Votto: 2020 WS Winner Would Deserve Full Credit

[North]

It's not so much the 80 games that would make it different for me. It's the potential other stuff. I've heard rumors of 40 man teams. Of schedules that could be terribly unbalanced etc...

Those are the things that for me will determine if this is a glorified exhibition or a real season. Like if they're going to do stuff like starting the 10th inning with a man on second after 10 pitchers on the 40 man team pitched the first 9. That is the stuff that would turn the year into an exhibition.

If they do take a stab at it, I suspect they will do whatever to maximize viewership

We need a straight face smiley...

[klw]

If Canada's Blue Jays win it would only be worth .71 the value of a WS win by any of the US teams.

[BCubb2003]

Like if they're going to do stuff like starting the 10th inning with a man on second ...

I want to see this for the non-zero chance of someone losing a perfect game.

[Reds Lurker]

All this asterisk talk is silly. Just because the season isn't 162 games doesn't matter. If they can play a season and crown a champ at the end it's a legit title and the winner should be recognized as such.


Unless the Cubs win the World Series. Then the season gets a big fat asterisk with no real champion. Obviously.

[RedsBaron]

While it still probably will not happen, an 80 or so game season increases the chances we could see the first .400 hitter in a season since Ted Williams in 1941. If a hitter still needs 3.1 plate appearances per game to qualify for a batting title, in theory a batter could qualify with 245 or so plate appearances, which could be as little as 200 or so official at bats. Maintaining a .400 batting average for 200 at bats is certainly easier, though not easy, than to do so over a 162 game season.

[hebroncougar]

So not one game has been played, and the baseball fans on here are ready to asterisk the season, give minimal credit, and say it’s not real baseball. So why should players risk their health and even bother to open up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[North]

So not one game has been played, and the baseball fans on here are ready to asterisk the season, give minimal credit, and say it’s not real baseball. So why should players risk their health and even bother to open up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They want money?

[RedlegJake]

They want money?

After the cuts (prorate, taxes, pct, agents cut) guys will make maybe 10-15% which is not much to risk your health and possibly suffer a serious injury that wrecks your future earnings. Setting "love of the game", tradition, etc aside I can see the naysayers point.

[North]

After the cuts (prorate, taxes, pct, agents cut) guys will make maybe 10-15% which is not much to risk your health and possibly suffer a serious injury that wrecks your future earnings. Setting "love of the game", tradition, etc aside I can see the naysayers point.

Sports are vicarious things.

[Roy Tucker]

After the cuts (prorate, taxes, pct, agents cut) guys will make maybe 10-15% which is not much to risk your health and possibly suffer a serious injury that wrecks your future earnings. Setting "love of the game", tradition, etc aside I can see the naysayers point.

What are the contractual details if a player voluntarily doesn’t play? Is the club still on the hook to pay them? Do they get released? Club can choose to still pay?

As far as asterisks go, baseball has always reflected society as a whole. It will just be the virus year like there was a strike year, steroid era, dead ball, AstroTurf era, etc. No reason to asterisk (if I can use that as a verb).

[Wonderful Monds]

It's not so much the 80 games that would make it different for me. It's the potential other stuff. I've heard rumors of 40 man teams. Of schedules that could be terribly unbalanced etc...

Those are the things that for me will determine if this is a glorified exhibition or a real season. Like if they're going to do stuff like starting the 10th inning with a man on second after 10 pitchers on the 40 man team pitched the first 9. That is the stuff that would turn the year into an exhibition.

Yep, that’s why, not the short season.

Sorry Joey, but you’re off the mark on this one. This year is going to be clown show baseball, and that’s fine, because I’d kill just to have spring training games on right now. But nobody is obviously going to look at this year’s champion the same as any other year’s World Series champion.

[JFLegal]

this could end up being sweet revenge for reds fans who were screwed in both 1981 and 1994.

[Bourgeois Zee]

Yep, that’s why, not the short season.

Sorry Joey, but you’re off the mark on this one. This year is going to be clown show baseball, and that’s fine, because I’d kill just to have spring training games on right now. But nobody is obviously going to look at this year’s champion the same as any other year’s World Series champion.

They look at the champs in 1981 the same as the others.

We'll look at his one the same too.

[757690]

They look at the champs in 1981 the same as the others.

We'll look at his one the same too.

We really don’t. I think most people consider it legitimate, but with an asterisk in their heads. Same for 1919 or 2018.

And in those seasons, there was one event that made it different. In this year, there’s a cornucopia of differences, major differences. The asterisk will be even bigger.

[UKWhoDey]

I couldnt care less. Play the season. 81 games is fine by me. Better than zero. Whoever wins the World Series wins it. Baseball diehards get too emotionally invested in this minutiae. We'll all know the season was shortened, and 99% of people will not care come championship time.