Baseball=Life wrote:Ok, Kenyatte, here's a good compromise.....
Your idea of 3 CF & 1 DeF per month (75% - 25%)........
then my idea of 2 CF 7 2 DeF per month (50% - 50%).....
then your idea of 3 CF & 1 DeF per month (75% - 25%)......
then my idea............ etc, etc.
so we just alternate the two plans from month to month.
Over one year, here's what the final percentages would be:
30 games at Curt Flood = 62.5%
18 games at DeFremery = 37.5%
So that seems more than fair, eh? Please consider that I have now dropped from 100% DeF to 50% DeF to now only 37.5% DeF. Is this satisfactory?
By the way, please don't read any sarcasm here, i'm straight-talking. I know I'm a member of Generation X, so sometimes online there's a need to clarify whether sarcasm is in effect or not. I'm not.
I think this plan is much more practical than trying to do double headers, that just involves way too many unknowns, including when to start the 2nd game (especially if at another field), since we can't estimate when the 1st game ends. So we need to back away from that plan. 4 games a month is a lot anyway!
Final note: Ken, you know the main reason why this debate is going on is because a) there's strong sentiment for both parks, but more importantly, b) your presense at games involving both parks is a big priority, since you are a key component of Park Baseball. My hope is that the 37.5% offer will make you want to participate, since it's so much less than previously offered.
TheLegend wrote:
I don't understand what makes you think these things wouldn't happen at curt flood. The only possible concern would be the lack of homeruns, but we had 4 balls hit to the fence in the first week! Do you really think there won't be any homers!?!?!
Well, Ken... We're still waiting for one.
Scott, where are we playing this week? Can we go to our home?
Woohoo! Live pitching is going to be be great. I'm ready, elbow or not!
I still say we will have to abandon keeping a count, at least for this first game. We don't want walks. Or arguments about calls (think about it, you know there would be plenty of them). If we have an extra guy who is happy to be umpire, then we could keep a count, but should allow 4 or 5 called balls instead of 3.
How many people do we have willing to do some pitching, besides myself? How many actually want to, besides myself? This could be good for other reasons, too. We'll have more rotation in the fielding positions, as no-one will want to pitch all day (or, in all likelihood, be able to).
One thing I thought of about umpiring, is that we don't have a 2nd face mask. And that obviously is necessary to call balls and strikes from behind the plate.
As for disagreements, if we had an umpire everyone would just have to agree that NO JUDGEMENT CALL CAN BE ARGUED. So you can't argue about safe/out, ball/strike, or fair/foul. You could only argue about rule clarifications, like if you thought the ump misunderstood a rule. This is the standard MLB policy (rule 901-c).
"Baseball is like church, many attend, few understand"
I know that Peter, Pat and Nick also wanted to pitch- There are probably others. I think my idea of letting the catcher call balls and strikes would work fine. As long as both catchers are familiar with what constitutes the strike zone.
A couple things we need to keep track of when creating teams are to make sure there are 3 pitchers and 2 catchers on each side (I say two catchers because I know both nick and I want to pitch ) Man I'm juiced.
I really got ahold of a couple of pitches yesterday in BP with Paul and Pat. It felt good to smack around some more lively pitching (and I look forward to doing it on sunday!)
Scott, I know that! I suppose I can't be offended, what with all the times I've gotten out or missed getting someone else out because I didn't know or simply forgot some rule or other!
I meant allow a 4-0 or 5-0 count to be reached before another ball causes a walk.
BTW, does anyone have a stopwatch? We can get rough estimates of our pitching speeds if someone can bring one.
Although my throwing in the field can be a scary sight, when I do pitch every now and then (slow for our own team)... I usually get it over the plate. If there are no objections, I wouldn't mind pitching an inning or two.
Also, if we're playing a "real" game with "real" pitching I'd vote to call balls and strikes (4 and 3) just like the real thing. Sure there could be lots of walks or lots of strike outs but whatever the abberations both teams should be affected equally. And I'd prefer to get used to the real thing even if it takes a few games to get used to.
Looking forward to this...I hope!
just my 2/100
Baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical --Yogi Berra
TheLegend wrote:
No one has came out and said "I hate Flood" which leads me to believe that everyone is happy playing there.
Kenyatte hasn't been doing his dishes. And besides that, he's a buster. So, with that said, let's change a few premises of this "Home of Park Baseball" argument.
I HATE FLOOD!!!!
- Dorian
PS: Now what, nigga!?!?!?
It's OK, It's alright
fuck all day, fuck all night
tallguy wrote:
I meant allow a 4-0 or 5-0 count to be reached before another ball causes a walk.
Based on today, I would say that the 5-balls-for-a-walk deal would not have really made less walks happen, it would just delay the inevitable that there would be an insane number of walks.
) Man I'm juiced.
