sbrylski

Most pitches aren't put into play, so that view, while very interesting, probably isn't showing what's most important. The location and movement of a pitch is So important that the view behind the pitcher almost has to be the default. I agree that it is clearly the most important, which is why I suggested replaying the pitch from the CF camera right after, you don't miss out on it. But there's more to the game than the pitcher/batter battle, and I'd like to break that monopoly they have on camera time. And I also think seeing the hit and ensuing action from a continuous camera angle rather than cutting it up is more exciting. I would suggest using the left side to show an alternate viewing angle. It could either be the angle you are advocating or if that view would be too small, perhaps just half the infield (alternate it depending on batter handedness). Not sure how that would work when quickly changing views when a ball is hit into play but it would be interesting. I think that might be too cluttered for the average viewer. It's not mission control. While I see the benefit, I think that would be more a niche market who actually prefers that. I wish the Brewers would go to the Target Field view of being directly behind and above the pitcher... Absolutely. The ideal camera angle would draw a line between the point of the pitcher's release and the center of the strikezone, IMO. Some camera's come pretty close. NotGraphs had an article ranking the center field cameras a few weeks ago, but I can't find it. The Brewers camera angle is way too offset. It's not terrible for right-handed pitchers, but you really notice it when a lefty is on the mound.

Does anyone else get tired of the only camera angle you ever see being from ground level behind the pitcher? Clearly, it's the best angle for seeing the pitch, which is the most important thing for the broadcast to display. However, we are missing out on so much but not seeing anything else, such as defensive positioning, pre-pitch movement, and leads and steals by the baserunners. We also miss out on some of the play because there's always a cut to a different angle when the ball is put in play. So here's what I suggest. For just the first pitch of every at-bat, the camera angle shown is from behind the batter, slightly elevated and zoomed out. You could still get a decent look at the pitch, at least whether it was inside or outside, but we can also see the defensive positioning (which will presumably will stay the same for the entire at-bat) and the leads of the runners on base. It would be a kind of "to set the stage" view. For all other pitches, the camera goes back to the standard CF view. If the first pitch isn't put in play, as it often isn't, you can instantly cut to a quick replay of the pitch from the standard CF view, so every pitch would still be broadcast. If it is put in play, they wouldn't have to necessarily cut to another camera, and we would see everything happen fluidly. Then run the replay from the CF camera. You could also show the first pitch from the third base side and elevated when a runner is on first base only, so you see the pitcher, catcher and batter, and first baseman in the screen. These alternate views are frequently used in replays, but I really don't see why they can't be mixed in as the live shots sometimes. Does anyone else like this idea, or am I nuts?

Dodgers have Trayvon Robinson in Triple-A. He's hitting .304 with 25 home runs and eight steals, and he swiped 38 bags last season at Double-A. Power-speed combo, 23 years old. Their OF is pretty set.

Does anyone else have problems figuring out if home runs at Miller are actually home runs when watching on TV? For the life of me, I can not tell at what point this ball hits something over the fence. Every time I watch it, it looks like the ball lands near the warning track and has backspin like a golf shot.

I also recommend Hawks.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1642&position=P He's not the K-Rod that played for the Angels, but as a setup guy he should be pretty good. ERA, FIP and xFIP all right around 3.00 so far this year.

All we need is a defensive-minded shortstop and then let 'em play.

It was an insane match. I was more jacked up watching this one than the USA Men's - Algeria game.

Prince, Howard, Bruce, and Stanton would be a nice foursome.

I think their success at the WBC is due to the time of year the WBC is played. If we played the WBC during their pre-season workouts and during our season, I'm confident that they wouldn't dominate as well as they do.I think the WBC is no more than a showcase and whoever wins is essentially meaningless in trying to evaluate talent level. I like the WBC, its fun to watch. But it's just too short of a format to really be meaningful in projecting the future.

"Because it doesn't fit with my preconceived notions" is not an acceptable argument. Unless you can prove that your preconceived notions are always 100% correct. There may be valid criticisms of WAR out there, but this is not one.

Fascinating. "Fate and the cunning treachery of the summa rudis killed me." i.e. He was robbed! It's the refs fault!

I'm moving to the Twin Cities in August (from Madison). Love those nicknames.

If you were truly interested: http://www.fangraphs.com/graphs/9059_P_daily_full_6_20110619.png FanGraphs Source (fixed link --1992)

Raaadical idea, not going to happen, fun to think about: Two leagues of 15. Instead of 162/3 = 54 series per year, expand that to 58 by starting the season two weeks earlier. Have intraleague, interleague, and international play against top clubs from Mexico, Japan, and Korea. Intraleague: 14 teams * 9 games = 126 games Interleague: 8 teams * 3 games = 24 games (One protected series, rotate through the other seven teams) International: 8 teams * 3 games = 24 games The international games don't count in MLB standings, but the best international records that don't qualify for the MLB postseason play in an international club postseason.

I agree that there's really no reason to have two leagues or conferences anymore. And if we are going radical, I would do three, five, or six divisions, with teams grouped by both geography and revenue. Six might be best, because you could have a high payroll and low payroll versions of the standard East-Central-West split. East Rich - These five together make sense. New York Yankees Boston Red Sox Philadelphia Phillies New York Mets Atlanta Braves East Poor - I could see a Toronto/Washington/Baltimore triangle rivalry. Washington Nationals Baltimore Orioles Toronto Blue Jays Tampa Bay Rays Florida Marlins Central Rich - Twins (surprisingly to me) were 12th in revenue last season. Chicago Cubs Minnesota Twins Chicago White Sox St Louis Cardinals Detroit Tigers Central Poor - A little weak in rivalries aside from the intra-Ohio matchup. Milwaukee Brewers Cincinnati Reds Cleveland Indians Kansas City Royals Pittsburgh Pirates West Rich - Houston is actually sixth in revenue of the two west divisions, but I gave them a bump for rivalry purposes. Los Angeles Dodgers San Francisco Giants Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Texas Rangers Houston Astros West Poor - Seattle was fifth in revenue of western teams, but we'll keep them with Oakland. Seattle Mariners Colorado Rockies Arizona Diamondbacks Oakland Athletics San Diego Padres

I think that's a bit harsh. The Mets are pretty much looking to break things up and start fresh, and Reyes is a free agent to be while Wright will make $45 million from now until the end of 2013. Not a bad contract, but not really a good one. Still, we simply don't have a package we could put together for them realistically. If we didn't make the Greinke trade, that package plus one more pitching prospect might be the market price for Reyes+Wright.

I cannot figure out Pakistan. They are all over the map. I've heard they help fund the Taliban, and I've heard they are cooperate with US intelligence. I've heard they never thought Bin Laden was in their country, and I've heard they helped lead us to him. And all the while he was living in a mansion near a Pakistani military training base, reportedly. What the heck?

sbrylski06, I've read that Al Qaeda currently has less than 100 members. Most of the people we consider part of the organization are merely other groups affiliated with the super-secretive organization. That's exactly the point.

I'm glad he's finally dead, because that pretty much kills Al Qaida. That is a huge step towards defeating terrorism. Bin Laden being dead is really a symbol for killing a big part of terrorism. There are 1,000 more ready to take his place. This does little to nothing except bring one man to justice. At the cost of trillions of dollars and loss of personal freedoms at home.

I think that's only referring to the pitcher and balks.

Those who think he'll be overpriced during his contract, make sure you're considering inflation. At a typical 5% rate of salary inflation, this table shows the cost of Braun's deal in today's money: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 AAV Actual Salary $ 19.0 $ 19.0 $ 19.0 $ 18.0 $ 16.0 $ 18.2 Inflation Adjusted $ 14.9 $ 14.2 $ 13.5 $ 12.2 $ 10.3 $ 13.0 It's more like a five-year, $65 million deal than the actual $105 million. We can put this another way, and look at what the equivalent deal would be if we waited until he hit free agency and then signed him to this contract. It would be reported at that time to be a five-year, $71.3 million dollar deal. In other words, the deal looks worse than it is because it doesn't kick in for five years.

Selig expecting playoff expansion Looks inevitable. As for scheduling, getting a three-game series in shouldn't be that big of a deal. I would have all three games at one stadium though, so you don't need a travel day: Day 1: 5@4 Day 2: 5@4 Day 3: 3@2, 5@4 (if necessary) Day 4: 3@2 Day 5: 4@1 Day 6: 4@1, 2@3 Day 7: 2@3 Day 8: 1@4 Day 9: 1@4, 2@3 (if necessary) Day 10: 1@4 (if necessary) Day 11: 3@2 (if necessary) Day 12: 4@1 (if necessary), 3@2 (if necessary) Day 13: 4@1 (if necessary)

They're interested in truth. Never any reason to stop seeking the truth.

Didn't know where to put this - a great trick play in a college game: SPOILER: Explanation - When the runner on first tries to steal second, the catcher instead throws the ball to third base, and then chases an imaginary ball to the backstop. The?base-stealer?finishes his slide without a tag, gets up and looks around to see that the catcher apparently still doesn't have the ball. So he takes off to third. Whoops.