MLB 2018 Season

[CTWarrior]

Tony Gwynn hit .415/.476/.521 in 107 plate appearences against Greg Maddux.  Without a striking out a single time.

That was the ultimate standoff for umpires.  Greg Maddux got an extra 6 inches on both sides of the plate and guys like Tony Gwynn and Wade Boggs traditionally got the corners called their way.  Must've been confusing for umpires to call those ABs.

[jficke13]

He should have known better at 18 years old.

I agree with this too.

I've thought about this a lot and haven't really come to a conclusion, but keep coming back to the idea of human imperfection and wanting to encourage self-improvement. If Hader once was prejudiced, but has since improved himself, does he deserve to be forever tainted? Or is some manner of reform/rehabilitation acceptable?

Like I said, I haven't really figured out where I fall on this, sorry for the incoherent rambling.

[GGGG]

I've thought about this a lot and haven't really come to a conclusion, but keep coming back to the idea of human imperfection and wanting to encourage self-improvement. If Hader once was prejudiced, but has since improved himself, does he deserve to be forever tainted? Or is some manner of reform/rehabilitation acceptable?

I would say...no he is not forever tainted and yes some manner of "enlightenment" is achievable.  (Not sure I like the words reform or rehabilitation.  Not sure it rises to that level.)  And maybe he already has been "enlightened" through his broader experiences since he was 17 and no longer shares the views of his younger self. 

That being said, I don't like the "kids do stupid things" excuse. 

[tower912]

He should have known better at 18 years old.

You would hope that his parents would have been teaching him all along that racist, homophobic comments are wrong.   18 year olds are idiots.    Most people grow out of it.   Some never do. 

[withoutbias]

You would hope that his parents would have been teaching him all along that racist, homophobic comments are wrong.   18 year olds are idiots.    Most people grow out of it.   Some never do.

and yet i would argue that most kids that are truly racists homophobes were molded into that by their parents.

of course hader shouldve known better than to tweet the clearly inappropriate things he did when he was 17 years old. but youre lying to yourself if youre telling people you didnt say insensitive stuff when you were a teenager. how much "better" is it to say "thats so gay!" when you don't like something than it is to say "i hate gay people?" is one more blunt than the other? yup. but if youre like "hey i have nothing against gay people" then why are you saying something is "gay" when you don't like it? are we going to say that every adult who ever said something like that when they were a teenager is a homophobe? youre also lying to yourself if youre telling people youve never quoted an inappropriate song or movie line.

it was stupid. it was inappropriate. it was unacceptable. but to say the "young and immature excuse doesnt play" is wrong. he was 17. it was 7 years ago, probably before he experienced any kind of diversity in his life and probably mostly while he was dicking around being a dumbass teenager.

im willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that hes grown as a person over the last 7, almost undoubtedly most shaping, years of his life. and given that before this weekend we never heard anything but how great of a guy he is im guessing he has grown since he was a clearly immature teen.

if some want to lie and say they never said anything insensitive and inappropriate when they were younger and less mature so be it. hader didnt back down or make excuses he owned it and said he screwed up. hopefully hes learned.

[MerrittsMustache]

At what point does being "a stupid kid" and "not knowing any better" no longer apply? Age 18? 20? 25?

[wadesworld]

At what point does being "a stupid kid" and "not knowing any better" no longer apply? Age 18? 20? 25?

Is there a set age that we should set it at?

Kids develop at different times.

[MerrittsMustache]

Is there a set age that we should set it at?

Kids develop at different times.

So if he posted these things at age 22, would you say that he just hasn't developed/matured yet? Would he still be a stupid kid who didn't know any better?

[wadesworld]

So if he posted these things at age 22, would you say that he just hasn't developed/matured yet? Would he still be a stupid kid who didn't know any better?

No.

[MerrittsMustache]

No.

What about if he was 19?


(See where we're going with this?)

[wadesworld]

What about if he was 19?


(See where we're going with this?)

No, I don't see where you're going with this.

He was in high school.  I don't know about you, but I matured quite a bit after I got out of high school.  I'd guess most people do?  But apparently I might be in the minority thinking that.

[tower912]

At what point does being "a stupid kid" and "not knowing any better" no longer apply? Age 18? 20? 25?

For some, DUI's at 29 count as youthful indiscretions.    For others, unsealed juvenile records of things that may or may not have happened at 14 are reason to not be allowed to pursue a career.     IMO, a 17-18 year old saying stupid crap on twitter still counts as a stupid kid.    I have frequently discussed with friends, family, and coworkers,  the notion that the nature of young people hasn't really changed over the years, just the tools with which they can get in trouble.    When most of us were kids, we would do stupid crap and there would be a circle of silence among our friends.    Today, the same stupid stuff gets posted on instachatweet and it is accessible to everyone and forever.   Kids don't think about long term repercussions.    They never have. 

An example.... a couple of years ago, at a holiday party thrown by a kid whose parents were out of town, an underage couple decided to have sex in one of the bedrooms.    Nothing new here.    Teenagers have been having sex since there have been teenagers and sex.   One of their friends entered the bedroom and busted them in the middle.    Still nothing really new here.   But the friend took a picture on his phone and posted it..... making him a child pornographer.      Is the friend really a child pornographer?    No, he is a dumb kid.    But in the eyes of the law, he is now labelled forever. 

Hader posted stupid crap while not yet old enough to vote.     It makes him a kid who was an immature jerk.    By all accounts, he has grown and matured.    And he should never go on social media again. 

[🏀]

No, I don't see where you're going with this.

He was in high school.  I don't know about you, but I matured quite a bit after I got out of high school.  I'd guess most people do?  But apparently I might be in the minority thinking that.

Jesuits will do that to you.

[Pakuni]

At what point does being "a stupid kid" and "not knowing any better" no longer apply? Age 18? 20? 25?

What does it matter? Hader wasn't 18 or 20 or 25. He was 17. Let's deal with reality instead of stretching hypotheticals to justify whatever point it is you're trying to make.
Hader's tweets, as offensive as they were, were juvenile ramblings. He wasn't posting white supremacist manifestos or marching on a college town with a tiki torch. Let's not make more of this that it deserves because he plays for a different team than the one you cheer for.

[MerrittsMustache]

No, I don't see where you're going with this.

He was in high school.  I don't know about you, but I matured quite a bit after I got out of high school.  I'd guess most people do?  But apparently I might be in the minority thinking that.

So, at age 17, it's fine for him to post racial slurs online but at age 22, it's not. Going back to my original question, how do we decide when a person reaches the point where the "young and dumb" excuse no longer flies? For you, it's apparently sometime between age 18 and 22. For me, I think that a 17yo should know better than to post wildly offensive comments online.

What does it matter? Hader wasn't 18 or 20 or 25. He was 17. Let's deal with reality instead of stretching hypotheticals to justify whatever point it is you're trying to make.
Hader's tweets, as offensive as they were, were juvenile ramblings. He wasn't posting white supremacist manifestos or marching on a college town with a tiki torch. Let's not make more of this that it deserves because he plays for a different team than the one you cheer for.

Ah, the old "it could have been worse" defense. So if you had a 17yo, you'd be OK with him/her posting those same things online? After all, it's just "juvenile ramblings." It's not like your kid killed someone, right?

Hader's team has absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, this incident is part of a larger issue that's not specific to Hader. Kids do stupid things but simply being a kid doesn't make it acceptable to do those things. The kid in tower's story should absolutely be labeled for the rest of his life because he did something incredibly stupid to warrant that label. That's how it works. One awful mistake, whether you're 16 or 60, can have a hugely negative effect on the rest of your life. People need to recognize that.

I just have a hard time getting on-board with "young and dumb" being an out for awful behavior. Now...get off my lawn!


EDIT: Just to clarify. I don't think Hader should be punished by MLB or the Brewers. Sending him to Sensitivity Training is the right move and I truly hope he learns from it and that he has already changed and grown as a person. I just have a problem with people shrugging it off as if he did nothing wrong simply because he was 17.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So, at age 17, it's fine for him to post racial slurs online but at age 22, it's not. Going back to my original question, how do we decide when a person reaches the point where the "young and dumb" excuse no longer flies? For you, it's apparently sometime between age 18 and 22. For me, I think that a 17yo should know better than to post wildly offensive comments online.


Ah, the old "it could have been worse" defense. So if you had a 17yo, you'd be OK with him/her posting those same things online? After all, it's just "juvenile ramblings." It's not like your kid killed someone, right?

Hader's team has absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, this incident is part of a larger issue that's not specific to Hader. Kids do stupid things but simply being a kid doesn't make it acceptable to do those things. The kid in tower's story should absolutely be labeled for the rest of his life because he did something incredibly stupid to warrant that label. That's how it works. One awful mistake, whether you're 16 or 60, can have a hugely negative effect on the rest of your life. People need to recognize that.

I just have a hard time getting on-board with "young and dumb" being an out for awful behavior. Now...get off my lawn!

I wouldn't call young and dumb an excuse.  I think I would call it context.

Age does not excuse the behavior. It was bad when he did it and it's still bad now.

But I do expect more of a 60 year old than I do of a 16 year old. And I think that's a fair expectation.

[Pakuni]

Ah, the old "it could have been worse" defense. So if you had a 17yo, you'd be OK with him/her posting those same things online? After all, it's just "juvenile ramblings." It's not like your kid killed someone, right?

C'mon, really? You really want to dumb things down this much?
I offered no defense, much less than "it could have been worse" defense, nor did I say anything about me being OK with this, whether it be my kid or anyone else's kid.
I'm simply suggesting that one have the intellectual capacity to exercise a little nuance and distinguish between the juvenile tweets of a high school kid and those of others we rightfully label as racists. Sorry, but you'll never convince me that what Hader (or Josh Allen or Donte Divincenzo) did is the moral equivalent of David Duke and the Daily Stormer.
If that kind of thinking is a bit much for some, so be it.

Hader's team has absolutely nothing to do with it.

OK, sure.

In fact, this incident is part of a larger issue that's not specific to Hader. Kids do stupid things but simply being a kid doesn't make it acceptable to do those things. The kid in tower's story should absolutely be labeled for the rest of his life because he did something incredibly stupid to warrant that label. That's how it works. One awful mistake, whether you're 16 or 60, can have a hugely negative effect on the rest of your life. People need to recognize that. 

So you consider the kid in Tower's example a child pornographer? Yikes.

I just have a problem with people shrugging it off as if he did nothing wrong simply because he was 17.

Yeah, not a single person here has done that.

[wadesworld]

So, at age 17, it's fine for him to post racial slurs online but at age 22, it's not. Going back to my original question, how do we decide when a person reaches the point where the "young and dumb" excuse no longer flies? For you, it's apparently sometime between age 18 and 22. For me, I think that a 17yo should know better than to post wildly offensive comments online.


Ah, the old "it could have been worse" defense. So if you had a 17yo, you'd be OK with him/her posting those same things online? After all, it's just "juvenile ramblings." It's not like your kid killed someone, right?

Hader's team has absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, this incident is part of a larger issue that's not specific to Hader. Kids do stupid things but simply being a kid doesn't make it acceptable to do those things. The kid in tower's story should absolutely be labeled for the rest of his life because he did something incredibly stupid to warrant that label. That's how it works. One awful mistake, whether you're 16 or 60, can have a hugely negative effect on the rest of your life. People need to recognize that.

I just have a hard time getting on-board with "young and dumb" being an out for awful behavior. Now...get off my lawn!


EDIT: Just to clarify. I don't think Hader should be punished by MLB or the Brewers. Sending him to Sensitivity Training is the right move and I truly hope he learns from it and that he has already changed and grown as a person. I just have a problem with people shrugging it off as if he did nothing wrong simply because he was 17.

Who said it's fine?

Your parents clearly had it easy with you.

[4everwarriors]

That was the ultimate standoff for umpires.  Greg Maddux got an extra 6 inches on both sides of the plate and guys like Tony Gwynn and Wade Boggs traditionally got the corners called their way.  Must've been confusing for umpires to call those ABs.

Every dude's gotta envy Maddux, hey?

[MerrittsMustache]

Every dude's gotta envy Maddux, hey?

Great stat from Bush Leaguer...

Cubs' Tyler Chatwood has now walked 73 batters in 84 IP this year. Greg Maddux only walked a total of 71 batters from 1995-1997 in 687.1 IP.

[TallTitan34]

Question for Brewers fans.  I've been following Brewer minor leaguer Tim Dillard on Twitter for a year or two now.  He's a great follow if aren't doing so. 

Anyway, I thought I'd look up his stats and I see he was drafted in 2001 and only got a handful of appearances in 2008, 09, 11, and 12.  He's 34 now and his stats appear to be pretty awful but they've kept him around for 17 years.  Just wondered what his story is.  That's pretty impressive spending that much time living as a minor leaguer much less with a single organization.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Question for Brewers fans.  I've been following Brewer minor leaguer Tim Dillard on Twitter for a year or two now.  He's a great follow if aren't doing so. 

Anyway, I thought I'd look up his stats and I see he was drafted in 2001 and only got a handful of appearances in 2008, 09, 11, and 12.  He's 34 now and his stats appear to be pretty awful but they've kept him around for 17 years.  Just wondered what his story is.  That's pretty impressive spending that much time living as a minor leaguer much less with a single organization.

http://www.baseballessential.com/news/2016/05/06/tim-dillard-baseballs-funniest-man/

[GGGG]

Time for MLB expansion?
Manfred lists Portland, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Nashville, Montreal and Vancouver as possibilities.

https://deadspin.com/rob-manfred-says-he-wants-mlb-expansion-lists-six-pote-1827712616

1. Charlotte
2. Nashville
3. Montreal

The rest aren't that exciting to me.

[wadesworld]

Time for MLB expansion?
Manfred lists Portland, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Nashville, Montreal and Vancouver as possibilities.

https://deadspin.com/rob-manfred-says-he-wants-mlb-expansion-lists-six-pote-1827712616

1) No expansion
2) Vancouver
3) Portland (I'm assuming Oregon, though Maine would be cool too)
4) Montreal
5) Las Vegas
6) Nashville
7) Charlotte

[CTWarrior]

1. Charlotte
2. Nashville
3. Montreal

The rest aren't that exciting to me.

I think Portland or Vancouver would be fine and help Seattle cut down on their travel a little.  They should expand to two of them and move Tampa Bay to a third.  The Rays have had some very good teams and they just don't draw.  And half the fans that do show up are rooting for the other team from where they used to live.