shrader
-
Posts
8,029 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by shrader
-
-
-
When did they do this? I'm flying in on friday night for the first time in a while so I guess I'll get to see what they've done so far.
-
I'm sure he walked the good kid just to give cancer boy a shot at being a hero. That had to be what was going through his mind.
-
Here's an equally screwed up story that I just read at another message board. There was a link, but it required a login, so I didn't bother to post that:
A local Little League team (Portsmouth) was playing in the regional semi final against Colchester Vermont in Bristol CT this afternoon. The info I heard second hand from the office from our reporter who's down there is that the Vermont team was up 9-8 in the top of the 6th (they're the home team) and they (and Portsmouth) realized that they forgot to use one player (how do you do that at this point?)Upon realizing this, The vermont team began throwing the ball around trying to allow a run to score to tie the game so they could bat the player in the bottom of the inning. The Portsmouth team decided to strike out intentionally to end the game losing, knowing that they would win based on the 'everyone must play' rules (one at bat or one inning in the field).
So the Portsmouth kid struck out to end and lose the game and they were celebrating. Colchester parents were ready to riot...
So they're awaiting appeal from national Little League headquarters...
If it stands that Portsmouth 'wins' despite losing, I'll feel sorry for those kids (Vermont), but how the hell do you let that happen at this level? As much as I hope Portsmouth wins and goes to Williamsport(because I can make some good $ covering it), it's kind of a bummer way to 'win', but rules are rules... I can't imagine how they could give Vermont the 'win'.... but what a bizzare turn of events
(side note, this crap gets way too much coverage, with the regional finals on ESPN on Sunday)....
-
My only problem with the whole thing is where the one coach said that the other would do the same exact thing (which by the way, isn't actually quoted in the article). I hate when people play that card. It's the equivalent of a 5 year old and his "no, you're stupid" reply.
-
Then the coach playing against the cancer kid should have just forfeited the game so that the cancer kid didn't have his feelings hurt. We will make sure that you are there to explain to the kids that they are losing the game because the other kid had cancer. It had nothing to do with their play or the fact that they earned the right to fight for that championship. Just throw away that long season so the cancer kid does not have his feelings hurt. Let me know how it goes.
I'm not suggesting any of that. All I'm saying is that I don't remember seeing that level of competition at that age. For that coach, being as competitive as he is, he was in a tough spot no matter what he decided to do.
-
The one thing that's not clear in that article is whether or not they are still sending out scouts. My guess is that they're using the video to initially narrow down a list of teams/games that they will send someone to. I can see some use for a system like that, but who knows if that's actually what they're doing or not. A better written article would help clear that up.
-
Where did I say that the roster was set that very instant?
When you have your best player followed by your worst player, there is a very good chance that they will walk the best batter to pitch to the worst. It not only happens at the end of the game, but during any inning. It is part of baseball.
Blame the cancer kid's coach.
You never said it. That's not the point at all. If this kind of thing is happening ridiculously early in a game full of 10 year olds, what you have is an overly competitive jackass coach. That kind of stuff was not happening when I was that age. 10 year olds don't care about baseball strategy enough to be walking power hitters in the 3rd inning.
-
If you want to blame someone, you should blame the cancer kid’s coach for putting him in that situation (batting behind the best batter). What did he think was going to happen? The other team was going to hand the game to them because they have a cancer kid on the team? Why not get an entire team of cancer kids and walk your way to a championship, because every team would have to forfeit to prevent hurting anyone’s feelings?
It's not like he set the lineup at that very instant when the team was down 1 run with 1 out left. The lineup was set at the start of the game. In those leagues where everyone bats, you have to mix up the batting order to avoid the situation where the game is on the line and you've got your 5 worst players all lined up.
-
In the end, the team with the cancer survivor is going to win. Some local professional team will end up inviting them to a game where they'll meet all the players and be given the best seats in the park. They'll remember that day longer than any of the kids from the other team will remember their championship.
-
-
We've been using this link over at the Sabres Report board and it breaks down the Sabres payroll/cap situation really well. It may not be perfect, but it's close.
-
So wait a second, we are now at 41.9 mil with Miller & Kalinin still to sign (on a 44 mil cap). OK, it makes sense to me that they would walk away from JP.
But, then you say that the Sabres have a modest profit on a 31 mil salary, that is expected to rise approx. 7 mil to approx. 38 mil.
I don't understand the discrepancy in numbers.
Each player's cap hit is their average salary over the life of the contract. A lot of the new contracts they just signed escalate each year. Campbell's is a simple example. He's making 1.25 million this year and 1.75 million next year. That makes his cap hit 1.5 million.
-
Sounds like poker over here. At least there's some throwing in darts, which makes it fit in on espn far better than poker does.
-
That is what I don't like about arbitration. The Sabres don't want to pay Dumont the arbitration amount, so now any team (including Buffalo) can sign him for any price...it seems sort of pointless...and would seem to harbour bad blood between a team and player. I agree the amount was too stiff for Dumont (who I like a lot), but what are the chances he will want to come back to Buffalo now? It seems like a very flawed system...
The only real purpose that I see to it is that it cuts back on long contract hold outs like the Peca situation a few years back.
-
It's such a complex document. It's hard to keep track of all the rules. Honestly, I'm a bit surprised that they are allowed to re-sign him now. Obviously there are some obstacles, but in theory, I team could reject the arbitration results in order to work around that rule where they can't renegotiate/extend the contract until January.
-
I just did a quick look through the CBA and there is nothing about this, so I guess I was thinking about MLB.
The one interesting thing I did read is that the teams are only allowed to walk away from a certain number of contracts. It really had no effect on the Sabres, but since they had 3 contracts awarded in arbitration, they could only walk away from two of them at most.
-
-
-
I hated the ending of last season, but at least we'll get to see that resolved before the show takes it's long World Series break.
-
What the hell is the point of this? Does reebok expect fans to go out and buy ref jerseys now too?
-
-
-
I live less than a mile away from one of their locations and I haven't even been there since hockey season. I know, I'm pathetic.
You know what, screw it and go to Legal Seafoods. My roommate is a waiter there. By going their, you can partially fund my NHL Center Ice Package this year.
Third Grade Test
in Off the Wall Archives
Posted
Funny, that's the first thing I tested when I took that quiz.