Re: [討論] 中職二軍的選手真的有職棒實力?已回收
※ 引述《kimkenxxx (天天狒狒)》之銘言:
: 這幾年的二軍看下來,有點感觸,基本上常駐二軍的選手,可以說是根本沒職棒的實力
: 頂多就是業餘球員的感覺,投手各種130戰隊,保送滿天飛,每個WHIP都很恐怖,練也練
: 不起來
: 二軍打的好的,上來一軍就什麼也揮不到,拉低整個職棒水平,二軍的人最少要有職棒實
: 力吧?
你的論點是
二軍上到一軍打不出成績,就等於二軍沒有職棒實力?
我再重複一次
二軍上到一軍打不出成績,就等於二軍沒有職棒實力?
MiLB、日職二軍的選手拉到聯盟最高層級,然後被打爆
人家會說他沒有職業實力,沒資格稱職業選手
還是認為尚未具備大聯盟、日職一軍實力?
在這環境打球已經夠可憐了
某人砂礫中掏不出珍珠的言論
對比美國用多層級多球隊支撐一支大聯盟水準隊伍
我就已經覺得他該羞愧的切腹自殺了
居然還有比這更可笑的言論,就是取消二軍
人家養成花多少時間?人家用多少基數支撐?
取消二軍,這種倒退走的觀點
自己家裡對空氣喊喊就好,別拿來網路上給大家笑話
--
不甘心就長野心
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 111.252.39.249
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Baseball/M.1461893252.A.862.html
推
04/29 09:29, , 1F
04/29 09:29, 1F
小孩子生出來不用教、不用養,最好一生出來就會跑步、說話、寫字?
推
04/29 09:29, , 2F
04/29 09:29, 2F
推
04/29 09:30, , 3F
04/29 09:30, 3F
或許不是高階聯盟又怎樣? 王建民35歲在美國仍抓的到機會
台灣就算不是最高聯盟,憑什麼20歲就放棄一個選手?
※ 編輯: hugh509 (111.252.39.249), 04/29/2016 09:33:15
→
04/29 09:31, , 4F
04/29 09:31, 4F
→
04/29 09:31, , 5F
04/29 09:31, 5F
→
04/29 09:31, , 6F
04/29 09:31, 6F
→
04/29 09:33, , 7F
04/29 09:33, 7F
推
04/29 09:33, , 8F
04/29 09:33, 8F
→
04/29 09:33, , 9F
04/29 09:33, 9F
推
04/29 09:34, , 10F
04/29 09:34, 10F
推
04/29 09:34, , 11F
04/29 09:34, 11F
→
04/29 09:35, , 12F
04/29 09:35, 12F
→
04/29 09:35, , 13F
04/29 09:35, 13F
→
04/29 09:35, , 14F
04/29 09:35, 14F
→
04/29 09:35, , 15F
04/29 09:35, 15F
→
04/29 09:35, , 16F
04/29 09:35, 16F
推
04/29 09:36, , 17F
04/29 09:36, 17F
→
04/29 09:36, , 18F
04/29 09:36, 18F
推
04/29 09:36, , 19F
04/29 09:36, 19F
→
04/29 09:37, , 20F
04/29 09:37, 20F
→
04/29 09:37, , 21F
04/29 09:37, 21F
推
04/29 09:39, , 22F
04/29 09:39, 22F
推
04/29 09:39, , 23F
04/29 09:39, 23F
推
04/29 09:39, , 24F
04/29 09:39, 24F
噓
04/29 09:40, , 25F
04/29 09:40, 25F
→
04/29 09:40, , 26F
04/29 09:40, 26F
推
04/29 09:40, , 27F
04/29 09:40, 27F
推
04/29 09:40, , 28F
04/29 09:40, 28F
→
04/29 09:40, , 29F
04/29 09:40, 29F
推
04/29 09:41, , 30F
04/29 09:41, 30F
→
04/29 09:41, , 31F
04/29 09:41, 31F
→
04/29 09:41, , 32F
04/29 09:41, 32F
→
04/29 09:41, , 33F
04/29 09:41, 33F
→
04/29 09:41, , 34F
04/29 09:41, 34F
→
04/29 09:42, , 35F
04/29 09:42, 35F
→
04/29 09:42, , 36F
04/29 09:42, 36F
噓
04/29 09:43, , 37F
04/29 09:43, 37F
還有 78 則推文
→
04/29 10:13, , 116F
04/29 10:13, 116F
推
04/29 10:13, , 117F
04/29 10:13, 117F
→
04/29 10:14, , 118F
04/29 10:14, 118F
→
04/29 10:14, , 119F
04/29 10:14, 119F
→
04/29 10:14, , 120F
04/29 10:14, 120F
→
04/29 10:14, , 121F
04/29 10:14, 121F
推
04/29 10:17, , 122F
04/29 10:17, 122F
→
04/29 10:19, , 123F
04/29 10:19, 123F
推
04/29 10:24, , 124F
04/29 10:24, 124F
→
04/29 10:25, , 125F
04/29 10:25, 125F
→
04/29 10:27, , 126F
04/29 10:27, 126F
推
04/29 10:29, , 127F
04/29 10:29, 127F
→
04/29 10:30, , 128F
04/29 10:30, 128F
→
04/29 10:30, , 129F
04/29 10:30, 129F
推
04/29 10:38, , 130F
04/29 10:38, 130F
→
04/29 10:39, , 131F
04/29 10:39, 131F
→
04/29 10:39, , 132F
04/29 10:39, 132F
→
04/29 10:39, , 133F
04/29 10:39, 133F
→
04/29 10:39, , 134F
04/29 10:39, 134F
→
04/29 10:39, , 135F
04/29 10:39, 135F
→
04/29 10:40, , 136F
04/29 10:40, 136F
→
04/29 10:41, , 137F
04/29 10:41, 137F
→
04/29 10:42, , 138F
04/29 10:42, 138F
推
04/29 11:09, , 139F
04/29 11:09, 139F
→
04/29 11:10, , 140F
04/29 11:10, 140F
→
04/29 11:11, , 141F
04/29 11:11, 141F
推
04/29 11:11, , 142F
04/29 11:11, 142F
→
04/29 11:12, , 143F
04/29 11:12, 143F
→
04/29 11:12, , 144F
04/29 11:12, 144F
→
04/29 11:13, , 145F
04/29 11:13, 145F
推
04/29 11:13, , 146F
04/29 11:13, 146F
→
04/29 11:13, , 147F
04/29 11:13, 147F
推
04/29 11:15, , 148F
04/29 11:15, 148F
推
04/29 11:21, , 149F
04/29 11:21, 149F
推
04/29 11:45, , 150F
04/29 11:45, 150F
→
04/29 11:45, , 151F
04/29 11:45, 151F
推
04/29 13:04, , 152F
04/29 13:04, 152F
推
04/29 13:45, , 153F
04/29 13:45, 153F
噓
04/29 13:50, , 154F
04/29 13:50, 154F
→
04/29 13:50, , 155F
04/29 13:50, 155F
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容:
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 6 篇):