MLB first in 28 years: No Saves

Maybe next time we could work on having a whole *two* sentences for our articles?

But this was sentence stated all that you needed to know for this story.

Funny, ESPN managed to do a whole article on it, and we couldn't manage *two* sentences? I think one-sentence articles are a waste of time. I don't want to spend my time clicking to read an article, only to find out that there's no more information in the article than there was in the headline. The ESPN article was worth reading; this article wasn't.

Who even wrote this? I can't see a name - although, I'm not sure if this qualifies.

I posted it. I didn't see the point in going through and rehashing the whole thing. It was an interesting stat, the orginial article was well done and I didn't have a lot of time anyways. If people wanted to read more, the link is right there, it just takes a little movement of the index finger and poof, there's an article about it.

Maybe we should create an area for stories that need more development - rather than just a "News" and "Opinion" section? Perhaps an "Interesting Tidbit" or a "Blurb" section could cover these type of things. One of the benefits of a Wiki format is usually that multiple people contribute to a page, not just the original poster. I have noticed that other than spelling or formatting errors, most pages are only contributed to by the original author.

not to be an AF jerk, but instead of complaining about it, why not add to it?

This was a statement about a historic stat which was found in a news article that was sourced. It was a piece of news and it was not meant for an opinion. If it was not sourced, i'd see Xinoph's point. But Im a cpcp gave credit to the article and did not see any point in adding to an article that speaks for itself.

In terms of the actual article, the stat is pretty incredible. Not to distract from this conversation or anything. And a lot of times people don't have time to write something long. I'm not really a fan of the closer position, I think having a consistent closer is necessary, but saves aren't the most difficult stat to attain. Good closers also lose their jobs within two years (F. Cordero, K. Foulke) and their success is inconsistent from year to year.