Brock Beauchamp

Oh, I definitely believe that contract was ill-advised. I'd probably offer Dozier something along the lines of a 3/$60m contract but would hesitate to go longer than that unless he took less per season.

I’m saying the fact that you find it accusatory is rather unfair. Dunno if you’ve read about White Fragility but it’s an interesting idea, one that I believe makes it nearly impossible to talk about race in a rational manner. My underlying point is that we need to take a deep breath and *really* consider why we’re getting mad about things, especially things that aren’t directly pointed at us. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.alternet.org/culture/why-white-people-freak-out-when-theyre-called-out-about-race%3famp

But no specific posters were singled out and you've determined that your personal reactions are not racially-driven. Yet you're still upset about the statement when it doesn't apply to you. I hope you can see how this makes it almost impossible to talk about race. Even the people who have no real, vested interest in the conversation get upset about its mere existence.

You should examine your thought processes and conclude that your rationale is not steeped in race. At that point, you should also realize that no one has called you a racist and that you can get on with your day. The question didn't bother me in the least. If you put thought into it and conclude that it doesn't apply to you, why are you still upset about it? What is it about the mere mention of race that sets off white people so often?

Bad ol' Comcast.

I've read the post half a dozen times now I and view it very differently. And I think that's part of the problem, as I pointed out in my last post. It feels to me that too often, we knee-jerk at the mere suggestion of racial bias and it's counter-productive to our stated goals as a society. The OP phrased that post about as delicately as one could phrase a post on this subject, yet still received blowback for it.

Sometimes, it takes a lot longer to get to the point of banning than it should with some posters. But know that, more often than not, we're trying to rehabilitate the poster, not immediately eject them off the board. Ultimately, this poster proved resistant to rehabilitation, IIRC.

See, I simply disagree. I think this is exactly the kind of situation where talking about race in a constructive manner is important. Challenging our subtle daily biases is a huge component of modern racism; the blatant stuff is easy to spot and has been challenged for decades now so there's little point in discussing it anymore. I think as a culture, we white people have been able to easily brush off the more underlying forms of our bias just because we "don't use the N word" or "have black friends". I put a lot of thought into race. A lot. And despite me spending what is probably a disproportionate amount of time thinking about it, I find myself in a bit of a quandry right now about my preconceived notions of black culture and how it relates to parenting (many of you know I'm fostering right now). It has led me to some really uncomfortable conversations with myself and I consider myself rather progressive in regards to race and how it affects many Americans. If I'm struggling with these kinds of questions, I feel it's pretty safe to say most other white Americans likely have issues with it as well. But anyway, I think it's a big problem that we have a negative gut reaction to anything regarding race, especially when the original statement isn't even a little bit accusatory. When something like this thread happens and we have a negative reaction, we should be asking ourselves "Why am I so upset about this?" and delving into why we have such a strong emotional reaction to a pretty benign statement, not lashing out with a "I'M NOT A RACIST" response because that wasn't really the question in the first place. No one here was called a racist; again, a question was posed asking whether our preconceived notions of race impacts our judgments of non-white players. When put that way, the reaction of "I'M NOT A RACIST" seems a bit out of proportion, doesn't it? Yet why do so many white Americans immediately default to that response? It's not healthy and prevents us from having some pretty important conversations.

I’m pretty sure I know who you’re talking about and it didn’t escape the mods’ attention. We had MANY conversations with that poster about their propensity to slap everyone with the label of racist. But that’s quite a different situation and reaction to what we’re discussing in this thread. No one is being pointed out and the OP merely asked a question to spur discussion.

The point is that everyone is a lot better in Coors, which makes the number misleading. If you adjust for park in any way, Blackmon's numbers are a lot closer to Dozier. Past three seasons: Dozier oWAR: 3.2, 6.0, 4.9 Blackmon oWAR: 3.2, 4.8, 6.5 Dozier OPS+: 104, 134, 126 Blackmon OPS+: 102, 130, 141 Those players don't look terribly different from one another, do they? Everyone here understands the Coors Field effect, right? Surely you don't all look at a +.450 OPS home/road split and say to yourselves "yeah, that's legit".

And this is why it's so bloody hard to have a conversation on race with white people. We raise our hackles at the mere mention that race might be somehow involved in our decisions, maybe even just a little bit. Read what the OP said again: "I wonder how much of Rosario getting called on hustle issues or throwing the ball to the wrong base has to do with some of the biases the media, the coaches and the fans have for Latino players. Thoughts?" There are no assumptions there, just a hypothesis and a question. No one is saying that if you're critical of Rosario that you're a racist. In fact, most posters here have conceded that Rosario's routinely bone-headed plays make it hard not to be critical of the guy. But let's turn this on its head a little and examine it from another angle: Nick Punto. You'll have a hell of a time convincing me that Rosario makes significantly more bone-headed plays than Nick Punto did... but Nicky was adored by a large segment of the Twins' fan base, despite the fact that he was not a very good player while Eddie Rosario is a very good player. I mean, Nick Punto (more than once) would try to lay "down" a bunt when the pitcher knew he was bunting so threw a pitch chin high that resulted in a double play... If I remember, he even did this during a postseason game (or was it 163?). The guy dove into first base more times than I can even stomach to think about. He made many base-running gaffes that drove me absolutely up the wall. Yet outside areas such as BYTO, Punto was a fan favorite. Why? Why was Punto "hustling" while Rosario is just a bone head?

*scratches head* Okay, thanks for chiming in. This is so weird... the site has been not only good for me lately but it has been unusually fast.

This is why you never use basic rate stats for players who play in Colorado. Blackmon career home OPS: .972 Blackmon career road OPS: .750 Dozier career home OPS: .802 Dozier career road OPS: .765 Blackmon 2017 home OPS: 1.239 Blackmon 2017 road OPS: .784 Dozier 2017 home OPS: .916 Dozier 2017 road OPS: .800 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueZ6tvqhk8U

Yeah, I think this contract has "mini Jacoby Ellsbury" written all over it. And I actually laughed out loud at that contract when it was given.

Weird. That's essentially what I'm running and I haven't seen any issues over the past couple of days. I'll keep using it and see what happens.

I see this being said on the forums somewhat regularly but what on earth makes people think this would have been the case? When Dozier was just emerging as a star player, he turned down a lot of guaranteed money by refusing to sign off even one of his free agent seasons (probably $15m-ish a season for one or two seasons). And now people believe that after he established himself and came closer to huge guaranteed money in free agency, he was suddenly willing to sell off just two of his free agent seasons? It doesn't make sense at all. Sure, if the Twins approached Dozier two years ago and offered him $15-18m per season for four seasons of free agency, he probably signs at the dotted line... but that deal isn't much different than what he'll ask for this offseason so there isn't anything to be gained.

Six of one, half dozen of the other, in my opinion. Yes, race very obviously taints our perceptions of people and players. Most of us are quicker to snap to judgment based on (usually negative) stereotypes. Anyone who claims otherwise is either the most enlightened soul on the planet or, more likely, oblivious to just how systematically society has ingrained certain ideas in our collective heads. With that said, here's the other half dozen: Rosario is kinda known for doing some dumb stuff out on the field. That says absolutely nothing about his Latino-ness, he's just one of those players that makes you shake your head on a fairly regular basis. Sometimes, his energy does amazing things (that balk call against Milwaukee last season)... sometimes, it leads to you wanting to scream at him. And that surely taints the viewer's perception of him as a player. Compare and contrast that to Dozier, who rarely makes the kind of mistakes Rosario makes out in the field (only using Dozier as an example because he was previously mentioned... the same could be said for lots of other players on the Twins of all races).

What version of Safari and OSX/macOS are you running?

Yeah... they're close to the same player (Dozier has ~600 more PAs, about 5 more fWAR). Oh, except Dozier is a year younger. Honestly, I don't get the Rockies making this deal but that's not unusual; I don't understand loads of things the Rockies do.

If anyone out there actually believed Lynn was a 1 or 2... *blank stare*

A fringe case for sure but definitely the time to bunt. His OPS would be near 1.000 without a third baseman present because the easiest thing to do is bunt too hard. Normally, that will cause you problems but not if there isn’t a fielder within 100 feet.

And if you screw up the first bunt with no strikes and send it foul, there's a good chance you may not break the shift but you've moved the fielders over a step or two, opening up more space to swing away with one strike.

I spent a decade complaining that Ortiz didn't bunt to break the shift with a bunt on a regular basis so it's pretty clear where I stand on this topic. Go ahead and shift but be warned that a smart player will hurt you for it.

I've been saying this for awhile now (which I why I sold) but I think we're in for a bumpy ride. Trump isn't helping things with his persistent trade war talk but I think stocks, tech stocks in particular, are primed to retract in a big way the first time we see a flat quarter or two (which is inevitable after the ~8 years of growth we've seen). Way too many stocks out there are obscenely over-leveraged.

The 1961 season didn’t start until April 10th. And that’s the real problem, I think. The season continues to stretch outward and baseball is a seasonal game.