 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » RED SOX LOSE
DeVeau31
Keep the fukc up TIMOTHY!!!
October 21, 2008 at 03:56PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
did I say worse in regards to his hitting? Was he traded because of his hitting?
Keep the fukc up TIMOTHY!!!
dirtdevil
October 21, 2008 at 03:56PM View BBCode
now post has dodger stats. including post-season, please. just for giggles.
FuriousGiorge
October 21, 2008 at 04:00PM View BBCode
The whole point, Tom, is that your "the Rays are good because they play well together" theory is just deliciously Morganesque.
tm4559
they were quite excellent. but comparing the two is like saying manny was putting it on a tee in both places, and he was dogging it in boston, which he was not.
drew was out part of the season, the hitters in front of ramirez did nothing, except for pedroia, and the pitching in the American League is just, plain, good. all those pitchers from tampa bay, the yankees were not terrible, toronto has pitchers that range from ungodly (halladay) to unhittable (burnett). those pitchers are flat out good, that is just in the division. the teams from the other divisions (the angels, the white sox, etc, can pitch plenty too.
so manny went to the national league and hit like crazy? sure he did, because he is a great hitter. and the pitching in the national league sucks rocks.
October 21, 2008 at 04:05PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
now post has dodger stats. including post-season, please. just for giggles.
they were quite excellent. but comparing the two is like saying manny was putting it on a tee in both places, and he was dogging it in boston, which he was not.
drew was out part of the season, the hitters in front of ramirez did nothing, except for pedroia, and the pitching in the American League is just, plain, good. all those pitchers from tampa bay, the yankees were not terrible, toronto has pitchers that range from ungodly (halladay) to unhittable (burnett). those pitchers are flat out good, that is just in the division. the teams from the other divisions (the angels, the white sox, etc, can pitch plenty too.
so manny went to the national league and hit like crazy? sure he did, because he is a great hitter. and the pitching in the national league sucks rocks.
dirtdevil
oh, absolutely. i just like seeing the red sox fans blow a gasket.
the team chemistry argument does have some merit, but it's very limited. there are teams who performed above the level of their skill for an extended period of time, which i guess you could partially attribute to chemistry. but the mostt dysfunctional team in mlb history might have been the early 70's oakland a's and they seemed to do ok.
October 21, 2008 at 04:13PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tm4559
so manny went to the national league and hit like crazy? sure he did, because he is a great hitter. and the pitching in the national league sucks rocks.
oh, absolutely. i just like seeing the red sox fans blow a gasket.
the team chemistry argument does have some merit, but it's very limited. there are teams who performed above the level of their skill for an extended period of time, which i guess you could partially attribute to chemistry. but the mostt dysfunctional team in mlb history might have been the early 70's oakland a's and they seemed to do ok.
happy
One situation where team chemistry would increase the chance to win?
Do they just like...think harder about winning, and it just happens? Does their aura cause blindness in the opposition? Does the players from the other team get jealous of their overwhelming happiness and ditch their team and begin playing for the rays?
and this whole manny thing is silly too. Didnt the Red Sox make the playoffs? So who cares? its the stupid regular season, for teams like the redsox its just a grind to the games that actually matter.
October 21, 2008 at 04:15PM View BBCode
DeVeau.One situation where team chemistry would increase the chance to win?
Do they just like...think harder about winning, and it just happens? Does their aura cause blindness in the opposition? Does the players from the other team get jealous of their overwhelming happiness and ditch their team and begin playing for the rays?
and this whole manny thing is silly too. Didnt the Red Sox make the playoffs? So who cares? its the stupid regular season, for teams like the redsox its just a grind to the games that actually matter.
tm4559
i am sure, you know, there are no hard feelings in that clubhouse about all that money they gave the longoria kid before he even played in the majors (all these guys got nice signing bonuses of course, but they went above and beyond on longoria's contract). aside from whatever they gave all those other players to sign though, they have a team that is average age about 28, pitchers and hitters, and they are paying them, for the most part, squadoosh. we will see what kind of chemistry they have when they have to start paying them, or they pick up and go play somewhere else.
October 21, 2008 at 04:18PM View BBCode
the thing is, the Rays are a nice team. anybody who has played simd knows the top of the draft can produce a very nice team, given some time (obviously the players are not a sure thing in real life, but quality is quality).i am sure, you know, there are no hard feelings in that clubhouse about all that money they gave the longoria kid before he even played in the majors (all these guys got nice signing bonuses of course, but they went above and beyond on longoria's contract). aside from whatever they gave all those other players to sign though, they have a team that is average age about 28, pitchers and hitters, and they are paying them, for the most part, squadoosh. we will see what kind of chemistry they have when they have to start paying them, or they pick up and go play somewhere else.
happy
October 21, 2008 at 05:21PM View BBCode
yeah, im not really imagining them giving the team a "chemistry bonus" on their pay level.
DeVeau31
The Rays are very good because of their players, no doubt about it. I think it helps a decent amount that they all get along and play together though.
And yes Tim, Manny was dogging it and taking unnecessary time off. Faking injuries, etc.
October 21, 2008 at 06:04PM View BBCode
you've got to be kidding me. If in a clubhouse there is dissension, you're trying to tell me that team would play to the best of their ability? If you say yes, 1) you're a censored moron; 2) you've never been in this situation; and 3) you're a censored moron.The Rays are very good because of their players, no doubt about it. I think it helps a decent amount that they all get along and play together though.
And yes Tim, Manny was dogging it and taking unnecessary time off. Faking injuries, etc.
tm4559
so that is 153. if he played in every game for the dodgers (i don't know if he did or not) then that leaves 9 games total he could take off for no reason for the sox. right or wrong?
483 at bats in 133 games in 2007 is about 3.6 at bats (or thereabouts, whatever 84/133 is the remainder, my computer doesn't want to open the spreadsheet right now) per game. he took 365 in 100 games before he was traded. 3.65 or thereabouts (actually exactly). i do see he played in 152 games in 2005, so maybe he was dogging it every since.
he is 36 now. a brother can't get a few days off when he hits like that when he does play?
October 21, 2008 at 06:16PM View BBCode
he played 130 games in 2006, and 133 games in 2007. he played in 100 games before he was traded, and then played in 53 games for he dodgers.so that is 153. if he played in every game for the dodgers (i don't know if he did or not) then that leaves 9 games total he could take off for no reason for the sox. right or wrong?
483 at bats in 133 games in 2007 is about 3.6 at bats (or thereabouts, whatever 84/133 is the remainder, my computer doesn't want to open the spreadsheet right now) per game. he took 365 in 100 games before he was traded. 3.65 or thereabouts (actually exactly). i do see he played in 152 games in 2005, so maybe he was dogging it every since.
he is 36 now. a brother can't get a few days off when he hits like that when he does play?
Benne
October 21, 2008 at 06:17PM View BBCode
[url=http://ussmariner.com/2008/05/19/evaluating-chemistry/]Read this.[/url]
dirtdevil
many good teams do, yes. i've been in this situation a few times, in both baseball and hockey. teams with a high level of maturity (or professionalism, if you prefer) on the roster are able to play to their best regardless of poor chemistry. poor chemistry can implode some more fragile teams, and good chemistry can very occassionally cause a team to play slightly above their normal level. but in my experience this effect tends to be more pronounced in younger or less experienced teams. chemistry also matters a great, great, great deal more to a hockey team than a baseball club. baseball is just so much more an individual game. but in either sport, at the end of the day skill is a much more important factor in a team's success than is chemistry.
October 21, 2008 at 06:28PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
you've got to be kidding me. If in a clubhouse there is dissension, you're trying to tell me that team would play to the best of their ability? If you say yes, 1) you're a censored moron; 2) you've never been in this situation; and 3) you're a censored moron.
many good teams do, yes. i've been in this situation a few times, in both baseball and hockey. teams with a high level of maturity (or professionalism, if you prefer) on the roster are able to play to their best regardless of poor chemistry. poor chemistry can implode some more fragile teams, and good chemistry can very occassionally cause a team to play slightly above their normal level. but in my experience this effect tends to be more pronounced in younger or less experienced teams. chemistry also matters a great, great, great deal more to a hockey team than a baseball club. baseball is just so much more an individual game. but in either sport, at the end of the day skill is a much more important factor in a team's success than is chemistry.
DeVeau31
I agree with that article, but this Manny situation was different than those stated within that article(though I did not read every single word, I'll admit).
When it comes to the Rays, I said they have great talent on that team, but having good chemistry there definitely added to their success. No question about it.
October 21, 2008 at 06:28PM View BBCode
Look, Jon, I am not trying to say that chemistry is better than having more talent, because it's not. What I am saying is that Manny was killing that clubhouse. Ask the players in there. It's not that the team performed worse because Manny was there, but they were sick of his censored and him getting away with stupid censored , things that other players get suspended or fined or sat for doing. He was aggravating and annoying to the players in the clubhouse. He didn't make them want to play their asses off.I agree with that article, but this Manny situation was different than those stated within that article(though I did not read every single word, I'll admit).
When it comes to the Rays, I said they have great talent on that team, but having good chemistry there definitely added to their success. No question about it.
DeVeau31
I do not agree with this. It will always effect at least one player, always. If it effects one player, then the team is not playing to the best of their ability.
I completely agree with this, never said I didn't. However, great chemistry, in addition to good skill, will produce an even better team.
October 21, 2008 at 06:31PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
many good teams do, yes. i've been in this situation a few times, in both baseball and hockey. teams with a high level of maturity (or professionalism, if you prefer) on the roster are able to play to their best regardless of poor chemistry. poor chemistry can implode some more fragile teams, and good chemistry can very occassionally cause a team to play slightly above their normal level.
I do not agree with this. It will always effect at least one player, always. If it effects one player, then the team is not playing to the best of their ability.
Originally posted by dirtdevilbut in either sport, at the end of the day skill is a much more important factor in a team's success than is chemistry.
I completely agree with this, never said I didn't. However, great chemistry, in addition to good skill, will produce an even better team.
whiskybear
Tom, of course, was a reliever and spot starter for the 1964 Phillies, who so famously collapsed in September following a clubhouse kerfuffle between Jim Bunning and Dick Allen.
October 21, 2008 at 06:32PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
you've got to be kidding me. If in a clubhouse there is dissension, you're trying to tell me that team would play to the best of their ability? If you say yes, 1) you're a censored moron; 2) you've never been in this situation; and 3) you're a censored moron.
Tom, of course, was a reliever and spot starter for the 1964 Phillies, who so famously collapsed in September following a clubhouse kerfuffle between Jim Bunning and Dick Allen.
DeVeau31
My dad was 4 in 1964.
It happens in every sport, at every level, so don't tell me it doesn't exist.
October 21, 2008 at 06:33PM View BBCode
Originally posted by whiskybear
Tom, of course, was a reliever and spot starter for the 1964 Phillies, who so famously collapsed in September following a clubhouse kerfuffle between Jim Bunning and Dick Allen.
My dad was 4 in 1964.
It happens in every sport, at every level, so don't tell me it doesn't exist.
dirtdevil
if they weren't performing worse with him there, then he wasn't killing the clubhouse, however much people enjoyed his departure.
October 21, 2008 at 06:33PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
...Manny was killing that clubhouse. Ask the players in there. It's not that the team performed worse because Manny was there...
if they weren't performing worse with him there, then he wasn't killing the clubhouse, however much people enjoyed his departure.
dirtdevil
this may come as a shock, but baseball, in the essence of it, is not really a team sport.
October 21, 2008 at 06:36PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
Originally posted by dirtdevil
many good teams do, yes. i've been in this situation a few times, in both baseball and hockey. teams with a high level of maturity (or professionalism, if you prefer) on the roster are able to play to their best regardless of poor chemistry. poor chemistry can implode some more fragile teams, and good chemistry can very occassionally cause a team to play slightly above their normal level.
I do not agree with this. It will always effect at least one player, always. If it effects one player, then the team is not playing to the best of their ability.
this may come as a shock, but baseball, in the essence of it, is not really a team sport.
whiskybear
You've never been in the situation, either. That was my point. I am not about to get into arguing team chemistry with you, Tom (I mean, come on guys, it's Tom), but don't appeal to some authority you have on this subject when you have as much major-league experience as anyone else here.
October 21, 2008 at 06:39PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
My dad was 4 in 1964.
It happens in every sport, at every level, so don't tell me it doesn't exist.
You've never been in the situation, either. That was my point. I am not about to get into arguing team chemistry with you, Tom (I mean, come on guys, it's Tom), but don't appeal to some authority you have on this subject when you have as much major-league experience as anyone else here.
DeVeau31
October 21, 2008 at 07:09PM View BBCode
I have been paid to play a sport and know from experience that when we all get along, the game comes easier. When there are other factors and getting pissed off for others not putting forth their best effort or acting above the rest of the team, the game comes harder and brings someone down...sometimes everyone, sometimes just one person...or themselves.
thatrogue
ETA: And two exceptional trades with the Mets (Kazmir) and Twins (Garza).
[Edited on 10-21-2008 by thatrogue]
October 21, 2008 at 07:13PM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31Right...with lots of tanky, high first round draft picks.
... if I were going to start a team, it would be built just like this Tampa team is built.
ETA: And two exceptional trades with the Mets (Kazmir) and Twins (Garza).
[Edited on 10-21-2008 by thatrogue]
tm4559
October 21, 2008 at 07:17PM View BBCode
crap, i did not even realize in 1992, i could have made a short drive (30 miles or so) over to kinston, north carolina, and watched manny ramirez terrorize the pitchers over there in the carolina league in his very first year as a professional baseball player. 13 homers, 4 triples, and 18 doubles in 291 at bats, 81 games. hell, he was probably already dogging it then.