Yordan Alvarez

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by ucLAkers

Queue the Babe Ruth gif anytime someone talks about fat hitters and aging curves as well

[ucLAkers]

Originally Posted by Ray27Ray52

It's to acknowledge that his knee issues are probably never going to go away and that they will probably shorten his career AND that he is one of the best hitters in the game. Both points are true.

Actually quite the opposite...todays surgical advancements would have had Mantle playing until he was 50.

Same with Koufax

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

I'd assume you know enough about Alvarez to know how bad of a fielder he is . Rather just assuming he's OK out there because his coach gave an additional injury reason and didn't trash his own player as one of the worst fielders in the league

He's not nearly as bad as you claim and that must be one heck of a lie because Dusty's not the first to mention it over the years. Not to mention, Yordan's only 23, his weaknesses can still be improved upon.

Time will tell if they give him starts in the field next year or not.

Got any Yordans you want to unload since he's such an injury prone garbage fielder? I'm buying.

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by ucLAkers

Actually quite the opposite...todays surgical advancements would have had Mantle playing until he was 50.

Same with Koufax

I think you've got it backwards. Careers are shorter than ever and injuries are more plentiful.

[ucLAkers]

Originally Posted by BBases31

Queue the Babe Ruth gif anytime someone talks about fat hitters and aging curves as well

Just remember the technology we carry now....Alvarez has 2 brand new knees. Not 2 “lingering injuries”...now if he gets hurt again...then we’ll talk about injury prone. But last time I checked Covid was a virus not an injury.

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

I think you've got it backwards. Careers are shorter than ever and injuries are more plentiful.

You're speaking purely in generalities with no supporting evidence about a topic that is a lot more nuanced than you're representing.

Simply put, guys like Mantle did not have access to the modern medical advancements in corrective surgery that we have today and it stands to reason he would've benefitted from it. It's a no brainer -- unless, that is, you actually have no brain, then my apologies for the insensitive statement

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by BGeezy

You're speaking purely in generalities with no supporting evidence about a topic that is a lot more nuanced than you're representing.

What? The history of baseball is the evidence lol. How many guys regularly play 20 years nowawdays? How many guys are actually productive into their late 30s now?

Simply put, guys like Mantle did not have access to the modern medical advancements in corrective surgery that we have today and it stands to reason he would've benefitted from it. It's a no brainer -- unless, that is, you actually have no brain, then my apologies for the insensitive statement

Of course Mantle would've benefitted but he also would've been hurt(from an injury risk standpoint) by how the game is today. Players train year round and start putting serious miles on their body once they hit travel ball. The reason injuries are more plentiful nowadays is guys put alot more strain on their bodies than they did 50 years ago.

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

What? The history of baseball is the evidence lol. How many guys regularly play 20 years nowawdays? How many guys are actually productive into their late 30s now?

Actually, you're wrong.

Educate yourself:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184466/

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/s...15careers.html

"A rookie could expect to play 4.3 years in what the authors call the Early Era, between 1902 and 1945, 6.47 years in the Golden Age (1946-68) and 6.85 years in the Modern Era. The study does not include players whose careers began later than 1993, because many are still playing.

“One- and two-year careers were more common in the earlier parts of the century,” Rogers said, but gains in longevity have not been significant — from a median of three years in the Early Era to six years in the Modern Era.

“We can speculate that career length has increased because of better overall health, longer life expectancies, better sports training and medicine, better scouting and recruitment, higher salaries, higher prestige, league expansions, and fewer social and economic disruptions,” Rogers said."

Originally Posted by BBases31

Of course Mantle would've benefitted but he also would've been hurt(from an injury risk standpoint) by how the game is today. Players train year round and start putting serious miles on their body once they hit travel ball. The reason injuries are more plentiful nowadays is guys put alot more strain on their bodies than they did 50 years ago.

I think it's pretty clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by BGeezy

Actually, you're wrong.

Educate yourself:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184466/

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/s...15careers.html

"A rookie could expect to play 4.3 years in what the authors call the Early Era, between 1902 and 1945, 6.47 years in the Golden Age (1946-68) and 6.85 years in the Modern Era. The study does not include players whose careers began later than 1993, because many are still playing.

“One- and two-year careers were more common in the earlier parts of the century,” Rogers said, but gains in longevity have not been significant — from a median of three years in the Early Era to six years in the Modern Era.

“We can speculate that career length has increased because of better overall health, longer life expectancies, better sports training and medicine, better scouting and recruitment, higher salaries, higher prestige, league expansions, and fewer social and economic disruptions,” Rogers said."

The problem with that is it's including "careers" of players who played for a season. The parameters of what you're trying to measure is wrong. There was no highly competitive minor league structure in 1920 that forced only the best of the best to have a chance at the highest level. The barrier to entry to actually get on a major league team was MUCH lower than it is today. To get in the majors today, you have to prove yourself in every level of minor league year ball for years. In 1915, you could have a good run on a barnstorming team and get a shot with a team for a pittance of a salary. They say it right there in your quote about the multitude of 1-2 years "careers" early in baseball history. That's why.

Career length is shorter today if you take the average of all ballplayers who played at least 5 years in the majors. That way you can get a more accurate comparison of players that were actually good enough to have a "career" in the majors. And it's even more of a difference if you take the very top players of the sport. The amount of 15+ year careers is down from 40 years ago.

[ucLAkers]

Originally Posted by BGeezy

Actually, you're wrong.

Educate yourself:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184466/

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/s...15careers.html

"A rookie could expect to play 4.3 years in what the authors call the Early Era, between 1902 and 1945, 6.47 years in the Golden Age (1946-68) and 6.85 years in the Modern Era. The study does not include players whose careers began later than 1993, because many are still playing.

“One- and two-year careers were more common in the earlier parts of the century,” Rogers said, but gains in longevity have not been significant — from a median of three years in the Early Era to six years in the Modern Era.

“We can speculate that career length has increased because of better overall health, longer life expectancies, better sports training and medicine, better scouting and recruitment, higher salaries, higher prestige, league expansions, and fewer social and economic disruptions,” Rogers said."



I think it's pretty clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Make a new thread on this with a poll...im curious who knows baseball the way we think we know baseball of the past vs. modern day medicine.

Good but small sample size article on what many greats missed out on...

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...360-story.html

[bloodwings19]

I'm quite sure the modern players don't get flu as much. If Yuli didn't get a contract extension before this season, I could see Yordan playing at 1st.

[rngrdanny22]

The hell was that strike three call? Good lord...

[noaskiecards]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

The hell was that strike three call? Good lord...

They should really just get rid of umpires and use computers

About the 10th this season for Yordan
Umps really hurting the game for big offense

His first at bat was a 350 foot line out on 7 pitches, this at bat wasn't ending well for the Jay's unless the ump was in their pocket

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

The problem with that is it's including "careers" of players who played for a season. The parameters of what you're trying to measure is wrong. There was no highly competitive minor league structure in 1920 that forced only the best of the best to have a chance at the highest level. The barrier to entry to actually get on a major league team was MUCH lower than it is today. To get in the majors today, you have to prove yourself in every level of minor league year ball for years. In 1915, you could have a good run on a barnstorming team and get a shot with a team for a pittance of a salary. They say it right there in your quote about the multitude of 1-2 years "careers" early in baseball history. That's why.

Career length is shorter today if you take the average of all ballplayers who played at least 5 years in the majors. That way you can get a more accurate comparison of players that were actually good enough to have a "career" in the majors. And it's even more of a difference if you take the very top players of the sport. The amount of 15+ year careers is down from 40 years ago.

I don't think you read the actual study, just the quote from the other article. The study accounts for careers of all lengths and shows the differences for each between all three eras, if you had actually read it.

You haven't presented any data or findings to backup your claims, you just keep making baseless statements without anything to support it.

The original point remains -- modern medical advancements have clearly benefitted modern players and there really isn't much debate about that.

[Archangel1775]

There was a play back in his minor league days where he was injured on the base paths I'm confident that's when he injured his knee. He's put up most of his numbers on a bum knee. He is healthy now and with him being a DH, he will have a long career. Of course there are no guarantees the way young stars are going on the IL

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by BGeezy

I don't think you read the actual study, just the quote from the other article. The study accounts for careers of all lengths and shows the differences for each between all three eras, if you had actually read it.

You haven't presented any data or findings to backup your claims, you just keep making baseless statements without anything to support it.

The original point remains -- modern medical advancements have clearly benefitted modern players and there really isn't much debate about that.

B Easy BGeezy

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

B Easy BGeezy

Another hit so far tonight... pretty consistent for having two bum knees.

[BBases31]

Originally Posted by BGeezy

Another hit so far tonight... pretty consistent for having two bum knees.

Can't believe he was able to even walk on the field

[BGeezy]

Originally Posted by BBases31

Can't believe he was able to even walk on the field

I think he could still bat at least .250 in a wheelchair.

[noaskiecards]

The thing about yordan is if you throw a strike, he's gonna get a hit about 35 percent of the time.

The strategy of the Jay's earlier was smart, just throw balls way off the plate and have them called for strikes. I guess the new scouting report for teams will be throw balls outside and hope to get lucky.

2 for 4 with 2 runs scored, avg up to .344

Very bittersweet as he prob would have had a base clearing double in the 2nd

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[TexanFan]

@MLBStats

Yordan Alvarez is the fastest player (114 G) in the Expansion era (since 1961) to reach 100 career RBI.

[ddearing]

Originally Posted by TexanFan

Yordan Alvarez is the fastest player (114 G) in the Expansion era (since 1961) to reach 100 career RBI.

This is not the hitter you're looking for. Move along.

[rippev]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

The hell was that strike three call? Good lord...

MLB complains that there isn’t enough offense, and then this happens to Yordan with the bases loaded. Which one do you want, MLB?!

[rwperu34]

A couple of Yordan thoughts;

1) A couple of Prism/Xfractors went for $50+. That is quite a bit more than I've been paying and I have plenty. A (3) Refractor lot went for about $95, which is also a bit higher than I expected.

2) Him being a DH does not matter.

3) His prices are low because he missed all of last year and hasn't gotten (m)any headlines this year. Even in his 2 HR game....off of the best pitcher in the AL....someone else got the headline.

4) His year so far, while it would be awesome if he kept up the pace (and he can), is not elite at this point. My secret hobby sauce has him at #31 for season to date whereas he's priced about top 20 or maybe top 30.

[rwperu34]

Originally Posted by ddearing

Stop it! I said that we should STOP buying his stuff. Why aren't you listening to me?

Unrelated, I was able to pick up another 15 of his Heritage Chrome Refractor RC's /571 this past weekend, bringing me up to somewhere in the 30-40 range, I think.

That is unreal. It seems to me like all Heritage /999 and /571 are undervalued for everybody except Eloy when he was hot. I'm currently loading up on Adell. I don't have anywhere near 40 though even if you count the Blue Speckle, Red /372, and Black /72.