Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Washington Nationals Thread: The Future is Near!


Riggo#44

Recommended Posts

"Bunch of ****ing losers. ****ing Rocky, is your hero. The whole pride of your city is based around a guy who doesn't even exist. ****ing Joe Frazier is from there, but he's black so you can't ****ing deal with him, so you make a ****ing statue for some three-foot Italian, you stupid, Philly cheese-eating ****ing jackasses"

 

Can I make that sign for April 2?

 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

I want Max's first pitch to be a high heater within 6" of Harper's chin to let him know he's not our friend anymore. Then proceed to strike him out with fastballs up and away and sliders down and in. 

 

He knows EXACTLY where to put that slider with two strikes, right at that back foot.

 

Here's a interesting tidbit that Philly will get REAL used to, REAL quick:

Harper two strike splits:

After 0-2: .181/.212/.319 (Career: .182 /.183/.271)

After 1-2: .185/.251/.346 (Career: .163 /.162/.280)

After 2-2: .209/.327/.390 (Career: .182/.182/.331)

With 2 strikes: .192/.289/.343 (Career: .192/.289/.343)

 

Juan Soto on the other hand:

After 0-2: .222/.300/.444

After 1-2: .223/.304/.364  

After 2-2: .254/.397/.402

With 2 strikes: .212/.333/.363    

 

Edited by Riggo#44
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2019 at 4:48 PM, Metalhead said:

Seeing that Phillies uni is gross. Something about that font used for "phillies" unsettles me...it looks like the unholy aftermath of eating Taco Bell when everything comes out like soft-serve ice cream.

 

I don't like baseball so I have no skin in the game, but I don't think we should be criticizing anyone logos.  The nationals straight up stole theirs from Walgreens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

@Riggo#44 check that math on the last line for Soto

 

It's avg/obp/slg, not OPS

 

Btw, Betts has career 2 strike slash of .259/.310/.708

 

Trout has .221/.338/.730

 

That Soto has a OBP of .333 at two strikes is really impressive.

 

Btw, today's game against Boston is on Masn and replay tonight (though I think at like 11:30)

 

Edit:

 

Wow, Harper for 18 was .151/.280/.576

 

Betts for 18 was .300/.545/.922!!!!

Edited by bearrock
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hatchetwound said:

 

I don't like baseball so I have no skin in the game, but I don't think we should be criticizing anyone logos.  The nationals straight up stole theirs from Walgreens.

 

Oh hey...a Walgreen's joke!

 

The reality is that Walgreen's started using the single script W as a logo well after the original Senators had developed theirs. But thanks for coming out chief.

8 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

@Riggo#44 check that math on the last line for Soto

 

It's from Baseball Reference. WITH an 0-2 count (as opposed to AFTER), Soto has a .143/.143/.393 line. Harper's is .182/.183/.271

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

 

 

It's from Baseball Reference. WITH an 0-2 count (as opposed to AFTER), Soto has a .143/.143/.393 line. Harper's is .182/.183/.271

 

Ah gotcha, makes sense. I was thinking the last line was an average across the first 3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

Ah gotcha, makes sense. I was thinking the last line was an average across the first 3. 

 

No, it also includes a full count.

With a full count, Harper has an outstanding .248/.527/.485, as opposed to Soto's .217/.509/.275. Which I think makes Harper's 2-strike numbers even worse...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Riggo#44 said:

 

No, it also includes a full count.

With a full count, Harper has an outstanding .248/.527/.485, as opposed to Soto's .217/.509/.275. Which I think makes Harper's 2-strike numbers even worse...

 

I think part of that is also Soto being cautious last year.  Instead of thinking of going for it at full count, Soto might have thought let's take the sure walk.  I think it's gonna be really fun to see how Soto does in his sophomore year.  He's been raking in spring training.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

I think part of that is also Soto being cautious last year.  Instead of thinking of going for it at full count, Soto might have thought let's take the sure walk.  I think it's gonna be really fun to see how Soto does in his sophomore year.  He's been raking in spring training.

 

Soto had a ton of called third strikes against him, many on balls a half inch off the plate. He’ll get better at knowing which ones to take a cut at as he gets older. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, hatchetwound said:

 

I don't like baseball so I have no skin in the game, but I don't think we should be criticizing anyone logos.  The nationals straight up stole theirs from Walgreens.

lol. Riggo already responded so we can just leave it at that.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Oh hey...a Walgreen's joke!

 

The reality is that Walgreen's started using the single script W as a logo well after the original Senators had developed theirs. But thanks for coming out chief.

This logo?

 

 

28f398f1ada41f9b8fcc639bd2cc7495.jpg

 

 

I don't think that looks anything like the walgreens logo.

Edited by hatchetwound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hatchetwound said:

I don't think that looks anything like the walgreens logo.

 

The original Senators (now Twins) used the single W dating back to early 1900's

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/1813/Washington_Senators

 

The second Senators (now Rangers) used the curly W (the one that Nationals now use) in the 1960's

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/79/Washington_Senators/

 

Walgreen logo history is here https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Walgreens

 

The singular W didn't appear until the 2000's apparently.

 

The cursive W isn't the most original thing in the world.  Let's not accuse one company of ripping off logo from the other.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

The original Senators (now Twins) used the single W dating back to early 1900's

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/1813/Washington_Senators

 

The second Senators (now Rangers) used the curly W (the one that Nationals now use) in the 1960's

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/79/Washington_Senators/

 

Walgreen logo history is here https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Walgreens

 

The singular W didn't appear until the 2000's apparently.

 

The cursive W isn't the most original thing in the world.  Let's not accuse one company of ripping off logo from the other.

 

Interesting.  I never new that.

Edited by hatchetwound
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last post about the logo, then I'll shut up.  I didn't mean to derail the conversation here.

24 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

 

The second Senators (now Rangers) used the curly W (the one that Nationals now use) in the 1960's

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/79/Washington_Senators/

 

Walgreen logo history is here https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Walgreens

 

 

According to the link you provided, the script W was 1953 before the 1960s Washington Senators.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hatchetwound said:

Can I ask a question since I'm not a baseball fan and clearly don't know the teams history.  Why arn't they the Washington Senators again?  According to bearrock, they were the senators not once but twice.

 

So, interestingly, there was a baseball team in the 1800's named the Nationals in DC.  When the new team in the then American League was established in DC in 1901, the team's official name was the Senators, but people used Nationals to refer to the local baseball team and people used both Senators and Nationals for the DC baseball team.  The dual moniker was widely used to an extent where newspaper stories would use both names for the local baseball team and even baseball cards would print the team name as either, depending on the card company.  

 

When the Senators left for Minnesota and new team was established, they pushed the Senators moniker harder, so they were the Senators.  

 

When the Lerner brought baseball back to DC in the 2000's, I think they chose the Nationals, one because the name does have roots in DC baseball.  Also, by the 21st century, the opinion of anything related to politics and congress was toxic enough that Nationals is a better team name than the Senators (2nd is obviously pure speculation on my part). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bearrock said:

 

So, interestingly, there was a baseball team in the 1800's named the Nationals in DC.  When the new team in the then American League was established in DC in 1901, the team's official name was the Senators, but people used Nationals to refer to the local baseball team and people used both Senators and Nationals for the DC baseball team.  The dual moniker was widely used to an extent where newspaper stories would use both names for the local baseball team and even baseball cards would print the team name as either, depending on the card company.  

 

When the Senators left for Minnesota and new team was established, they pushed the Senators moniker harder, so they were the Senators.  

 

When the Lerner brought baseball back to DC in the 2000's, I think they chose the Nationals, one because the name does have roots in DC baseball.  Also, by the 21st century, the opinion of anything related to politics and congress was toxic enough that Nationals is a better team name than the Senators (2nd is obviously pure speculation on my part). 

Very interesting!  Thank you for that!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...