Skip to main content

64 replies

Colonial District Predictions

B baseball727Member
quote:
Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
quote:
I am =NAME DELETED=. **** Deep Run and **** Freeman, Godwin's taking this district.


I'm not sure what to believe at this point.

If you are indeed =NAME DELETED=, you would be well advised to take down the above post. Ask your brother how college coaches, or your current HS coach, would feel about it if he knew about it.

If you're not =NAME DELETED=, as someone above charged, then this is so far over the line I don't know where to start. Not only is the post inappropriate, but if it's done by an imposter, it's a slander on the boy's good name.

Either way, I am hereby clicking on the "report post" icon.


I think we all know what is happening and it is hard to understand or believe. Travis is being slandered and this should not be tolerated. Thanks for reporting the post to the administrator. I have done the same.
Last edited by MN-Mom
Midlo DadMidlo Dad10,000+ posts
Oldhandcoach,

It has come to my attention that you think a particular player's parent is posing as someone on this site in order to promote his son.

FYI, there was an imposter problem here, but the person doing it was NOT who you thought it was. Nor has that particular dad been on here at all, much less bragging about his son.

FWIW, I know the player involved and consider him a solid D-1 prospect. In fact, we tried to get him to come to our travel team but he ultimately decided to go another direction. Our loss.

What I'm trying to say is, you're new here, be a little more circumspect with the conspiracy theories and accusations. Just because some fans speak kindly about a player doesn't mean it's some parent shilling for their own son. Some of us actually like to say nice things about players, just because we're fans.
B berryberrygood100+ posts
Agreed, Midlo Dad. But, I would add that names of players are thrown about way too much on this website. Although most of the posts are complimentary of the players mentioned, as we can see from this string, even complimentary posts can be misconstrued.

I would like to see a policy that individual players not be mentioned by name. It's easy to write enough of a description so that anyone familiar with a program knows who you're talking about (eg, "the #1 lefty pitcher on Springdale High" or "the senior #4 hitter/1B on Springdale High") ...and if someone really wants/needs to know a name, they can always contact the poster directly.

A policy like this would really serve the kids a lot better in the end, and save some people from hurt feelings and possibly damaged reputations.
WR WB Reporter1,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by berryberrygood:
I would like to see a policy that individual players not be mentioned by name. It's easy to write enough of a description so that anyone familiar with a program knows who you're talking about (eg, "the #1 lefty pitcher on Springdale High" or "the senior #4 hitter/1B on Springdale High") ...and if someone really wants/needs to know a name, they can always contact the poster directly.

A policy like this would really serve the kids a lot better in the end, and save some people from hurt feelings and possibly damaged reputations.


How very boring and uninformative that would be. I look to this board to provide game highlights, scores, etc. from local games at a greater depth than the local newspaper's coverage, and I look to this board to find out how the seasons are going for many, many players from across the state, in whom I have developed an interest after watching them play many, many games for many years but I may have no idea about their high school program. While I remember the high school homes of some of the players, if I was quizzed on their high school names, I would probably get less than 50% correct. I probably would not know their batting position on a high school team and I most certainly would not know their high school jersey number. Yet I still am very interested in their high school baseball careers. Can you imagine trying to figure out: "the senior LHP for ABC school" pitched a no hitter. What I am supposed to do? Go to that school's web site to see if there is a LHP on that roster (if the school even has a roster posted) that I might know and then if the school had 2 LHPs, I might not know whether the one I knew was the successful pitcher.

And I can't wait for the start of the college season to hear how some of the many players I have watched perform at that next level. Are you proposing to censor that reporting?

I think the intention of most posters is not to be malicious but to report facts and information. As far as players getting their feelings hurt, welcome to the real world. Maybe your next move can be to advocate the elimination of strikeouts so the players' feelings and psyches are not harmed.
B berryberrygood100+ posts
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my post, WB Reporter. I am 100% in favor of writeups of games being as detailed as possible, and I certainly don't have any problems with box scores and descriptions like "Player X pitched 6 excellent shutout innings" or "Player Y went 3 for 4 with 4 RBIs," or even "Player Z struck out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 7th." I agree that game highlights, scores, etc., are important posts, and they will inevitably include stats that are good for one team (usually the winner) and bad for the other.

What I do not like is messages about players, mostly done by anonymous posters, that either build up expectations of specific players beyond realistic expectations (or beyond reality itself), or postings that are in any way negative about expectations for a specific, named player. If you peruse the many postings on this site, you'll notice that there are some writers that consciously avoid naming names, and others that seem to love to write about this player and that player in practically every post. The "namers" are usually well-intentioned, but I'm not so sure that it's in the best interest of these kids to have their name bandied about on a website by multiple unnamed or anonymous posters. And I think you'll agree that the (relatively few) negative postings with specific names mentioned are certainly a big problem.

The difference here is that a game writeup talks about something that actually happened, whether it is "good" or "bad" for any specific player or team (and hopefully is factual, if you are depending on it to get your information). A posting about someone's expectations, or about something that hasn't happened, may cast a specific kid in an unfair light.

I am NOT for censorship, never was and never will be, and resent your inference that I am. That word is a hot-button topic and evokes reactions "from the gut" in many people, and your use of that word should be considered more carefully in the future. I think that if we are trying to place a label on what I was suggesting, it would be "exercising self-restraint." That would be a much better description than "censorship." The censorship that does happen on the site is rare and well-applied, as can be seen on this very thread.

And, BTW, strikeouts are a good thing, obviously for the pitcher and defense, and sometimes even for the player that Ks, if the hitter learns from the experience and comes back next time up to have a better at-bat. I'm not worried about a player's "feelings and psyches" if the posting is, as you say, about "facts and information." It's the postings that mention names and are NOT about facts and information that posters should probably be more careful about -- and this was the intent of my message.

I apologize about the long post, but felt that I needed to clear the air about what I said and about the response it generated.
PB Prep Ballfan10+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by berryberrygood:
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my post, WB Reporter. I am 100% in favor of writeups of games being as detailed as possible, and I certainly don't have any problems with box scores and descriptions like "Player X pitched 6 excellent shutout innings" or "Player Y went 3 for 4 with 4 RBIs," or even "Player Z struck out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 7th." I agree that game highlights, scores, etc., are important posts, and they will inevitably include stats that are good for one team (usually the winner) and bad for the other.

What I do not like is messages about players, mostly done by anonymous posters, that either build up expectations of specific players beyond realistic expectations (or beyond reality itself), or postings that are in any way negative about expectations for a specific, named player. If you peruse the many postings on this site, you'll notice that there are some writers that consciously avoid naming names, and others that seem to love to write about this player and that player in practically every post. The "namers" are usually well-intentioned, but I'm not so sure that it's in the best interest of these kids to have their name bandied about on a website by multiple unnamed or anonymous posters. And I think you'll agree that the (relatively few) negative postings with specific names mentioned are certainly a big problem.

The difference here is that a game writeup talks about something that actually happened, whether it is "good" or "bad" for any specific player or team (and hopefully is factual, if you are depending on it to get your information). A posting about someone's expectations, or about something that hasn't happened, may cast a specific kid in an unfair light.

I am NOT for censorship, never was and never will be, and resent your inference that I am. That word is a hot-button topic and evokes reactions "from the gut" in many people, and your use of that word should be considered more carefully in the future. I think that if we are trying to place a label on what I was suggesting, it would be "exercising self-restraint." That would be a much better description than "censorship." The censorship that does happen on the site is rare and well-applied, as can be seen on this very thread.

And, BTW, strikeouts are a good thing, obviously for the pitcher and defense, and sometimes even for the player that Ks, if the hitter learns from the experience and comes back next time up to have a better at-bat. I'm not worried about a player's "feelings and psyches" if the posting is, as you say, about "facts and information." It's the postings that mention names and are NOT about facts and information that posters should probably be more careful about -- and this was the intent of my message.

I apologize about the long post, but felt that I needed to clear the air about what I said and about the response it generated.


Well said.
EG El gato500+ posts
Are we really damaging the players or their parents. In my many years, I have found that baseball players, especially the better ones, are very savvy about other baseball players' abilities. If you ask their opinion about player a, b or c, they will tell exactly what they think about a, b or c. I am often amused (and usually delighted) to hear them speak openly and honestly about a player's weaknesses and strenghts. It is the parent that is often blind and/or myoptic (sorry parents). Obviously, we should not encourage or tolerate fraudulent or libelous postings, but, in this day of "transparency", discussions should not be "chilled".

As far as a strikeout being a good thing, I doubt that unless you are a pitcher or the defensive team. WB must be a hitter!
B berryberrygood100+ posts
I'm not worried about "damaging" parents. I definitely agree with you that parents often see only the good (and not so much the bad) in their son on the baseball field. That's part of unconditional love, and that prevents most parents from being truly objective about their son. We all know dozens of examples of that type of behavior, and it sometimes gets over the top.

I am concerned about the players. These are, after all , largely teenagers that we're talking about here. They do not need to be placed in a bubble and sheltered from everything, but IMO they also should not have their names, as I said in my last message, bandied about the internet by a bunch or largely unnamed and anonymous posters.

And I certainly also agree that players (and coaches) can and often do speak openly and honestly about the strengths and weaknesses of other players, and there is nothing wrong with that. The difference in my mind is that this is talk that is backed up by the person that says it, which is quite different than a posting on the internet, for everyone to see, from an anonymous source. IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between these situations.
redbird5redbird510,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by berryberrygood:
...I am concerned about the players. These are, after all , largely teenagers that we're talking about here. They do not need to be placed in a bubble and sheltered from everything, but IMO they also should not have their names, as I said in my last message, bandied about the internet by a bunch or largely unnamed and anonymous posters....


I've been a member and moderator here for the last 9 years or so. I can say, without a doubt, that the community here does not put up with speaking ill of a player. This is not only enforced by the moderators, but by the entire community on the HSBBWEB.

Personally, I think the "RHP/2B at ABC HS" posts do not do the player any justice. What is the harm in mentioning the player's name? Conversely, I think the driveby "watch out for little Jimmy" posts are ferretted out by the community very well.

I think to change the policy would be supremely short sighted.
birddogbirddog500+ posts
Spot on Redbird. The drive by posts as you so aptly named them (esp. those by newcomers) smack of parental self promotion. As you know, talent always get identified and somehow, even in spite of parental pandering, the kids get where they need to be if they simply do the work on the field and in the classroom.
B berryberrygood100+ posts
Redbird, I have read your posts for the past couple of years, and even more closely over the past 12 months or so. I know you are an "Old Timer" on HSBBWEB, and are well-regarded and venerable. I respect all of that, and don't wish to get into a scrap with you (or anybody) about this. I just felt that, having read thousands of posts, it was time to step up and express my opinion, and that's all I was doing. The slanderous and potentially poisonous things that were said earlier on this thread provided the perfect opportunity to do so. Yes, the affected player's name has since been deleted, but the reality is that it was out there for a couple of days before it was censored, and I think that's wrong.

Again, as I have said the vast majority of posters on this site mean well. And I am just expressing my opinion. The reasons I feel that there may be "harm in mentioning the player's name" has been already thoroughly covered in my previous 2 posts. I may very well be in the minority, but I know that there are others out there that would agree with me. But whether I am in the minority or not, and whether I am a relative newcomer or not, I feel it would be an injustice to sit back and see some of the things that are posted without commenting.

And again, I totally respect your knowledge and position....I hope you can also respect my opinions.
redbird5redbird510,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by berryberrygood:
...And again, I totally respect your knowledge and position....I hope you can also respect my opinions.


LOL...I don't care about venerable and well-regarded. My point for mentioning my tenure here is having seen it all on here. Things come and go. Driveby postings happen. Idiots will pop their heads up and the community will play "wack-a-mole" with them. I've seen it happen over and over again. The player previously referenced was not hurt and won't be hurt.

I certainly respect your opinion, but disagree.
Last edited by redbird5
Midlo DadMidlo Dad10,000+ posts
I don't know that Deep Run "struggled" against Benedictine. For one thing, Benedictine is perennially among the best private school teams you'll find. They certainly have their share of talent this year. For another, Deep Run used a LOT of players in that game, guys who might not play in regular season, and still won.

Generally I though they looked average in the field, average at the plate, but extremely deep in pitching. No one pitcher made headlines but the fact that they have so many gives them a big edge.
PB Prep Ballfan10+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
I don't know that Deep Run "struggled" against Benedictine. For one thing, Benedictine is perennially among the best private school teams you'll find. They certainly have their share of talent this year. For another, Deep Run used a LOT of players in that game, guys who might not play in regular season, and still won.

Generally I though they looked average in the field, average at the plate, but extremely deep in pitching. No one pitcher made headlines but the fact that they have so many gives them a big edge.


Agree with Midlo--- Benedictine may very well be defending their State championship in mid-May. Who did BHS use on the mound? Z. Joseph (All-Metro 2010) and A. Wood (headed to VMI) are as good a 1-2 on the mound as any one--public or private. So if Deep Run "won"- I say they did OK.
PB Prep Ballfan10+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by BaseabllIsLife5:
Compared to last years Benedictine team, that won private league states. And Deep Run's very average team last year. Deep Run won something like 17-4 against the state champs. So for a BHS team that isnt as strong as last year, and a Deep Run team that is suppose to be way better according to you people. I would say that is struggling.


Comparing one game last year to one game this year--well, not going to argue with you. Did not see the scrimmage, so no idea who pitched, played, etc.

BHS lost some games to publics last year because they played 3-4 games a week and went deeper into pitching staff, but made them better at end end. But also, they beat Atlee 17-0 in Henrico Spring Break Tourney that I would not say was an accurate account of Atlee.

If you were there, and think Deep Run struggled, I
respect your opinion. But again, first scrimmages, they won 7-5 and Benedictine is good (especially with either Woods or Joseph on the mound), so DR's "struggles" are relative.

And, BTW, from what I've seen on other posts, Dinwiddie supposed to be one of best in Central Region this year--so 7-2 scrimmage "win" is impressive there also- depending on pitching line-ups etc.
Last edited by Prep Ballfan
B BaseabllIsLife510+ posts
you are correct, Im not trying to down DR, I feel like they struggled against BHS, but then it sounds like the played strong and well against Dinwiddie who is usually a good squad. Like others have said, scrimmages are irrelevant to the season, as coaches mess with pitching, and line ups, and batting order.

Can't wait for the season to start this coming week.
Previous

Add Reply

Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×