BuckminsterFullback's picture


Member since 08 March 2014 | Blog

Recent Activity

Comment 20 Apr 2017

Oh, Geez, search for that and there's no telling what ads adsense will serve you...

Comment 19 Apr 2017

Sounds like all 3 RB's are ready to go.

I just hope that the backups get enough reps, and demonstrate ball security, early in the year, to gain UFM's confidence; that way, if something happens to Weber in an important game, Meyer doesn't resort to running JTB 30 times.

Yes, I'm still salty about the 2015 Michigan State game.

Comment 18 Apr 2017

The CBJ have some good, young talent (Jones, Werenski, Saad, Wennberg). If some young guys (Carlsson, Nutivaara, Peeke) develop as expected, they could have an elite D-man 1st pairing, and a very, very good 2nd and 3rd pairings. There are some young wings (Bjorkstrand, Abramov) to be excited about, and some good young role players (Jenner, Anderson).

The organisation is short on talent at C. CBJ views Pierre-Luc Dubois as the answer as the 1C, but it's not clear that he's going to meet that expectation.

The CBJ team has played 17 seasons, with just 3 playoff appearances and a couple near misses. Despite a long history of bad hockey, they haven't had very favorable draft position. They had to buy their way into the #1 to pick Rick Nash, and the year that they earned the #2 pick (2012) was a relatively weak draft class. They drafted Murray, and he's had a litany of injuries that have prevented him from excelling. The 2016 draft was the first time that CBJ moved "up" in the draft lottery, and they only moved up 1 spot, from #4 to #3 (DuBois). 

A fan base that has seen an extended run of success might be able to tolerate a "blow it up" approach, but CBJ has seldom rewarded the fans. Nobody wants to go back to square one. And if there's an absolute "can't miss" guy (McJesus, Matthews) to be had at #1, then 7 other teams tank, too, and you risk winding up with the #7 pick anyway. 

There are some really good NHL players who were drafted after #15 overall. CBJ is going to have to be very smart and lucky and hit on some later picks, and hit on some international free agents, or they're not going to have the talent to compete with the elite teams. But blowing it up and tanking would alienate the fan base, and that might be the last straw.

Comment 15 Apr 2017

Good point about Mickey Mantle. It's a shame that he hurt his knee so early in his career; if you could send an orthopedic surgeon back in time to repair Mantle's knee with today's techniques, his career might have been even more impressive. He definitely begins in the discussion.

Mantle grew up in Oklahoma. His father and uncles worked in the nickle mines, and died young. Mantle was apparently convinced that it was genetics, not environmental exposure, so he was sure he would die young also; that outlook contributed to his hard-living lifestyle. Imagine how good he might have been if he hadn't played "half" of his games with a hangover.

Comment 15 Apr 2017

you lost me at the "Steroid Kid".

I hear ya. 

From what I've read, Bonds didn't start on the juice until after 1998, when Mark McGwire hit 70 HR.

By that time, Bonds had already won 3 MVPs and 8 Gold Gloves, had 12 seasons of 28+ stolen bases, and led the league in OPS+ 4 times. Once the the steroids kicked in, his numbers were cartoonish (to match his head). He's 3rd all-time in career OPS+ (182) but there's no question that steroids inflated that number by a bunch.

Comment 15 Apr 2017

However, I would not say Aaron was any better than Ted defensively or baserunning.

(All stats courtesy of the excellent www.baseball-reference.com.)

Aaron's wheel's were gone by the time his career ended, but for his career, he had 240 stolen bases, and was caught 73 times, for an outstanding 77.3% percentage; he had 6 seasons of 20+ stolen bases.

Williams managed 24 stolen bases, and was caught 17 times, in his entire career.

As for defense, I will concede that there are some issues with defensive metrics, but: Williams posted a positive dWAR in just 1 of his 19 seasons; Aaron posted a positive dWAR in 8 of his 23 seasons, and won 3 Gold Gloves. (Gold Gloves weren't awarded until 1957, the last 4 years of Williams' career; but, as far as I'm aware, he never had much of a reputation as a fielder.)

No question, though, that Williams could hit like few others. His OPS+ of 190 is second all time to Ruth's 206; Aaron is 24th at 155. 

(It's a common phenomenon that really great hitters' bats keep them playing long after their legs have gone, and we have a tendency to remember them as slugs on the basepaths and in the field; some of them could really cover ground before they hit 35 or so.)

Ruth has the cred, but his pitching career was done around the age of 23-24 if memory serves.

True, Ruth's pitching career was effectively done after his age 24 season, but he had 28 starts as a 20-yr old; in his age 20-22 seasons, he won 18, 23, and 24 games, and led the league in ERA as a 21-yr old.  He wasn't just a guy who could pitch; he was a very good pitcher. He just happened to be an other-worldly hitter who was too valuable not to play every day. (Wasn't much of a baserunner, though; had 123 career SB, and at least 117 CS (apparently CS wasn't recorded until 1920.)

Comment 14 Apr 2017

And it seems to me that Ted may have been the best ever as an all-around player, with average and power and all of it. 

Williams is probably my favorite "historical" player, but I think it's a stretch to consider him the best "all-around" player. He was a fantastic hitter, and he had a good arm, but he was not a good baserunner or defensive outfielder.

My list of candidates for best "all-around" player; Babe Ruth (was an accomplished pitcher as well as a hitter), Barry Bonds, Willie Mays; with Hank Aaron and Ty Cobb just outside that group.

Comment 11 Apr 2017

If the offense succeeds in throwing the ball around the yard, will that be a vindication of the QBs and Zone6, or an indictment of the new DB's?