Page 163 of 194 FirstFirst ... 63113153159160161162163164165166167173 ... LastLast
Results 1,621 to 1,630 of 1935

Thread: For MLB fans

  1. #1621

    Default

    what
    As is from 1965 and was redone "" before the Raiders left Oakland for LA and the "redone" was adding Mount Davis which the As don't use. I'd be surprised as shit if Oakland Coliseum isn't the most outdated in baseball (or football).

  2. #1622

    Default

    Honestly didnt view it as him trying to start an argument with me. Im cool explaining myself.

    That being said, KB, you're a badass and your post made me very happy. I had no idea you knew as much about this kinda stuff as I do. It makes me feel like less of a baseball nut job.

  3. #1623

    Default

    @hulky ya O.co is hilariously bad too. Check the articles I posted.

  4. #1624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KBHoleN1 View Post
    You have a really bad habit of not reading people's posts all the way through and starting an argument based off of something they didn't say.

    Spencer said it's one of the "oldest stadiums in baseball not to have undergone any serious renovations." That's a word-for-word quote from his post. Rogers Centre is currently the 7th oldest stadium in MLB, and he's probably right about it being the only one of the older stadium not to have undergone serious renovations. Kauffman Stadium went through some big renovations in 2006 to modernize it and increase fan experience. Fenway has had improvements since 2000 (like the Green Monster seats and some of the grandstand areas), Wrigley has been going through some cosmetic improvements the last few years, the Dodgers have spent hundreds of millions to build shops and restaurants around the stadium and improve entrances, etc. I think the only thing Rogers Centre got was a new scoreboard over the years.
    My bad, I did misread it. I wasn't starting an argument, I was asking a question about what he said. I hope it's obvious I'm an easy going dude.

    Yeah, Fenway is unrecognizable to me now. It's unreal how different it is now. They started changing it around the early 2000s.

  5. #1625

    Default

    From an outside perspective, the changes theyve made have been really good. But I get where you're comin from

  6. #1626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer 555 View Post
    @hulky ya O.co is hilariously bad too. Check the articles I posted.
    it is hilariously bad, but so much fun and so cheap compared to other high end pro sports. It's like MLS soccer cheap (if not more so).

    kinda funny the second worst experience from your link was Tropicana which I thought was worse (imo). I've been to Rays As and Giants. Giants is amazing and luxurious and I assume thats what most are. As feels like baseball. Rays was like "okay I was gifted these tickets and it's aight".

  7. #1627
    Here to help Hugh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The Porkchop Express
    Posts
    16,508

    Default

    Khris Davis is having an MVP type season. Not saying he’ll win over Martinez, Betts or Jose Ramirez but there’s lots of games left and he’s heating up. I do think he’s more valuable to his team than those guys, meaning without Davis I dont think Oakland is in the playoffs at all. Same might be the case for those other guys but I’m not as sure.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hulky View Post
    My wife said the watch shown on the show said uh the bad guy groups name before Thanos.

  8. #1628

    Default

    That's always been an interesting thing to me with the MVP. League MVP I feel like they should just be judging the player as an individual playing in the overall league in a vacuum, not measure him against his team. But for the World Series MVP it should absolutely be taken into consideration how much they contributed to their own team.

    Like, I don't like football but Tom Brady gets Superbowl MVP every single time they've won. Every time he has one there are definitely other people more deserving in terms of how much they contributed to the overall team winning. If you want to give him league MVP for his seasonal numbers in a vacuum irrespective of who he's playing for, that makes sense.

    Just my opinion.

  9. #1629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
    Like, I don't like football but Tom Brady gets Superbowl MVP every single time they've won.
    Deion Branch got it in the 3rd SB win. (Tom, Tom, Deion Branch, Eli, Eli, Malcolm Smith, Tom, Nick Foles [it's kinda hilarious the list of people who beat Tom Brady in retrospect, like why isn't it Brees/Rodgers/Wilson or whatever actually MVP type player fucking NFC is wild])

    League MVP isn't just individual stats though, it's usually individual stats + team success. However a player on a stacked team where they aren't necessarily carrying the team still can win it (and usually does) over someone with slightly more stats on a less successful team, but they carried the team.

    Like CY Young this year has Jacob DeGrom in the running but he has so many loses and his team sucks so he likely doesn't get it even though his numbers are competitive. Or last year Jose Altuve didn't have the -best- stats, but they were close enough plus he was the best of the Astros batters. Before him though it's usually Trout whose team is dog shit but he is a baseball tier by himself.

    I think MVP this year is JD Martinez. Adding him put Boston over the hump plus things like him teaching Devers how to improve just gives him the veteran role model-y type edge I think.

    Still think in the NFL Brees should won a couple MVP over Peyton and JJ Watt should have gotten MVP the year he went insane on defense plus had offensive TDs.
    Last edited by Hulky; 08-22-2018 at 01:23 PM.

  10. #1630

    Default

    I don't know enough about football to debate to be honest, I've just seen it as I live here and I figured it was a fitting example for the point I was trying to make. I guess in my opinion as far as league MVP goes, if someone gets stuck on a shitty team and they still crush it, they should be measured in a vacuum in my opinion instead of against the overall performance of their team. Because someone could beat them who was massively supported by a much better team that helped their performance, even though the better player just had less support.

    But as I said, I feel the opposite for World Series MVP. I think you should absolutely have to factor in how much they helped the team and contributed to everyone's overall performance to win. Because it's not a huge macroscopic field to measure, just two teams.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. For NFL fans
    By Blexican in forum Sports Discussion
    Replies: 4915
    Last Post: 03-15-2024, 07:12 PM
  2. For NBA fans
    By Blexican in forum Sports Discussion
    Replies: 1461
    Last Post: 11-23-2020, 12:16 PM
  3. For NHL Fans
    By Madamos in forum Sports Discussion
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 08-12-2020, 09:15 PM
  4. For English Premier League fans
    By Veilmenacex in forum Sports Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-12-2017, 06:27 AM
  5. For MLS fans
    By Veilmenacex in forum Sports Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-12-2017, 06:26 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •