HarleyQuinn

*begs with Slapnuts* I know...we still have a month, yadda yadda...but I just want it done before opening day. Assuming we go 5 picks a day from here on out(on a good day), that's 110 picks out of a total 180 picks(excluding the 4 keepers and rounds 1 & 2). In order to reach 180, we'd have to go roughly 8 picks a day.

I just love how when asking a family member what they think, the family member says that the media must be lying...hello, the kids were found in deplorable condition! What? Did they just do this by accident?

I'll take Fenway Park *runs from KingPK*

MIB, Nogoodnik, and Bored are due up

Hey Al, a few questions... 1) How long will the season schedule be? 2) How will park factors come into play? As in, can we choose our own home parks? 3) How will the league totals be set up? Will they represent the modern day style?

Keep in mind though that Young was pitching in an era that largely utilized 3 man rotations, which padded his career wins and losses. The years that he started 35 or so games he had records of 18-19, 13-21, 21-11, and 19-15. Those aren't exactly spectacular although one could argue the fact that he was 38+ in age had to do with that. Again though, a guy who starts 45+ a season has a good chance at winning 25-30 games a season. Could you imagine how great Pedro Martinez would be W-L wise if he started every 4th game?

Well, we've gone through 5 picks today so far...

Sounds like a good idea Al

Pawtucket Red Sox select SP "Big" Ed Walsh the career leader in ERA. KingPK and The Californian are due up. What time would this chat be taking place?

Gotham Harlequins select SP Dontrelle Willis of the Florida Marlins

They've been negotiating a long-term contract from what I've seen (likely 3-5 years I believe).

Ok, it sounds like you know your stuff. I just thought that those career record number of strikeouts would come in handy. Didn't mean to come off as defensive though if Johnson had 10 more seasons, I'm sure he could pad his K totals and get over 6,000

Ryan, while fabulous, had a poor walk rate (4.67 for his career), which was my main reasoning on taking RJ. Ryan also had a career 9.55 K/9 and had only eight seasons with a sub 3.00 ERA in 27 major league seasons! RJ has done that eight times in ten fewer seasons. Slapnuts is up, followed by IK Cool Jew.

Well a few people here actually chose a player who plays a position worse than a player not chosen (see: Randy Johnson, no offense to Harley). My reasoning was: Johnson has a career 11.12 K/9 and has averaged almost 200 innings a season. He also has a career 3.2 K/BB ratio, which should surely help. When he was on top of his game, he was putting up sub 2.50 ERA's in a fairly extreme hitters era. You really think Randy wouldnt have lasted you til the 4th pick of the 2nd round? Well, never say never, especially with some of the other guys also in this thing.

Well a few people here actually chose a player who plays a position worse than a player not chosen (see: Randy Johnson, no offense to Harley). My reasoning was: Johnson has a career 11.12 K/9 and has averaged almost 200 innings a season. He also has a career 3.2 K/BB ratio, which should surely help. When he was on top of his game, he was putting up sub 2.50 ERA's in a fairly extreme hitters era.

The Pawtucket Red Sox are proud to feature a showdown between arguably the two best strikeout pitchers as they select a man with a career 11.12 K/9 rate... SP Randy Johnson LooneyTune is now on the clock!

4 sounds good

My projections 1. Yankees (97 - 65) 2. Red Sox (95 - 67) 3. Orioles (79 - 83) 4. Blue Jays (74 - 88) 5. Devil Rays (70 - 92) I can't see any of the teams losing less than 70 games except maybe the Devil Rays. The Blue Jays and Orioles will be battling all season long for third place and I think whomever has the better starting rotation will help their team win it.

Sonic Youth in IZ & HD Only Theme: Come Out and Play - Offspring

The Gotham Harlequins take SS B.J. Upton of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays Wart is due up

True but then one could argue that it's your fault and not necessarily the games'. Although the more you watch hockey, the easier it is to pick up the puck so I think that's kind of a poor argument as to why constant action is a bad thing. I'd argue that it's the former. Kind of hard to be popular without being shown yes? Just look at the way ESPN hypes upcoming basketball, football, and baseball games on other programs. They didn't do that nearly enough when they were showing the NHL and as a result, hockey wasn't popular due to lack of press. I liken arena football to hockey in that they are alot alike. They are both fast paced with a much smaller environment. Hockey isn't as high scoring but you'll get the occasional 6-5 or 7-6 game. I think the field's good too but again, with the 300+ pounders dominating several positions it means that you can only look at RB/WR/CB/S to really speed the game up and even then, that only happens when they have the football. I still think that hockey is more exciting because everybody has a chance to handle the puck, regardless of position and also switching in and out happens seamlessly. I'm a baseball stat junkie, love stats. I don't think that the lack of stats hurts the NHL though since all ya need to focus on are goals, assists, points, +/-, and GAA. I'm sure that there are ways of including more stats in hockey but that there hasn't been a Bill James type to do it yet. I also think that hockey has the same thing as baseball as far as your scoring analogy went. In hockey, especially as of late, there aren't many goals scored so each shot at the net raises the anticipation of that being a goal(ala a swing of the bat being a potential run scorer/HR in baseball). I'm not saying that basketball players should be bodychecking each other but it does add to hockey. It basically allows a team to take advantage by having more guys get access to the puck. Keep in mind too that they're playing an hour and on ice which is just as hard as a wood floor. Even with the padding, they don't get much cushion when they hit the ground(ala football players). I'll just agree to disagree here since we both have different opinions on what makes a game manly. Can't argue that though it did lead to our discussion.

Bravesfan, Bored and Will Scarlet are due up

He should be autopicked by now I'd think.

Constant action in a smaller, more contained environment with no real slow portions. Even with the trap, there's still constant motion back & forth to the other side akin to the NBA. Lack of marketing/spotlight on stations like ESPN. It was relegated to ESPN2 and given the look over during Sportscenter where as the other three sports garnered far more coverage on both ESPN and Sportscenter. Far more time stopping in regards to time outs, challenges, and penalties. In hockey, the referee doesn't get a camera on his mug so he can explain the penalty. Also a bigger surface to cover means slower pace. Baseball is all about the one on one matchup that you don't get in other sports. You have pitcher vs. batter with only one side winning. As far as hockey goes, baseball is far slower and I blame that on the constant commercial breaks after every half inning. When the game is embodying everything. High scoring, big bodychecks, and great saves. The anticipation of the next goal and which team will pull out the victory is the excitement. Far more physicality in hockey in terms of body to body contact. It's about avoiding the hits as much as scoring in hockey whereas basketball is mostly hands off as of late. Aside from taking charges, how often do basketball players physically hit each other? Maybe he wanted to garner discussion.

Same here, I've been to games at all big 4 sports and hockey has the fastest pace and is the most entertaining that I've been to. Seeing a game live is amazing considering how fast the game flies by.