Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 69
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    10,653
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    he's asking $31 million to go to charities, the lawsuit also claims he's seeking damages for himself. It's a cash grab and a chance to grab the spotlight.
    in itself, doesn't make it wrong for him to pursue
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    10,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    All that may be very well true, and yet 12 trash can bangs in 29 pitches still probably prematurely ended his chance as a big leaguer.

    You guys forget that for some of these fringe guys all they have is hope to stick around as long as they can and love of the game. He has a right to be pissed and if the Jays are willing to testify that his performance that day was the reason they sent him down then hes got a real case.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    just on a per game basis, his 2017 salary was 545,000....or like 3500/game.....as a minor leaguer, 3500 was more like a month's pay (whole different discussion on the ridiculousness of minor league pay scales)
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    31,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    I think his position will be that whether he was good or not they influenced the course of his career with their cheating and if a putrid performance that day was cause for demotion than hes right.

    Perhaps he still gets sent down later in the season. Perhaps he makes it to the end of the year on the roster and gets no contract offers in the following offseason. All that should matter to a judge is whether the Jays decision to send him down that day had anything to do with the battering he received and he should win.

    The fact that he wasn't good is irrelevant. It's about having control (reasonable control) over his baseball destiny.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    How is it irrelevant? If the guy was a decent pitcher, then one bad performance wouldn't have caused him to get sent down. Nor would it prevent him from getting called back up again. A guy with a 3.5 ERA who has that performance isn't getting sent down to the minors afterward.

    I just don't know how a jury could reasonably look at the case and say the sign stealing prevented this guy from playing baseball at the major league level. If his stuff was good enough, he wouldn't have gotten sent down in the first place and/or he would have made it back by now. But he just wasn't good enough.


  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    How is it irrelevant? If the guy was a decent pitcher, then one bad performance wouldn't have caused him to get sent down. Nor would it prevent him from getting called back up again. A guy with a 3.5 ERA who has that performance isn't getting sent down to the minors afterward.

    I just don't know how a jury could reasonably look at the case and say the sign stealing prevented this guy from playing baseball at the major league level. If his stuff was good enough, he wouldn't have gotten sent down in the first place and/or he would have made it back by now. But he just wasn't good enough.
    Or just don't cheat. Seems simpler.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    45,704
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    How is it irrelevant? If the guy was a decent pitcher, then one bad performance wouldn't have caused him to get sent down. Nor would it prevent him from getting called back up again. A guy with a 3.5 ERA who has that performance isn't getting sent down to the minors afterward.

    I just don't know how a jury could reasonably look at the case and say the sign stealing prevented this guy from playing baseball at the major league level. If his stuff was good enough, he wouldn't have gotten sent down in the first place and/or he would have made it back by now. But he just wasn't good enough.
    I basically agree with all of this.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    La Puente, CA
    Posts
    14,186
    Don't you need five seasons of MLB service to be eligible for a pension? Bolsinger only played in four seasons. So he's just using the cheating scandal as an excuse to get some money, because he knows that he likely won't return to the majors. His case will predictably get thrown out of court.

    Future Hall of Shamers:
    (1) B.A.L.C.O. Barroids (2) Mark McJuicer (3) Jose Chem-seco (4) Rafael Palmeiroids (5) Ken Chem-initi (6) Jason Gi-andro (7) Ryan Fraud (8) Muscle Melk (9) Woman-Ram (10) Shammy Sosa (11) Roger Clear-mens (12) A-Roid (13) Ryan HGHoward

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,950
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    How is it irrelevant? If the guy was a decent pitcher, then one bad performance wouldn't have caused him to get sent down. Nor would it prevent him from getting called back up again. A guy with a 3.5 ERA who has that performance isn't getting sent down to the minors afterward.

    I just don't know how a jury could reasonably look at the case and say the sign stealing prevented this guy from playing baseball at the major league level. If his stuff was good enough, he wouldn't have gotten sent down in the first place and/or he would have made it back by now. But he just wasn't good enough.
    Because the jury's job isn't to decide whether he was good enough to play in the major leagues, it would be to decide whether their cheating resulted in his demotion at that moment.

    Obviously no one can can prove how affected his performance that day was but if a judge believes in the scheme as it has been described, and determined that if is true that the Astros signaled a whopping 12 times on 29 pitches, I dont know how anyone could possibly disregard the impact that likely had. It would certainly help the Astros if it turned out the fact that the game in question was the one with the most "bangs" turned out to be false, I would think.

    The interesting question to me is would the jays be asked to testify? And what would they say? If they said that performance was the straw that broke the camels back and tipped them toward moving towards other options, immediately resulting in his being transferred to AAA that seems like a slam dunk to me.



    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Jamiecballer; 02-12-2020 at 07:55 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,083
    Quote Originally Posted by dodgerdave View Post
    Don't you need five seasons of MLB service to be eligible for a pension?
    Players only need 43 days of service time to be eligible for a pension, they need 10 years to be fully vested.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Sentinel Island
    Posts
    5,400
    Fact of the matter is this:

    The guy has a strong case, but you cannot prove that this game is why he was ultimately cut. Him not being a good pitcher to begin with isn't going to help him either.

    While the Astros are completely classless and I really wish them nothing but the harshest of punishments (it gets worse and worse with every article), this isn't going to go anywhere and if it does, I'd be shocked (albeit happy)
    FC Bayern Munchen

    New York Yankees



  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    La Puente, CA
    Posts
    14,186
    Quote Originally Posted by otatop View Post
    Players only need 43 days of service time to be eligible for a pension, they need 10 years to be fully vested.
    Back in the 1990's it was 5 years. So things have changed since then.

    Future Hall of Shamers:
    (1) B.A.L.C.O. Barroids (2) Mark McJuicer (3) Jose Chem-seco (4) Rafael Palmeiroids (5) Ken Chem-initi (6) Jason Gi-andro (7) Ryan Fraud (8) Muscle Melk (9) Woman-Ram (10) Shammy Sosa (11) Roger Clear-mens (12) A-Roid (13) Ryan HGHoward

  11. #56
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    45,704
    Not true. Starting in 1980, players were eligible for a pension after acquiring roughly a quarter season worth of playing time.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    La Puente, CA
    Posts
    14,186
    Fully vested after 5 years.

    Future Hall of Shamers:
    (1) B.A.L.C.O. Barroids (2) Mark McJuicer (3) Jose Chem-seco (4) Rafael Palmeiroids (5) Ken Chem-initi (6) Jason Gi-andro (7) Ryan Fraud (8) Muscle Melk (9) Woman-Ram (10) Shammy Sosa (11) Roger Clear-mens (12) A-Roid (13) Ryan HGHoward

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Yankees90. View Post
    Fact of the matter is this:

    The guy has a strong case, but you cannot prove that this game is why he was ultimately cut. Him not being a good pitcher to begin with isn't going to help him either.

    While the Astros are completely classless and I really wish them nothing but the harshest of punishments (it gets worse and worse with every article), this isn't going to go anywhere and if it does, I'd be shocked (albeit happy)
    Why cant you prove it? Can't you ask the decision maker? That seems like proof to me.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    Why cant you prove it? Can't you ask the decision maker? That seems like proof to me.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Exactly this. Doesn't matter how bad he was. He has the entire narrative on his side.

    I'm sure the Blue Jays keep assessment reports on player performances. I hope this goes through and I hope he wins. It would feel, for the first time, like real justice from this Astros scandal. I also hope other players whose careers were affected sue the Astros

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Sentinel Island
    Posts
    5,400
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    Why cant you prove it? Can't you ask the decision maker? That seems like proof to me.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    What incentive would the decision maker have to do that? There is no doubt that game didn't help, but he was also flat out booty as a pitcher. As I said, I'd be ecstatic as I don't believe the Astros got anywhere remotely close to the punishment they deserved, I just don't see it.
    FC Bayern Munchen

    New York Yankees



Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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