Jump to content

Talk:Stephen Strasburg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleStephen Strasburg was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 25, 2012Good article nomineeListed
May 4, 2020Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Nickname

[edit]

"The Anchorman" is not a valid nickname for Strasburg. Being mentioned in an ESPN podcast is not a notable enough event to coin a nickname. It may eventually catch on, but as of now it shouldn't be added to the article. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. -Phoenixrod (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree, as long as it's noted as such. I don't see any problem with noting the context in which this name was suggested, and providing the direct link to the actual audio which it was mentioned (which is available). Bill Simmons himself can also be linked internally to wikipedia, and his readers/followers are in the millions, make this is a very creditable source. Would appreciate it if this is re-evaluated, I believe now that he is pitching in pro leagues, this nick name will be mentioned more frequently. Cbirckhead (talk) 03:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Nationals

[edit]

Strasburg has yet to sign as of July 30, 2009. Until he does, please do not alter his infobox to read "Washington Nationals."--Johnny Spasm (talk) 15:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. He's not in the Nationals organization. They control his rights and that's quite temporary. I remember reading some talk that he might go to Japan for a year and wait to be drafted again next year. Is it a bluff? We don't know. --Muboshgu (talk) 17:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moot point now, isn't it? Nonpoint74 (talk) 15:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey number

[edit]

Okay everybody, since nobody was willing to resolve the content dispute, I had to request protection for this page. Now, can you just come here and discuss this so the page doesn't have to be fully protected for 7 days just because of two characters!? Ksy92003 (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we cross-posted. See my comment right above yours. BTW, I should add that from looking at the history page for THIS article that there doesn't appear to be any sort of "consensus." 1995hoo (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we sent our post at nearly the same time. With your permission, I'll copy/paste that comment here because we don't need two sections about this on the same talk page. Ksy92003 (talk) 18:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's fine. I'll delete the prior section. Looking at the history of this article, I see another user (X96lee15) was emphatic that the article should not list him as #37 when the current status is that the team doesn't regard him as wearing that. As I say on the page linked below, my preference would be to see some format indicating that the Nationals have said that he will be assigned this number when the time comes. 1995hoo (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking about this further while sorting the laundry and I wonder if it would be a reasonable compromise to leave the dash and to drop a footnote explaining that Strasburg was given a #37 jersey at his introductory press conference but that he is not presently listed on the team's roster that way. Note that at the time of the presser, third-base coach Pat Listach was assigned #37 and he continued to wear it until the first game of the Cubs series on August 25. I think that fact clearly indicates that in the eyes of the team, the presentation of the jersey at the press conference didn't constitute assigning Strasburg that number. (The footnote solution doesn't work for the roster template, which is why I raise it here. I'll post a version of this comment on that talk page too.) 1995hoo (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A further comment (yes, I suppose I'm talking to myself here). I was trying to find any news about Pat Listach's number change. See this entry from the Washington Post Nationals beat writer's blog ([1]). Listach was given the opportunity of waiting until next year to change numbers, meaning he could have kept wearing #37 for the remainder of this year. I believe this is further confirmation that Strasburg isn't yet "officially" #37. The team couldn't very well have had TWO #37s at the same time, could they? 1995hoo (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Cut from previous post) I've raised the same issue at Template talk:Washington Nationals roster navbox and so I shan't repeat it here, as trying to track the same thing in two places seems counterproductive. 1995hoo (talk) 18:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page had to have editing disabled because of a debate over a jersey number? Yikes. --Muboshgu (talk) 14:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that, halfway through the week, nobody who felt that Strasburg has already been assigned #37 has had anything to say in support of that position, isn't it? 1995hoo (talk) 20:02, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VERIFY, Strasburg was given #37 at the press conference and Litash took #4, remember it is verifiabilty and not truth. Ositadinma (talk) 20:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

start by start?

[edit]

Why are we posting start by start summaries of his performance in the Arizona Fall League? That really is not appropriate.Spanneraol (talk) 14:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. It's impractical to include a start-by-start chronology, especially if a pitcher has a long career, and it's unnecessary because that sort of thing is recorded in all sorts of other places. It seems silly to try to make Wikipedia into a stats database when other sources already do that. I'm deleting the game-by-game thing, but someone can always restore it in the future if it's found to be appropriate. 1995hoo (talk) 17:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I'm wondering why, at this point (after his first start in the majors), anything at all is mentioned about his play in the Arizona league. Conversely, I'm wondering why the name of the batter who hit a home run in Strasburg's debut was deleted. Thoughts? Sholom (talk) 04:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
His first professional appearance should be noted... the batter who hit a home run against him really is not historically notable. Spanneraol (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two responses: (1) Do other players have their Arizona League appearances noted? (2) Why is his first strikeout victim historically notable, but not the first guy to get a hit/home run off of him? Sholom (talk) 03:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some of them do.. depends on how much minor league info is included on the players... just his very first would be notable.. Strikeouts are more notable for pitchers than hits.. would you note the first player to hit a double off him? Spanneraol (talk) 03:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, but doubles are not as noteworthy. How many people know off the top of their head who the "double king" is? But fans know the "home run king", and know the single-season record for HR's. I'm just thinking that if Strasburg goes on to have a HoF-like career, it might be Delwyn Young's claim to fame. (Not to put Young down). Similar to Mike Bacsik's claim to fame is that he surrendered Bond's 756th. (OK, not exactly comparable, but I think you get the jist). In fact, in Bond's article, the pitcher who surrendered 754, which was one short of the record at the time, is even listed. Sholom (talk) 03:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Does Roger Clemens article mention who hit the first home run off of him? Does Randy Johnson? The home run simply isnt notable to the pitcher, the way strikeouts are... It MAY be notable to Young IF Strasberg becomes a hall of famer... but it would not be notable to the pitcher. Spanneraol (talk) 04:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

bob feller

[edit]

you might want to mention that bob feller had 15 k's in his first start —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.107.101 (talk) 21:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I just put it in. Sholom (talk) 03:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other records

[edit]

It should be added to the page that in Strasburg's first game, he set a very noteworthy record: Lowest amount of pitches thrown in a 14K performance. I believe the previous record holder was J.R. Richards, who threw 96 in his third game. Strasburg has also set the record for the most strike-outs records in his first three games (32Ks). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.246.242 (talk) 09:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pitch Speed

[edit]

Strasburg's circle change does not reach 110? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsafadsfdsaf89 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a good chance that was someone screwing around that went uncaught at the time. I shall remove the unsourced MPH's. --Muboshgu (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

End of 2012 Pitching

[edit]

On Sept 2, 2012, Nationals Manager Davey Johnson announced that Strasburg would pitch his last game of the season against the New York Mets on September 13, 2012. Source: xhttp://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120902&content_id=37787402&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb User: Nats34 —Preceding undated comment added 23:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good article candidacy?

[edit]

It's not there yet, but it's in sight. Here are a few tasks we could consider:

  • Expanding the lead.
  • Talking about early life/high school.
  • Improving references in the International play section.

I'm sure there's more. Feel free to add. --Jprg1966 (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • A quick look reveals that this article doesn't even mention where he went to high school: it starts with SDSU. That's a problem, a fixable one. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I reworked the lead a bit. Find any remaining loner sentences in the article and work to merge them with a current paragraph. Surely the reason for missing nearly the entire 2011 season is more worthy of being in the lead than the generic mention of him having endorsement deals, and the name of his agent (which MLB player doesn't have endorsement deals)? Scrub any potential peacock terms (I removed "blossomed into..."). There is no ASG mention in the lead. If this was mentioned along with his 2011 woes, it would be a nice contrast. Zepppep (talk) 01:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Stephen Strasburg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 15:20, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LEAD
High school
College
International play
Draft
Minor leagues
Innings limit and shutdown
Pitch repertoire and approach
Images
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stephen Strasburg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update

[edit]

Hi Jprg1966. Looking through some older GAs and have come across this one. It is great to the 2013 season and then falls over until 2019. Great to see you are still around. Are you interested in getting this back up to GA standard? AIRcorn (talk) 11:30, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Various issues were also raised at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_44#Stephen_Strasburg in Nov 2019.—Bagumba (talk) 12:27, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will give JPRG a little time to reply and then start a reassessment. AIRcorn (talk) 20:01, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Stephen Strasburg/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

The article fails WP:GACR 1b for following the MOS for layout. Specifically per MOS:BODY, a section should at least be a decent size, and definitely not a short paragraph or single sentence. This is an issue with a lot of the prose after his 2013 season. The issue has been tagged and unresolved since October 2019, with a discussion also at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_44#Stephen_Strasburg.—Bagumba (talk) 06:04, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Delisted after no activity.—Bagumba (talk) 06:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nats' September 8 announcement

[edit]

A lot of media outlets had reported, based on unnamed "sources," that there would be a press conference at Nats Park on September 9 announcing Strasburg's retirement. The Nats released an announcement on September 8 stating that no press conference had ever been confirmed by the team, that none will take place, and that they look forward to seeing Strasburg at spring training—in other words, they haven’t been able to reach an agreement with him as to the terms of his retirement. I mention all this to underscore why it’s not OK to race to update Wikipedia with information from media reports that say "sources say" or similar. Those media reports are not reliable. It is factually correct to say that media reports said something, but it is not factually correct to represent whatever they’re saying as fact. In other words, "In August 2023, various media reported that Strasburg planned to announce his retirement" would be correct—the media did say that. "Strasburg decided to retire and will announce it on September 9 before the Nats game that afternoon" would not be—there is no actual confirmation of that other than media reports that were obviously wrong. All of this is why the WP:CRYSTAL policy exists. 1995hoo (talk) 12:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stephen_Strasburg&oldid=1204753257"