gil4

The umpire made a bit of movement after that pitch, but it was all with his left hand. I don't think he got the call on that one, and I don't think he ever would (except maybe with a robo-ump - occasionally pitches with a sharp downward break look low to everyone except the computer.)

Heretic.

I'd prefer to keep Kepler, and trading Donaldson's contract was never going to be easy.

I'd rather see free than have someone's definition of fair imposed. I do understand that some degree of competitive balance is in everyone's best interest (and most other sports do it better because of the way they divide the TV money), but the money also has to be divided between the risk-takers/investors and the earners. I agree to an extent about the minor-leaguers. The biggest offense I see there is they don't get to collectively bargain. The MLBPA negotiates "on their behalf", but they can't actually be members of the union until they are in the majors.

We have seen that system, so we don't have to speculate. They wouldn't.

The problem is you are comparing their income to the average income. They aren't average. Of the millions of people who play baseball, they are the top 800 or so. In 1970, movie stars got paid big bucks. Top musicians got paid big bucks. Why? Because if the actors didn't like their pay, they could go to a different studio. The musicians could sign with another label. But baseball players couldn't do that - they could either re-sign for what they were offered or hold out, which except for a few stars would have resulted in them being blacklisted by the sport. Now, they can eventually earn a certain level of freedom, after 4-5 years of team control as minor leaguers and then another 5-6 years in the majors (3 years of arbitration?) What is stopping you? Are you not in the top .0001% in your field? (Or does the market not widely differentiate between the to .0001 percent and the top 1% in your field as it does in theirs.) Are you free to go to another employer? Maybe the market just won't pay that kind of money for the goods and/or services that you help deliver, or the part you play isn't as difficult to replace as the part they play in their business.

I think your figure shows how much the salaries of the players were artificially suppressed 50 years ago, rather than an indicator that we should go back to the previous system.

Part of the trade was giving Cruz the better that he deserved. This team is going nowhere. At age 41, Cruz doesn't have many more shots. He is now on a team that could be going somewhere. Do you think Cruz is angry over how he was treated? Heck, no. I'm sure he is disappointed how the year has gone, but he has to be thankful for the opportunity he has now been given.

Throw in a Hosken Powell, a Dan Ford, and Wille Norwood's glove and we're there.

I think most of us are with you. Part of this trade is showing respect for Cruz by trading him to a contender, since this team has cratered. No second guessing - it was a trade that had to happen, even if we hate to see him go.

I'm from Connecticut, so I had to make sure grinders were also OK. (Is there anywhere else in the world that uses that term? I've done a lot of traveling, but I've never had a grinder outside of CT.)

One of the best

I think there's one of the commandments about that - something like "thou shalt not drown baseball coaches in the baptistry." (That might be a loose paraphrase from Exodus.)

Jeffers strikes out. That's how last night's comeback started.

Just setting up the 9th inning. Single-HR-Single-HR. It's a great play if your team can execute it.