Does HW's post 100 make sense to anyone else? I can't figure out who or what he is responding to.

Sheffield only played 50 games in 1991 because he was hurt, upset and clashing with management. It was a difficult situation for everyone.

Understanding that Sheffield was a young man but Tom Trebelhorn is a guy well known for not only workinig with young players but in particular African-American players. Rickey Henderson has mentioned him as one of his favorite managers. Imagine how good Tom must be for RICKEY to remember his name!!

Yet Gary hated him. Gary hated Paul Molitor. Robin Yount. Called everyone racists. Said the team, management and the city was out to get him. Yes, Milwaukee has had its issues with race. But NOT its players of color. The town has always embraced its athletes. Gary referred to them by any number of names.

And unfortunately it was returned in kind.

Many here have excused Gary because of his age and the times. Well, he wasn't 15. He just acted that way. And this wasn't 1935 or 1955 or even 1985. Guys like Aaron, Hisle, Cooper, Ogilvie, etc had come and gone and were all heroes.

Gary told Dave Parker he was washed up! Now, that may have been true. But who does that?

I could go on for some time. But Danny would again accuse me of smearing Gary's "good name".

So I will refrain from any more facts so that folks who prefer conjecture can speculate on what REALLY happened.

As opposed to admitting that an immature young man was told he couldn't play shortstop so he pouted, sulked and intentionally antagonized those around him to get his way.

Nawy, that's too simple a narrative. Though not "FALSE".............................

OCF:

Post 71.

And to help those still curious Google the name "Bill Spiers". Spiers was the guy who played shortstop instead of Gary.

Spiers is white. Guess how Gary took THAT.........

I actually think third base is the "easiest" infield position for little league, mostly because it's almost assumed that you're not going to throw someone out from all the way over there.

Last year I had an 8 year old with a gun on my team. I played him at 3rd and he threw out about 1 hitter at first per game, a couple of them 5-3 DPs. In 2 years of coaching 7-8 year olds, I saw only 2one or 3 other players do it once.

It's pretty obvious what this article is all about...

Did you notice the multiple reference to the Mets? What you have is a New York area sportswriter upset with Kent that he didn't play to his fullest potential until after he left the Mets. So he's completely ignoring Kent's years as a Giant, Astro and Dodger upon which Kent's Hall of Fame case is built. Kent sucked as a Met... therefore Kent sucks... therefore Kent shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame. Pretty simple really (and simultaneously simple-minded).

I know the consensus here is that [Kent]'s a shoo-in, but my intuition tells me he'll be one of those guys who has to sit on the ballot for about a decade before he gets in.

For purely unsabermetric reasons, I don't really have a problem with Kent having to wait a decade to get elected. Kent was obviously a very good player, but he was a total @$$. And he went out of his way to be an @$$. Not just to the media and his teammates, but to the fans as well. Some fans in SF resented him because he was traded for the very popular Matt Williams, but people were rooting for him by the middle of 1997 (his first year with the Giants).

From I could tell, he got off on being a d!ck and taking every opportunity to tell people how big a drag it was to have to play baseball--that it was just another job. Screw him.

I hope he goes out to his ranch, falls off his motorcycle, gets trampled by his cows, and spends his final moments face-down in manure thinking "Man, I should have been washing my truck."

It's clear now that whatever I write is being interpreted as an effort to portray Sheffield in a worse light than which he has ALREADY CREATED FOR HIMSELF.

Which is nonsense......

Which is impossible. Really, a guy who goes around claiming that he deliberately committed errors? It is not so much that he did (or did not) do it, but that he thought it would be a great idea to make a point of it. That is seriously stupid.

93. Exploring Leftist Conservatism since 2008 (ark..) Posted: January 22, 2009 at 04:08 PM (#3058286)

It's also easy to mistake creatine use for steroid use. The former makes it very, very easy to put on 15-20 pounds of muscle in a single offseason, makes it easy to keep that weight on during a long season, and is reputed to help limit the fatiguing effect of lactose acid build up during exercise or play.

Actually, that is not 15-20 pounds of MUSCLE tissue. It is 15-20 pounds of BODYWEIGHT. That is a HUGE difference. A fairly significant part of that weight gain is water weight that has been pulled into the muscle tissue. Not that that is not beneficial to an athlete.

And creatine monohydrate supplementation beneficial effects has far more to do with the ATP-CP (adenosine triphosphate-creatine phosphate) energy system, than the non oxidative glycolytic system (ie lactate), than as a lactate "buffer".

Also, regarding lactate (lactic acid) buildup, lactate is produced even under conditions of rest and can be a valuable source for energy. When sufficient oxygen is available, during periods of rest or lower activitiy, lactate can be used as an energy source (by reconversion to pyruvate). In addition, the lactate and pyruvate formed in muscle during activitiy can be used to manufacture glucose (gluconeogenesis / Cori cycle). It is a bit simplistic to blame muscle fatigue on lactate buildup.

I hope he goes out to his ranch, falls off his motorcycle, gets trampled by his cows, and spends his final moments face-down in manure thinking "Man, I should have been washing my truck."

I find it risible how much he plays up the cowboy thing considering that he grew up in Huntington Beach and went to school at Berkeley, noted redneck havens both.

Frickin' chemists. ;-)