Jose Bautista

[RedThat]

May I ask, where in the heck did this guy come from?

Leads the league in HR's, RBI's, has a good OBP, solid utility player. Great arm in the outfield, he is up there as one of the leaders in assists for an outfielder. Very good defensively. Yeah he was a Royal at one time. I know it sucks. You can shoot me for saying that. But how in the world did he become this good? Dude is having a monster year. Great breakout season.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by tk13

I don't think it looks like he's exponentially bigger than before or anything. But even Barry Bonds was a great, great hitter before he got large. It wasn't like he was a hack who suddenly became good with steroids.

I'm hard pressed to think of another guy who has blown up out of nowhere like this, and then kept it up. You have years like the time Brady Anderson hit 50 HR's, but it was back down to earth after that. I'm sure someone who has watched baseball longer than me could give an example or two.

It's impossible to do. Nobody in the history of baseball has ever done anything like this (gone from nothing to the best hitter in the league). He's like a real-life Roy Hobbs.

As I said last season, there are simply no precedents for this kind of incredible performance increase, so looking at other hitters as benchmarks or comparisons would be useless.

[KC_Connection]

As for the PED thing...well sure he could be. But so could any of these guys.

Singing out a guy simply based on performance increase doesn't make much sense. Did he just never consider steroids for his entire career and then one day in September 2009 choose to finally take them? And how did these steroids turn him from career mediocrity to best hitter in baseball? It's never happened for anybody else, but he found the magic combination?

The swing change is the legit explanation, it brought him more success, and success breeds confidence. That's what we're seeing here. If he's doing it with help, it's impossible to tell. But he shouldn't be singled out in this regard anymore than any of the consistent power hitters of the last few years (Pujols, Dunn, Fielder, Cabrera, etc).

[Gadzooks]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Those trades had little to do with Anthopoulos and everything to do with Rogers Communications being cheap. For what is one of the richest corporations in sports, they certainly don't act like it.

Drabek has serious issues throwing strikes, but the potential and stuff is there. He'll never be Halladay, but you can't expect that from anybody. Doc is the best pitcher of our era.

So true… Anthropophagus was brought in to "build a winner", in other words, shed the payroll and build a deep system of youngsters. He's certainly done that, but, until Rogers deems another WS championship worthy of splurging on, we'll keep shedding our talent.
This is what makes the whole Bautista thing so surprising. Why are they tickling Jays fans asses with a feather?

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Zooks

So true… Anthropophagus was brought in to "build a winner", in other words, shed the payroll and build a deep system of youngsters. He's certainly done that, but, until Rogers deems another WS championship worthy of splurging on, we'll keep shedding our talent.
This is what makes the whole Bautista thing so surprising. Why are they tickling Jays fans asses with a feather?

Have to give the fans at least one reason to watch, I guess. I'm glad they did. Bautista ABs are much-see TV, he's that good. He's also single-handedly keeping them at .500 right now.

[Jim Jones]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

As for the PED thing...well sure he could be. But so could any of these guys.

Singing out a guy simply based on performance increase doesn't make much sense. Did he just never consider steroids for his entire career and then one day in September 2009 choose to finally take them? And how did these steroids turn him from career mediocrity to best hitter in baseball? It's never happened for anybody else, but he found the magic combination?

The magic combination? No, YOU'RE the one saying he found the magic combination. That after seven years of mediocrity he all of the sudden became the most feared hitter in the game. How? By tinkering with his swing? He found some "magic" adjustment in his swing that took him from 10 homers to 50 homers? Hard to believe.

Seven years isn't an aberration. He isn't a lifelong great player who struggled through seven "fluke" years. He's an average player who has all of the sudden become elite. Baseball history tells me it's likely due to more than just a change in his swing.

One thing my Pirates-fan brother pointed out is his bat speed is ridiculous now. Almost Sheffield-esque. He says it was never like that early on in his career. He's able to get around on pitches so much quicker now.

Here's an interesting stat from a recent ESPN blog post on Bautista:

"Since May 15, 2010, Bautista has hit 63 home runs -- 22 more than Albert Pujols' next-best total of 41. Remarkable considering that in his first 1800 career at-bats, Bautista hit just 60 home runs.".

From 10-15 HR's a year to that?

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Drabek has serious issues throwing strikes

Lol
Posted via Mobile Device

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

Lol
Posted via Mobile Device

Still holding that childish grudge over my objectivity during the Greinke negotiations, I see?

It's 40 innings into his major league career, hardly anything to worry about or anything that will destroy him at the age of 23. You know who had serious issues throwing strikes for the first two entire seasons of his career? Only the greatest pitcher of our era, Roy Halladay.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

The magic combination? No, YOU'RE the one saying he found the magic combination. That after seven years of mediocrity he all of the sudden became the most feared hitter in the game. How? By tinkering with his swing? He found some "magic" adjustment in his swing that took him from 10 homers to 50 homers? Hard to believe.

There's nothing "magic" about his adjustment at the plate. It's visible and very real. Do some reading, watch some video. It's not insignificant.

What's hard to believe is that a career mediocrity somehow found a magic steroid that nobody else has access to and that did something that no steroid had ever done before. But sure, keep working on that crazy, baseless assumption.

Seven years isn't an aberration. He isn't a lifelong great player who struggled through seven "fluke" years. He's an average player who has all of the sudden become elite.

He played three full major league seasons after having his development stunted in 2004 by being selected in the Rule 5 draft and moving through five teams. Scouting reports from early in his college and professional days suggested, though, that he had great power potential and a very good eye. The question isn't so much why did Bautista become elite at the age of 29. The question is why it took him so long to reach that potential. And yes, that delay had everything to do with the flaws in his swing.

Baseball history tells me it's likely due to more than just a change in his swing.

#1. Baseball history tells you nothing about Bautista because nobody has ever done anything like this before. There are no precedents for this kind of change.
#2. We're letting the PED-filled baseball history condemn a guy's success now? Get me some actual evidence of your claim, then get back to me.

One thing my Pirates-fan brother pointed out is his bat speed is ridiculous now. Almost Sheffield-esque. He says it was never like that early on in his career. He's able to get around on pitches so much quicker now.

Bautista's always had quick bat speed, it allowed him to hit the few home runs that he did it when he connected. He was also always a whiz in batting practice, crushing shots all over the park. The problem was that he rarely made contact because his stance and approach at the plate was completely ****ed up. Gaston and Murphy's change helped with his timing immensely.

Here's an interesting stat from a recent ESPN blog post on Bautista:

"Since May 15, 2010, Bautista has hit 63 home runs -- 22 more than Albert Pujols' next-best total of 41. Remarkable considering that in his first 1800 career at-bats, Bautista hit just 60 home runs.".

From 10-15 HR's a year to that?

I read the same article. It also contained:

We ignore Jose Bautista. At best, we politely pay half-attention, not ready or willing to acknowledge the numbers he's putting up and maybe hoping he stops. The Blue Jays' right fielder leads the major leagues in batting average, home runs, runs scored, total bases, on-base and slugging percentage and OPS. Bautista is the tree in the forest. Yes, we hear, but why do we pretend not to? He's a quiet, understated man who plays for a Canadian team that is virtually ignored in the U.S., even among baseball fans. Where is he from? Why is he never on TV? Does he speak English? How did he get so good?

Fifty-four home runs last season was enough to say "Wow," but not enough to force historic comparisons or stare the PED issue square in the face again. The consensus reaction to Bonds' perjury trial this year might best be described as our long national indifference. I hope we don't remain indifferent to Bautista, or to the Blue Jays for that matter. Bautista is the best hitter in baseball and, eventually, we have to relax and trust what we're seeing again.

You might want to take Berthiume's advice. At least until, you know, there's actually some evidence for this whining.

[KC_Connection]

And again, I'm not saying Bautista isn't on PEDs. I'm never going to outright claim that a professional baseball player isn't taking some kind of drug. There's an incredible drug culture in the sport, with both hitters and pitchers (who never get any focus in this area from the media).

I'm saying attributing his change solely to PED use is ignorant and pretty absurd. And making the claim that he is on them is weak and completely baseless.

[Jim Jones]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

There's nothing "magic" about his adjustment at the plate. It's visible and very real. Do some reading, watch some video. It's not insignificant.

What's hard to believe is that a career mediocrity somehow found a magic steroid that nobody else has access to and that did something that no steroid had ever done before. But sure, keep working on that crazy, baseless assumption.

What is this adjustment at the plate you keep talking about? What did he do to his swing that let him go from 13 homers to 54 homers in one year? TWO years ago he hit 13 homers in 336 at bats. He's now got 16 this year in 121 at bats. What did he change?

He played three full major league seasons after having his development stunted in 2004 by being selected in the Rule 5 draft and moving through five teams. Scouting reports from early in his college and professional days suggested, though, that he had great power potential and a very good eye. The question isn't so much why did Bautista become elite at the age of 29. The question is why it took him so long to reach that potential. And yes, that delay had everything to do with the flaws in his swing.

He played four major league seasons with over 300 at bats before hitting 54 homers, so let's work off of that. The most he hit in a season prior to that was 16 and his power numbers were actually gradually going DOWN each year until last year. Also, he wasn't ever hitting many doubles, so it wasn't like he was always driving the ball well and just finally pieced it together to get it over the wall. No, this pretty much came out of the blue.

His old scouting reports said he had some power potential? Guess what? Read 10 scouting reports of hitters in the minors right now and I bet eight of them will say the guy has "power potential". Almost everyone has some sort of power potential.

#1. Baseball history tells you nothing about Bautista because nobody has ever done anything like this before. There are no precedents for this kind of change.

Well there was a guy named Barry Bonds. He went from hitting 30 homers a year to hitting 73. There was a guy named Sammy Sosa. He went from hitting 20 homers a year to hitting 60. Those are basically the same kind of jumps that Bautista has made, aren't they? Except he just started out lower on the totem pole.

#2. We're letting the PED-filled baseball history condemn a guy's success now? Get me some actual evidence of your claim, then get back to me.

Oh look, I'm sure some of it is the swing. I don't mean to sound like it's ONLY PED's that are helping him do this. It's probably a combination of things, but I've never seen a player go from Wilson Betemit to Barry Bonds solely by changing his swing.

Bautista's always had quick bat speed, it allowed him to hit the few home runs that he did it when he connected. He was also always a whiz in batting practice, crushing shots all over the park. The problem was that he rarely made contact because his stance and approach at the plate was completely ****ed up. Gaston and Murphy's change helped with his timing immensely.

I'll trust my brother's judgement on this. Like I said, I can't say I ever watched him with the Pirates and I'd wager to guess you didn't either unless you've been a lifelong Bautista fan, but watching him now it's REALLY hard to imagine ever having the bat speed then that he does now. That's part of why Bonds became so dangerous. You add the strength, you add the speed. For a guy who already has a good eye, that makes him so much more dangerous because he can sit on a pitch longer, get around on it faster and really make a pitcher pay for mistakes.

You might want to take Berthiume's advice. At least until, you know, there's actually some evidence for this whining.

I wasn't really interested in his opinion, just the stats he laid out, which are ridiculous when you really think about them.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

What is this adjustment at the plate you keep talking about? What did he do to his swing that let him go from 13 homers to 54 homers in one year? TWO years ago he hit 13 homers in 336 at bats. He's now got 16 this year in 121 at bats. What did he change?

This is a good place to start reading: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/24/al...ome-run-binge/

Everything he's done (the crouching, the toe tap, the opening up of his stance, the leg kick) has allowed him to get started sooner on his swing and the result has been more hard contact.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=12383209

He played four major league seasons with over 300 at bats before hitting 54 homers, so let's work off of that. The most he hit in a season prior to that was 16 and his power numbers were actually gradually going DOWN each year until last year. Also, he wasn't ever hitting many doubles, so it wasn't like he was always driving the ball well and just finally pieced it together to get it over the wall. No, this pretty much came out of the blue.

Nobody is saying it didn't. But to pretend that he was John McDonald is also wrong. He was drafted for his power potential and good eye at the plate. One of those things developed early in the majors (his good eye), the other didn't (because of mechanical issues in his swing).

Well there was a guy named Barry Bonds. He went from hitting 30 homers a year to hitting 73. There was a guy named Sammy Sosa. He went from hitting 20 homers a year to hitting 60. Those are basically the same kind of jumps that Bautista has made, aren't they? Except he just started out lower on the totem pole.

#1. Sosa and Bonds were hitting 30-40 HR for years before their jumps. They were great players. They just got a lot better when they started taking 'roids and baseball started juicing the balls.

#2. Are we to assume that every hitter that experienced a large HR jump over one season was taking PEDs? Even in the 40s/50s/60s? Can hitters not have huge increases in performance without suspicion in your mind? What about pitchers?

Oh look, I'm sure some of it is the swing. I don't mean to sound like it's ONLY PED's that are helping him do this. It's probably a combination of things, but I've never seen a player go from Wilson Betemit to Barry Bonds solely by changing his swing.

Nobody has ever seen a player do anything close to this before, that's the point. Steroids have been around since the 1960s/1970s in baseball and no baseball player has ever come anything close to this kind of increase. So Bautista either found a magical steroid that nobody else has access to and a steroid that does something no steroid has ever done (incredibly unlikely) or steroids aren't the sole reason for his success.

I'll trust my brother's judgement on this. Like I said, I can't say I ever watched him with the Pirates and I'd wager to guess you didn't either unless you've been a lifelong Bautista fan, but watching him now it's REALLY hard to imagine ever having the bat speed then that he does now. That's part of why Bonds became so dangerous. You add the strength, you add the speed. For a guy who already has a good eye, that makes him so much more dangerous because he can sit on a pitch longer, get around on it faster and really make a pitcher pay for mistakes.

I watched him whenever I watched the Pirates (not often, I admit), and then, when he was traded to the Jays, don't forget that he was that same mediocre hitter for about a full season. He always had great bat speed and a great eye, the issue was his swing and the complete lack of contact. He'd hit the occasional HR, take some walks, and was generally an average player. When Cito Gaston and Dwayne Murphy got him started earlier in September 2009, though, it all clicked for him.

I wasn't really interested in his opinion, just the stats he laid out, which are ridiculous when you really think about them.

Yes, ridiculously awesome.

Here are some more: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...autista-facts/

He's currently on pace to put up the best offensive season in baseball history. Of course, it's incredibly unlikely that he'll keep up the pace, but who knows with this guy.

[Jim Jones]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

This is a good place to start reading: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/24/al...ome-run-binge/

Everything he's done (the crouching, the toe tap, the opening up of his stance, the leg kick) has allowed him to get started sooner on his swing and the result has been more hard contact.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=12383209

Thanks for the link. I fully acknowledge the fact that he's made some changes to his swing that have helped for the better. Although, I would love to see a video of his stance and swing while playing with the Pirates for comparison. Like I said though, I think it's a combination of changing up his approach + PED's that have led to this huge surge.

Nobody is saying it didn't. But to pretend that he was John McDonald is also wrong. He was drafted for his power potential and good eye at the plate. One of those things developed early in the majors (his good eye), the other didn't (because of mechanical issues in his swing).

Actually, he wasn't drafted for his good eye. In fact, if you go and read John Sickels' retro prospect report on Bautista, he says that Bautista had spotty plate discipline early in his career. He didn't really gain such a great command of the strike zone until recently. I wonder if that correlates to how much more easily he's able to turn on pitches now?

Plus...dude, he was drafted in the 20th round. Now that's not to say that a 20th rounder can't develop into a good player, but guys drafted in the 20th round in baseball are mainly drafted to fill out the farm system. I'm sure they saw some power potential, but like I said, almost EVERY prospect has "some" power potential.

#1. Sosa and Bonds were hitting 30-40 HR for years before their jumps. They were great players. They just got a lot better when they started taking 'roids and baseball started juicing the balls.

Thank you for making my point for me. They GOT A LOT BETTER when they started taking 'roids.

How good the players were before they started taking PED's has no relevance. His surge is exactly the same as Bonds and Sosa's. Sosa's 20-60 jump and Bonds' 30-70 jump in homers is exactly the same as Bautista's 15-50 jump.

#2. Are we to assume that every hitter that experienced a large HR jump over one season was taking PEDs? Even in the 40s/50s/60s? Can hitters not have huge increases in performance without suspicion in your mind? What about pitchers?

I think that given how many players have been exposed in baseball, you pretty much have to proceed with a guilty until proven innocent attitude.

Nobody has ever seen a player do anything close to this before, that's the point. Steroids have been around since the 1960s/1970s in baseball and no baseball player has ever come anything close to this kind of increase. So Bautista either found a magical steroid that nobody else has access to and a steroid that does something no steroid has ever done (incredibly unlikely) or steroids aren't the sole reason for his success.

Why do you keep ignoring all the hitters from the steroid era who hit more homers on steroids than they ever would have off? Why do you keep ignoring Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds having 30-40 home run surges midway through their careers? Why do you keep ignoring the cesspool of Luis Gonzalez's and Bret Boone's and the like that littered Baseball during the steroid era that pulled huge 30-40-50 HR seasons out of their ass? I'm sure Luis Gonzalez told everyone he changed his swing too when he went from 20 homers to 57 homers. Why do you keep ignoring Roger Clemens reinventing himself in his mid-30's and becoming better than he ever was after taking PED's?

Please tell me why you keep acting like none of this stuff ever happened? It's almost mind-boggling.

I would imagine PED's in baseball are like an arms race. Bonds was using stuff in 2001 that baseball didn't test for until a few years later. Whatever Bautista may be using now is likely something that isn't being tested for. Why is it so hard to believe that a relatively obscure player playing for a largely irrelevant team in Canada that nobody pays attention to could be ahead of the PED curve? It's not like he's in NY where all eyes would be on his every move.

I watched him whenever I watched the Pirates (not often, I admit), and then, when he was traded to the Jays, don't forget that he was that same mediocre hitter for about a full season. He always had great bat speed and a great eye, the issue was his swing and the complete lack of contact. He'd hit the occasional HR, take some walks, and was generally an average player. When Cito Gaston and Dwayne Murphy got him started earlier in September 2009, though, it all clicked for him.

Once again, he didn't have the great eye you keep talking about. He also didn't have that great bat speed. Like I said, his bat speed is INCREDIBLE now. Sheffield-esque. Nothing in Sickels' retro scouting report mentions anything about bat speed. And there's no way he would have been as...mediocre, as he was back then if he had the bat speed he has now.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Anyone who has ever played any bat and ball sport, whether it's baseball, or golf, knows that you can't have enormous jumps in swing speed after you are fully developed, even with excellent mechanics.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Thanks for the link. I fully acknowledge the fact that he's made some changes to his swing that have helped for the better. Although, I would love to see a video of his stance and swing while playing with the Pirates for comparison. Like I said though, I think it's a combination of changing up his approach + PED's that have led to this huge surge.

That's fine and certainly possible, but the idea that he's on PEDs is still a baseless one. The guilt of others isn't evidence of anything.

And they've been showing video of the swing before and after the change often, but I can't find a link to it online. The difference, obviously, is noticeable.

Actually, he wasn't drafted for his good eye. In fact, if you go and read John Sickels' retro prospect report on Bautista, he says that Bautista had spotty plate discipline early in his career. He didn't really gain such a great command of the strike zone until recently. I wonder if that correlates to how much more easily he's able to turn on pitches now?

Bautista's had a great walk rate since very early in his minor league career. That's the one aspect of his game that didn't change last year for him.

Plus...dude, he was drafted in the 20th round. Now that's not to say that a 20th rounder can't develop into a good player, but guys drafted in the 20th round in baseball are mainly drafted to fill out the farm system. I'm sure they saw some power potential, but like I said, almost EVERY prospect has "some" power potential.

His talent level was higher than that of a normal 20th round pick, his asking price led him to be a draft-and-follow in that range.

How good the players were before they started taking PED's has no relevance. His surge is exactly the same as Bonds and Sosa's. Sosa's 20-60 jump and Bonds' 30-70 jump in homers is exactly the same as Bautista's 15-50 jump.

#1. Sosa didn't make any 20-60 jump. He was hitting 30-40 HRs for years before his big years and was an established power hitter.
#2. Bonds had been hitting 40 HRs for years before his four amazing years, including 49 HR in the year 2000. He was the best hitter in baseball even without steroids and juiced baseballs.
#3. Taking steroids didn't turn them into something they weren't....it simply made them better, stronger power hitters. You are suggesting that taking steroids made Bautista into a completely different baseball player...from a guy who made poor contact and hit the ball on the ground a lot to the best power slugger in the game. That shows a lack of understanding about what steroids actually do for a player.

I think that given how many players have been exposed in baseball, you pretty much have to proceed with a guilty until proven innocent attitude.

So every leap in performance each season should be seen in a skeptical light now? Can young players not experience huge leaps in performance without suspicion, too? Or is it only late bloomers like Bautista that are considered guilty without any evidence? What's the age limit for suspicion, 28 or so? Joey Votto showed huge power last year that he had never shown before (at any level) at the age of 26, was that suspicious? How about Joe Mauer when he came out of nowhere in 2009 to hit 28 HR? Steroids for one year?

Neither of those two had shown any kind of track record throughout their baseball career for that kind of power, after all. How many other players from year-to-year are regularly making significant jumps in performance? Sure, maybe most of them are on steroids, but how the hell can you tell the difference? Just focus on the bigger, more improbable jumps? And what about the guys who have shown consistency from the very beginning? Are they out of the line of suspicion because of that? History tells us that some of the most consistent performers were also drug users.

To me, worrying about this kind of thing is quite absurd. There's no way to really know who is using what and who isn't.

Why do you keep ignoring all the hitters from the steroid era who hit more homers on steroids than they ever would have off? Why do you keep ignoring Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds having 30-40 home run surges midway through their careers? Why do you keep ignoring the cesspool of Luis Gonzalez's and Bret Boone's and the like that littered Baseball during the steroid era that pulled huge 30-40-50 HR seasons out of their ass? I'm sure Luis Gonzalez told everyone he changed his swing too when he went from 20 homers to 57 homers. Why do you keep ignoring Roger Clemens reinventing himself in his mid-30's and becoming better than he ever was after taking PED's?

I'm not ignoring anything, I know all about the drug culture inherent in baseball and amateur and professional sports. In fact, I embrace it. I would love to see players allowed to take whatever they want. What I'm telling you, though, is that Bautista's change is not solely PED-related (or juiced baseball related, like Luis Gonzalez). By virtue of the incredible change he made in approach, it simply couldn't be.

Whatever Bautista may be using now is likely something that isn't being tested for. Why is it so hard to believe that a relatively obscure player playing for a largely irrelevant team in Canada that nobody pays attention to could be ahead of the PED curve? It's not like he's in NY where all eyes would be on his every move.

You really believe that Bautista found a magic steroid that nobody in the rest of baseball has access to and a steroid that does something no steroid has ever done before (turns career mediocrities into Barry Bonds)? Your theory loses me here, I admit. Somehow I don't think we'll be seeing more Jose Bautista/once in baseball history-type jumps in the near future.

Once again, he didn't have the great eye you keep talking about.

He did. He's had a great eye for years, check his college and MILB stats. The only thing that he really had going for him as a Pirate and as a Blue Jay in his early years was his plate discipline and ability to take a walk (in addition to his gun for an arm, I suppose).

He also didn't have that great bat speed. Like I said, his bat speed is INCREDIBLE now. Sheffield-esque. Nothing in Sickels' retro scouting report mentions anything about bat speed. And there's no way he would have been as...mediocre, as he was back then if he had the bat speed he has now.

As I told you, bat speed was never an issue for Bautista. In fact, it was, and always has been, great. Teams saw the power in his swing in 2004 as a young kid and that's part of the reason why he moved around between so many teams. Indeed, he put on shows in batting practice as both a Pirate and a Jay.

And why couldn't he be mediocre with great bat speed? Many players are. Approach is everything. If you have a poor approach as a hitter that prevents you from making contact and sufficiently utilizing that bat speed, it won't matter how strong or how fast you are.


In the end, it really comes down to whether you want to enjoy one of the great all-time offensive starts and one of the most impressive changes in baseball history or whether you want to piss on the guy without any evidence of PED use. To me, it's kind of like whining about the validity of Usain Bolt's amazing record runs in Beijing because of the history of drug use in his sport. Keep complaining if you wish (though I've never understood why fans care much about players being on PEDs) but I'll side with the former and enjoy the ride. Baseball's more fun that way.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Anyone who has ever played any bat and ball sport, whether it's baseball, or golf, knows that you can't have enormous jumps in swing speed after you are fully developed, even with excellent mechanics.

Nice of our resident expert to finally chime in after ignoring the thread for weeks with an unnecessary quip from his vast reservoir of baseball knowledge.

What I really want to know, though, is when Bautista is going to stop being an elite hitter and start being a fluke like you told me he would.