But throwing a punch at the opposition isn’t posturing. It’s violent action.

Rodriguez clearly threw a punch on the field. It’s described as “silghtly more aggressive posturing,” because Deadspin has mocked “basebrawls” in the past. The narrative controls the reporting, if you want to call embedding external videos a report.

To almost everyone below: nice reading comprehension.

I am not justifying hitting Arrieta or stupid baseball unwritten rules... But doesn’t this story HAVE to mention that Arrieta- who only hit 10 batters all year- hit two in 6 batters prior to this? Whether you like it or not (I don’t!), that’s still the way this game is played. So at least mention that and dismiss it,…

“Should have bunted.”

If it means I can go 38 seconds without a commercial for either of the two I’m for it.

This seems like the type of article Deadspin usually pokes fun at. Especially since the Cubs went 5-3 in those games.

Even in hindsight, you make the move the Cubs did 10 times out of 10.

I was going to say- to me, this seems like a pretty good argument for what they did? I mean, if you’d gone to management right up front and said you can trade an entire year of his career for home instead of away at the WC game, they would have tripped over their own dicks rushing to take the extra year.

Jesus fucking christ is this article for real

The Cubs went 5-3 in those 8 games, a winning percentage higher than they achieved over the length of the season. They may have won another game or two with Bryant. They may not have. The argument that they may have cost themselves home field in this WC game is purely hypothetical. And, in any case, the Cubs were only…

Counter-point: what if Bryant would have started the season with Chicago, and caught the same ball on his wrist that Mike Olt got, and missed 60 games instead of 8?

You can’t spell “Cubs’ third basemen of the future” without ‘semen’

I’m pro being able to use logic that someone who is using face paint for a black out game isn’t trying to pretend they are a caricature of a black person from the 1930.

Exactly. How am I supposed to tell my kids to be respectful of the Blue Men if a bunch of ASU students are out there aping them with blue face paint and black mock turtlenecks? “No! Sweetheart! You can’t play weird drums and stuff your face with marshmallows and Toblerone because it’s racist! Those kids don’t know…

who asked someone not to be racist? is it really racist to have a blackout and paint yourself black? to say its racist is insinuating people who are african american are all black and its not right to paint yourself like them. first, not a single african american is the color black because black is not a color. second…

It is not racist to paint your face black. It is racist to paint your face black in an attempt to imitate a black person. Those are wildly different things.

Disagree. Gold is a shade of yellow and therefore insensitive to Asians. Blue is insensitive to the hypoxic and to the Na’vi.

We all got our laughs at the kid’s expense, sure. But is it necessary to print his name? He’s just 19, after all.