This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
They need to have randomly generated hot spots in the field by DakotaDomer
If you hit a ball into the hot spot circle your team scores an additional 1-5 runs.
This seems like a move that would appeal to fantasy players and people who like to overanalyze the game by giving the manager another decision to make. However, I think there might be additional pushback on this one if it were ever implemented because its going to really mess with hitting/pitching stats comparisons unlike ghost runner which is relatively rare and doesn't affect the overall stats measurably. This looks to me like it would definitely affect ERA, RBI, HR stats