the % within the sport? Also - couldn't you just argue there was a disproportional # in baseball back in 1975 and thus it's simply averaged out?

I'm still a tad confused. In terms of people picking up the game for the first time at home or in a field, the cost of basketball, baseball, soccer and football is all pretty equal. I mean I guess 10 kids can play with 1 football or 1 basketball, whereas each kid would need their own glove in baseball? Is that the argument? I mean we're talking about some $30 use baseball gloves here. Once you go to an organized (local league) team - is football not a lot more expensive than baseball due to all the equipment? In my world, parents need to buy kids cleats and a glove that need to be replaced (upsized) yearly or every other year. We're talking $100 for new gear, or like $50-$60 for used stuff. The cost to play basketball, baseball and soccer at a local league should all be somewhat comparable. I'd image the actual cost to play football would be higher (whether parents buy their kids equipment or if that's provided as part of a league fee). Don't the 'good kids' in every sport need to join travel teams to truly develop and advance? Perhaps you could argue the distance/cost of one sport is more than the next, but regardless, you need some coin if you want your talented kid to advance no? Yes, some leagues/teams get money to help cover costs - but ones that don't (or don't get as much) typically have sponsorship opportunities in place to help cover parent costs. I guess the reality is money does play a part because you certainly hear stories of people from poor families making it in the NFL (and NBA to a lesser extent) a lot more than you do in MLB and the NHL. I'm obviously missing how that happens I guess. I'd like to say it's because top talent kids playing basketball and football get recruited through High School programs where the costs to play are very minimal; however - the same could be said for baseball (and hockey).

https://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/1979995/this-cubs-draftee-fancies-himself-baseballs-best-lefty-reliever-he-might-soon-prove-it Case in point. I actually read this article and it mentions Burl Carraway's devastating curveball like 6 times....yet no .gifs. Massive fail IMO.

Hurl - where did he say what he was going to do? It obviously isn't in the quote provided. I'm curious as far to often it seems people just whine and bitch without any notion of doing anything to foster improvement. Join the MLBPA union and impart change.

This is an interesting debate. MLB seems like one of most diverse sports leagues in the world that consistently celebrates that by showing which country the players are from. I'd be interested to see the stats of other leagues. Are there many black majority owners in the NBA or NFL (or in any other league around the world)? I will admit I don't fully understand the restrictions and challenges of all sports within all regions, but to suggest baseball isn't accessible to kids is a little odd. Outside of areas/regions that simply don't offer it (as previously noted), baseball is a relatively inexpensive sport (kids don't need $200-$500 gloves). You need a glove and some cleats and then you can share bats and helmets (or at least you used to be able to). Hockey is 4 - 5 times more expensive for kids at a local league level. If they get really good and need more competition, do they need money to join travel teams? Yes, they probably do; however, that's generally true for the top kids playing hockey (and basketball) in Canada too. How's that work for basketball and football in the US? Do the best kids just dominate in local league straight into top High School programs? (maybe they do). Is it fair to blame leagues and compare 'how it used to be'? I'd argue that it's significantly harder for leagues in 2020 than it was back in 1970 due to the massive increase in competing interests.

Then it doesn't deserve my attention

All kinds of .gifs included guys. Side note - why any journalist would ever post an article without .gifs these days is beyond me. I basically close articles immediately if I don't see some .gifs

What's the probability that 1 start from Pearson is the sole difference between making or missing the playoffs this year. 0.341%?

He hired Dusty Baker - I don't think we can rely on him to make good decisions like that.

Right - so obviously there is risk there as it will be difficult to ensure all parties involved strictly adhere to the protocols. That said, there's always risk involved. We have concussion protocols and if someone gets seriously hurt, we could get sued (whether or not the organizations/coaches are following the protocol or not). Is the difference simply that for concussions (in this case), the organization would be covered through insurance? Are they covered by insurance even if they aren't following the applicable protocols?

Would a waiver then work for youth sports and protect the organization, executive, coaches, etc?

What if certain people or teams don't the protocols? I wonder if there's some understand that people won't follow all the protocols to the letter of the law and that by signing the waiver, you accept that. I'm curious about this as I don't think most employers are asking staff to sign waivers and such. They may have protocols in place, but if people don't follow them and someone gets sick and dies - is the business at risk for not enforcing the protocols? I'm also curious from a minor sports perspective. They have insurance to cover injures during play, but if the organization, coaches, etc. don't follow protocol (think concussions) and someone is seriously hurt - are they still 100% covered by insurance even if they are negligent? Now with COVID, there will be call kinds of protocols put in place, but we all know it will be challenging to strictly follow them. Will the waivers protect the organization and coaches in the even someone is seriously ill or killed (will they even be able to link it back to the sporting event)? or will that breakdown and they will become personally liable it can be proven they didn't enforce protocols "enough"? Perhaps this belongs in the OT thread, but I'd love to hear opinions/thoughts.

I have a question about liability and COVID. Under 'normal' conditions, MLB and the teams have insurance to cover baseball related injuries and incidents. If someone gets seriously injured and they feel it was caused by the negligence of the league or team, they could sue. Take for instance, Justin Morneau and his concussion. If he felt as though the team didn't follow the proper concussion protocol, he could sue. If it was proven the team was negligent and didn't follow the proper protocol - would insurance still cover the cost of all the damages? It's my understand you can't get insurance against COVID, so with the baseball season resuming, I would assume all players (and everyone involved) will have to sign a waiver form holding the league and the team harmless if someone was to get COVID. However, if someone where to get COVID and get really sick, or die and they believe it was because people weren't following the proper protocol - I would assume they will sue. If successful, would the league/teams end up paying out big gobs of money? Or will the waivers be rather ironclad?

Never downplay the importance of grammer...

Interesting, although it's 6 years ago, so this may have changed some.

Is this true? I thought BBCOR bats were designed to mimic wood bats.