Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Chemistry?.....we don't need no stinking chemistry!
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Wayback1918
Feb 8, 2012, 6:50:46 AM2/8/12
to
I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
test.
The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
History"
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1035006-30-worst-clubhouse-cancers-in-baseball-history.
Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
love him).
The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
on the team) has been traded to Houston.
It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
be booed or cheered at the home opener.
Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
test.
The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
History"
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1035006-30-worst-clubhouse-cancers-in-baseball-history.
Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
love him).
The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
on the team) has been traded to Houston.
It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
be booed or cheered at the home opener.
Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
Ray Garraty
Feb 8, 2012, 8:25:43 AM2/8/12
to
On Feb 8, 4:50 am, Wayback1918 <wayback1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1035006-30-worst-clubhouse-cancers....
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
>
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
I'll agree they have some nutcases on this team, and last year I'll
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
agree you'd have to say it's just part of the equation. But it's still
vague to me, If the Red Sox squeeked out two more wins would their
chemistry have been as bad?
I've always thought this stuff is overdone by the media. You win,
nobody questions it. Lose or underachieve and everyone questions it.
Think of the dysfunctional teams Billy Martin managed that won.
Everyone hated each other on those teams including the manager.
It's more important to have a leader player in the clubhouse to keep
everyone in line, than to worry about having choir boys in the
clubhouse. Vartitek was obviously not that personality.
Anyway here's my favorite quote on chemistry:
>>>When Jim Leyland managed the Pirates, he and Barry Bonds got into an infamous spring-training shouting match near the batting cage. When a reporter later asked Leyland how the incident would affect team chemistry, Leyland nailed the answer:
>>>"I'll tell you what f------ chemistry is: Chemistry is a .300 batting average, 30 home runs and 30 stolen bases."
Dano
Feb 8, 2012, 8:58:47 AM2/8/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:357fcb94-b0c5-46cb...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
====================================
<yawn>
news:357fcb94-b0c5-46cb...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
<yawn>
Wayback1918
Feb 8, 2012, 9:15:23 AM2/8/12
to
On Feb 8, 8:58 am, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Wayback1918" wrote in message
>
> news:357fcb94-b0c5-46cb...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1035006-30-worst-clubhouse-cancers....
> "Wayback1918" wrote in message
>
> news:357fcb94-b0c5-46cb...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
>
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
> ====================================
>
> <yawn>
<fart>
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
> ====================================
>
> <yawn>
Dano
Feb 8, 2012, 9:17:47 AM2/8/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:1aec2792-f915-4ece...@jn12g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
> ====================================
>
> <yawn>
<fart>
=====================================
<burp>
news:1aec2792-f915-4ece...@jn12g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
> ====================================
>
> <yawn>
<fart>
<burp>
Wayback1918
Feb 8, 2012, 9:14:25 AM2/8/12
to
prefer to like the team I'm rooting for. Right now, this team seem to
have a low 'likability quotient’.
Would two more wins have changed people's opinion of this
team?...maybe. Two more wins, followed by 11 more in the playoffs
certainly would have. (It's tough to boo players at a parade.) But
the bottom line is that didn't happen.
At one time Varitek was that personality. A Player's ability to lead
doesn't last throughout his entire career. As teammates come and go,
and as his contribution to the team lessens so does ability to lead.
(I'd say it's a little like being 'clutch' but I don't really believe
in that either).
curiousd
Feb 8, 2012, 10:21:55 AM2/8/12
to
You of all of us know this stuff....Am I right that whether "Clutch"
is real or not is still being debated amongst baseball math geeks? For
a while the feeling was NO but I think recently this changed to a
"Maybe". Have no clue myself. Anyone interested I could with some
digging, find the references I am thinking of..
curiousd
Feb 8, 2012, 12:30:37 PM2/8/12
to
Ortiz! Yes now I remember the most interesting part....
Whoever the stat geek was who changed his mind from : "No" to "Maybe"
when it comes to the "Is there clutch hitting?" question;
I recall that the overwhelming case he analyzed to make him think
"Yes there must be such a thing" was David Ortiz, amongst everyone
else.
'course that included the stats for the "back in the day" Ortiz, and
even though pretty good last year, he ain't the D. Ortiz of old ....
Paul Simon:, "I'm older than I once was, but younger than I'll be;
that's not unusual.." (from The Boxer )
Whoever the stat geek was who changed his mind from : "No" to "Maybe"
when it comes to the "Is there clutch hitting?" question;
I recall that the overwhelming case he analyzed to make him think
"Yes there must be such a thing" was David Ortiz, amongst everyone
else.
'course that included the stats for the "back in the day" Ortiz, and
even though pretty good last year, he ain't the D. Ortiz of old ....
Paul Simon:, "I'm older than I once was, but younger than I'll be;
that's not unusual.." (from The Boxer )
PETER SHORTS
Feb 8, 2012, 2:33:59 PM2/8/12
to
lots of chemistry in here.
Ray Garraty
Feb 8, 2012, 2:40:28 PM2/8/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
It was originally proposed by Dick Cramer that cutch was nonsense-
this was late 1970's early 80's I think - He was a reasearch scientist
and kind of predecessor to Bill James, who spent his spare time
examining obscure baseball stats, Cramer said nothing he could find
historically indicated any players hit better in any situation than
any other; other than LH-RH matchups. Which at the time baseball
didn't pay that much attention to that even. There is some mention of
him in Moneyball - the book, not the movie.
Dano
Feb 8, 2012, 12:53:56 PM2/8/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:d9bf5167-cb7a-43cf...@og8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
=============================================
I'd say that it's silly...even ridiculous to assume we have the first clue
about who likes or respects who in a clubhouse. As has been said many times
and many way, winning produces chemistry...NOT the other way around.
I also maintain that you have a better than even chance of developing a
winning team with role players at some positions as well as on the bench
rather than trying to assemble a team of all superstars...which is nearly
impossible anyway.
news:d9bf5167-cb7a-43cf...@og8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
I'd say that it's silly...even ridiculous to assume we have the first clue
about who likes or respects who in a clubhouse. As has been said many times
and many way, winning produces chemistry...NOT the other way around.
I also maintain that you have a better than even chance of developing a
winning team with role players at some positions as well as on the bench
rather than trying to assemble a team of all superstars...which is nearly
impossible anyway.
curiousd
Feb 8, 2012, 7:50:27 PM2/8/12
to
Chemistry:
I was thinking about this string. I think that Wayback is right that
chemistry being not so crucial in MLB. It hit me...because I am a
Connecticut Husky fan and have been for years I am absolutely positive
that in big time mens' hoops, chemistry is almost the deciding factor
between elite programs. You need NBA class raw talent to compete in
elite Mens' hoops but this means that you have people playing for you
who potentially focus on future career to the team detriment. So
playing time and stats are potentially much much more important than
how the team does as a whole. This has given rise to a very strong
effect in UConn mens' hoops:
1. If the team has one or at most two clear, high draft pick NBA
talents and a bunch of non NBA talent role players (or talented
freshmen starting out), that combination is a potential championship
club. This was the case last year. Also when Richard Hamilton was
the lone star, and when Ben Gordan and Okafor were the two stars.
2. Worst case scenario...five marginal NBA talents. This was the case
for probably the best all round UConn team ever in terms of over all
talent. As the season wore on they only cared about which ones of the
five were going to make the big bucks, if any. Can't really blame
them. One was quoted after the team's upset by George Mason in the
NCAAs ..."We were all so thinking who was going to be drafted and
stuff we forgot to win."
3. This years team is one of the non chemistry teams. For instance,
last years center has lost playing time to a freshman with high
upside, that last years center is sulking around/probably no longer
gives a R.A. I predict this years UConn mens team is going to suck
all season.
4. None of this applies to elite womens' hoops because the pro money
is diddly. You don't get the athletic, high flying, spectacular
physical play, but John Wooden said toward the end of his life that
the best women's teams play the best fundamental basketball in the
colleges. Any of them would be killed by a mediocre mens' team, of
course, but if you want to see real passing, unselfish hustle, great
fundamentals recommend elite womens' college hoops.
I was thinking about this string. I think that Wayback is right that
chemistry being not so crucial in MLB. It hit me...because I am a
Connecticut Husky fan and have been for years I am absolutely positive
that in big time mens' hoops, chemistry is almost the deciding factor
between elite programs. You need NBA class raw talent to compete in
elite Mens' hoops but this means that you have people playing for you
who potentially focus on future career to the team detriment. So
playing time and stats are potentially much much more important than
how the team does as a whole. This has given rise to a very strong
effect in UConn mens' hoops:
1. If the team has one or at most two clear, high draft pick NBA
talents and a bunch of non NBA talent role players (or talented
freshmen starting out), that combination is a potential championship
club. This was the case last year. Also when Richard Hamilton was
the lone star, and when Ben Gordan and Okafor were the two stars.
2. Worst case scenario...five marginal NBA talents. This was the case
for probably the best all round UConn team ever in terms of over all
talent. As the season wore on they only cared about which ones of the
five were going to make the big bucks, if any. Can't really blame
them. One was quoted after the team's upset by George Mason in the
NCAAs ..."We were all so thinking who was going to be drafted and
stuff we forgot to win."
3. This years team is one of the non chemistry teams. For instance,
last years center has lost playing time to a freshman with high
upside, that last years center is sulking around/probably no longer
gives a R.A. I predict this years UConn mens team is going to suck
all season.
4. None of this applies to elite womens' hoops because the pro money
is diddly. You don't get the athletic, high flying, spectacular
physical play, but John Wooden said toward the end of his life that
the best women's teams play the best fundamental basketball in the
colleges. Any of them would be killed by a mediocre mens' team, of
course, but if you want to see real passing, unselfish hustle, great
fundamentals recommend elite womens' college hoops.
Ray Garraty
Feb 8, 2012, 8:31:28 PM2/8/12
to
chemistry thing. Likewise I think it's overdone, I do think one real
bad situation or real bad apple can drag a team down.
That seems natural.
As far as likability, I see where you are coming from but as a fan I
just never cared much about that. Like when Jose Canseco was playing
for Boston. Not a fan per se, but I had no trouble rooting for him.
Of course at that time nobody knew about PED's, but he was still
considered an ass by most people. Short of wife beaters or worse, I
don't care. I feel like most of what we hear about their
personalities is BS.
Jeff Kent is a player I always admired for his abilty and intensity.
For some people he brought out this rabid dislike because he was surly
to reporters I guess? The press called him a clubhouse cancer; Ellis
Burks said he was a friend and great teammate, so who knows what's
real?
>
> Would two more wins have changed people's opinion of this
> team?...maybe. Two more wins, followed by 11 more in the playoffs
> certainly would have. (It's tough to boo players at a parade.) But
> the bottom line is that didn't happen.
were a loose bunch, a bunch of characters, aren't they funny?
I don't think what they were doing was acceptable at all, but how it's
perceived is mostly based on success or lack of IMO. The all-time
collapse really magnified it.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 5:57:41 AM2/9/12
to
On Feb 8, 12:53 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> =============================================
>
> I'd say that it's silly...even ridiculous to assume we have the first clue
> about who likes or respects who in a clubhouse.
We wouldn't know but the reporters who are in the clubhouse daily
>
> =============================================
>
> I'd say that it's silly...even ridiculous to assume we have the first clue
> about who likes or respects who in a clubhouse.
would, and docomment on it all time.
BTT
Feb 9, 2012, 7:42:25 AM2/9/12
to
On Feb 8, 6:50 am, Wayback1918 <wayback1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1035006-30-worst-clubhouse-cancers....
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
> The new manager was not a popular choice with the players. Beckett
> and Crawford especially, have issues with Valentine. Wait 'til he
> throws his first player under a bus publically in the press.
>
> Two of the new players this year, Vincente Padilla and Carlos Silva
> were on the list of "The 30 Worst Clubhouse Cancers In Baseball
> History"
>
>
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
Just to clear up a point--Youk! is not mentioned in the Bleacherreport
> Youkilis is very unpopular with his teammates (even though I still
> love him).
>
> The only friend of the AL MVP runner-up (and the consensus 'Nicest guy
> on the team) has been traded to Houston.
>
> It certainly won't help matters if they have to take, their most
> popular player in the last decade, to arbitration.
>
> Carl Crawford Is accused of swindling $123,000 from a former
> friend. At least 'Husband of the Year' John Lackey won't be around.
>
> ....and all that is before we even mention the "Chicken and Beer Flop"
> fiasco that the players will be answering questions about all Spring.
>
> That's a lot a baggage for a team that doesn't really know if it will
> be booed or cheered at the home opener.
>
> Ok...there, I've said it. Let the flaming begin.....
article as a clubhouse cancer. He may or may not be well liked, but
it's not mentioned here.
Current and former RS who ARE mention include: Manny, Vicente, Caveman
Carl, Julian Tavarez (I had no idea), Rickey Henderson, and Everday
Shea.
BTT
BTT
Feb 9, 2012, 8:14:33 AM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
And considering the way the season ended, chemistry may not have
> - Show quoted text -
helped, but it couldn's have hurt!
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 12:23:47 AM2/9/12
to
"Ray Garraty" wrote in message
news:badab8da-439c-4912...@o4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
As far as likability, I see where you are coming from but as a fan I
just never cared much about that. Like when Jose Canseco was playing
for Boston. Not a fan per se, but I had no trouble rooting for him.
Of course at that time nobody knew about PED's, but he was still
considered an ass by most people. Short of wife beaters or worse, I
don't care. I feel like most of what we hear about their
personalities is BS.
========================================
What do you mean by "nobody knew about PED's"? Long before Jose played for
the Sox he was getting those steroid chants...many right in Fenway. I
believe he had one or two domestic blow-ups as well.
news:badab8da-439c-4912...@o4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
As far as likability, I see where you are coming from but as a fan I
just never cared much about that. Like when Jose Canseco was playing
for Boston. Not a fan per se, but I had no trouble rooting for him.
Of course at that time nobody knew about PED's, but he was still
considered an ass by most people. Short of wife beaters or worse, I
don't care. I feel like most of what we hear about their
personalities is BS.
What do you mean by "nobody knew about PED's"? Long before Jose played for
the Sox he was getting those steroid chants...many right in Fenway. I
believe he had one or two domestic blow-ups as well.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 8:14:37 AM2/9/12
to
On Feb 9, 7:42 am, BTT <BTTalbot2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> BTT- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
You left out Carlos Silva....and I'm not sure why it needed to be
>
> - Show quoted text -
cleared up, it was never implied that Youkilis was on the Clubhouse
cancer list.
Ray Garraty
Feb 9, 2012, 9:15:55 AM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Speaking of clubhouse shenanigans, I guess Oil Can Boyd admits pitched
> - Show quoted text -
2/3 of his games on coke. I guess this makes beer and chicken seem
tame.
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/09/oil-can-boyd-admits-that-he-was-on-cocaine-in-two-thirds-of-his-games/
I saw him get off a bus in Seattle while still w/ Boston and tell a
bunch of autograph seekers (mostly kids) to "get the f--- out my way"
And here all this time I just thought he was an asshole.
Ray Garraty
Feb 9, 2012, 9:19:41 AM2/9/12
to
before Boston. The rest came after. As far as the roid chants long
before Boston, I attended dozens of games in Oakland in the 1990's and
never heard a thing till 1999/2000
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 10:24:53 AM2/9/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:687bfbba-500c-4f5a...@ow3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
=====================================
Except that they don't. Come on WB. You know damn well players don't speak
openly about most stuff. And when they do, it's not for attribution. If
the reporters that DO really see stuff...and reported and put names to it,
they would have a seriously hard time getting any cooperation from these
guys again. What irritates me is I'm SURE you must realize this. But
anything to further an argument.
news:687bfbba-500c-4f5a...@ow3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
Except that they don't. Come on WB. You know damn well players don't speak
openly about most stuff. And when they do, it's not for attribution. If
the reporters that DO really see stuff...and reported and put names to it,
they would have a seriously hard time getting any cooperation from these
guys again. What irritates me is I'm SURE you must realize this. But
anything to further an argument.
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 10:33:05 AM2/9/12
to
"Ray Garraty" wrote in message
news:8ad7d8ae-7553-4abc...@kn4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
Well of course you wouldn't hear them on his home turf. I remember hearing
them at Fenway on more than one occasion...in person as well as on TV. I
actually was sitting in rooftop seats way out in right field for a playoff
game and he was getting an earful. He sort of won over the crowd taunting
him by doing "the crab" bodybuilding pose for the crowd in response and
cracked everyone up.
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 10:39:44 AM2/9/12
to
"BTT" wrote in message
news:347951a1-9f92-4bcc...@j14g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
================================================
Can we also try to understand that in a crowded clubhouse not everyone will
get along? There are cliques and loners and everything in between. Even
Carl Crawford and Manny had friends. Sometimes chemistry isn't just about
whether someone or other is hated or popular. I'm sure there are some guys
who many cannot stand that everyone will tolerate as long as they do their
job and help to win games. The problems show when they lose. Obviously.
news:347951a1-9f92-4bcc...@j14g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
Can we also try to understand that in a crowded clubhouse not everyone will
get along? There are cliques and loners and everything in between. Even
Carl Crawford and Manny had friends. Sometimes chemistry isn't just about
whether someone or other is hated or popular. I'm sure there are some guys
who many cannot stand that everyone will tolerate as long as they do their
job and help to win games. The problems show when they lose. Obviously.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 10:48:58 AM2/9/12
to
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 12:09:54 PM2/9/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:dfd160a4-3035-4fbd...@tj4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
=========================================
Yep. Okay. You're right. We know EXACTLY everything that goes on in the
clubhouse. ALL the time. You win again.
You are freaking delusional. All we know is what gets out through the
filter of some writer's agenda. THEY have friends and favorites too you
know. Or maybe you really ARE so thick headed that you don't. Whatever.
news:dfd160a4-3035-4fbd...@tj4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
Yep. Okay. You're right. We know EXACTLY everything that goes on in the
clubhouse. ALL the time. You win again.
You are freaking delusional. All we know is what gets out through the
filter of some writer's agenda. THEY have friends and favorites too you
know. Or maybe you really ARE so thick headed that you don't. Whatever.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 12:27:40 PM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
No one even remotely implied that "We know EXACTLY everything that
> - Show quoted text -
goes on in the
clubhouse." Your need to consistantly mis-represent, to the extreme,
what people say can only mean you have no legitimate arguments.
Reporters, Radio and TV hosts have all commented on the atmosphere in
the clubhouse once the season was over. If you are too thick-headed
to know about it that's your problem, but the group shouldn't be
limited to what little you know.
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 12:54:02 PM2/9/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:798a6f75-0da6-469e...@4g2000pbz.googlegroups.com...
===============================================
Clearly there were problems. It's just not "ABSOLUTELY" clear what (or who)
those were.
It's not even "remotely" correct to deny that the use of the word "ABSOLUTE"
is somehow implying any reasonable doubt.
You ABSOLUTELY continue to be one didactic motherfucker. Stick to your
quantifiable statistical diatribes. You're on much safer ground.
news:798a6f75-0da6-469e...@4g2000pbz.googlegroups.com...
Clearly there were problems. It's just not "ABSOLUTELY" clear what (or who)
those were.
It's not even "remotely" correct to deny that the use of the word "ABSOLUTE"
is somehow implying any reasonable doubt.
You ABSOLUTELY continue to be one didactic motherfucker. Stick to your
quantifiable statistical diatribes. You're on much safer ground.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 1:21:58 PM2/9/12
to
>
Once again you need to mis-represent to the extreme....it's nearly
pathological.
'Absolute' was used in response to your statement that reporters never
report on clubhouse problems. I said they do...they 'absolutely'
do. But even if you want to attribute that word to my original
statement I don't have a problem with it. The facts in OP are
acurate.
Of course you know that....it's why you have moved away from what I
actually said and switched to the semanitics of 'absolute' vs
'reasonable doubt'.
Tristan daCunha
Feb 9, 2012, 1:31:00 PM2/9/12
to
Hey Swayback; What youse need is a steenking team!
The RSN bus......with the conveyer belt "underneath" is backin' up
already!
That's why God hates youse!
Fair weather band wagoneers.
And now comedy relief aka Bobby V.
Say the magic word and the duck will give youse the A.L. East.
heh heh heh...
The RSN bus......with the conveyer belt "underneath" is backin' up
already!
That's why God hates youse!
Fair weather band wagoneers.
And now comedy relief aka Bobby V.
Say the magic word and the duck will give youse the A.L. East.
heh heh heh...
Tristan daCunha
Feb 9, 2012, 1:37:07 PM2/9/12
to
Orteeeeeeeez, without the juice, ain't shit!
He can't field, or fight, and he's f'n stone fugly!
Otherwise, he's a walk in HOF'r.
Just like Ramroid!
He can't field, or fight, and he's f'n stone fugly!
Otherwise, he's a walk in HOF'r.
Just like Ramroid!
Ray Garraty
Feb 9, 2012, 2:38:30 PM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
A typical Red Sox or Yankees game in Oakland, there are more opposing
> - Show quoted text -
fans than A's fans. No exaggeration.
I may be wrong, but I don't remember hearing about that until after he
played in Boston.
Dano
Feb 9, 2012, 3:10:26 PM2/9/12
to
"Ray Garraty" wrote in message
news:18b0daec-087c-4a27...@iu7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
You can doubt me if you like...but I know I was at that game. I never sat
up there on the roof other than that game. And a playoff game at that. And
I know Jose had never played for the Sox at that point in time. Back in the
80's I think. Now he had not come out about his use of PED's yet...but he
was the most commonly accused player...maybe the first.
Wayback1918
Feb 9, 2012, 8:53:13 PM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2245&dat=19881006&id=B4AzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HzIHAAAAIBAJ&pg=3461,3219691
> - Show quoted text -
McDuck
Feb 9, 2012, 9:16:21 PM2/9/12
to
On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 06:14:25 -0800 (PST), Wayback1918
<wayba...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>At one time Varitek was that personality. A Player's ability to lead
>doesn't last throughout his entire career. As teammates come and go,
>and as his contribution to the team lessens so does ability to lead.
>(I'd say it's a little like being 'clutch' but I don't really believe
>in that either).
>
>
I agree. Very hard for a fringe player in baseball or basketball to be
<wayba...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>At one time Varitek was that personality. A Player's ability to lead
>doesn't last throughout his entire career. As teammates come and go,
>and as his contribution to the team lessens so does ability to lead.
>(I'd say it's a little like being 'clutch' but I don't really believe
>in that either).
>
>
a team leader. Seems to work on ocasion in football, at least for a
little while.
Ray Garraty
Feb 9, 2012, 11:39:55 PM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
I wasn't doubting you, I just said I never knew before that. I
> - Show quoted text -
honestly never heard it a game I attended. I didn't watch much TV
back then.
.
Ray Garraty
Feb 9, 2012, 11:39:51 PM2/9/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well the proof is in the pudding I suppose
> - Show quoted text -
Wayback1918
Feb 10, 2012, 5:41:20 AM2/10/12
to
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Well the proof is in the pudding I suppose- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Certainly the effect of steroids on the game wasn't known a that
> - Show quoted text -
time. The chant was simply mocking Canseco for mockings sake.
Pearly Soames
Feb 10, 2012, 9:40:33 AM2/10/12
to
Wayback1918 wrote:
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
I've always believed that physics is more important in baseball than
> I am not a big believer in 'Team Chemistry' when it comes to winning
> and losing, but the 2012 Red Sox could really put that theory to the
> test.
>
chemistry is, but I agree that this season will be interesting.
--
OK, who’s got the kibble?
PETER SHORTS
Feb 10, 2012, 11:28:38 AM2/10/12
to
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Well the proof is in the pudding I suppose
the proof is in the pudding? lol
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Well the proof is in the pudding I suppose
Dano
Feb 10, 2012, 12:13:13 PM2/10/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:ececc244-834e-407f...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
============================================
And exactly what effect WAS that? The point is...many people were already
suspicious of anyone built like that regardless of what sport he played.
Steroid use has been around far longer than whenever you THINK it had an
impact on the sport. However widespread the use was thought to be, many if
not most suspected Jose. Most significantly...they were right...according
to Jose himself.
What exactly is your point? Or are you simply looking for any chance to
contradict me? For "mockings" sake?
news:ececc244-834e-407f...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
And exactly what effect WAS that? The point is...many people were already
suspicious of anyone built like that regardless of what sport he played.
Steroid use has been around far longer than whenever you THINK it had an
impact on the sport. However widespread the use was thought to be, many if
not most suspected Jose. Most significantly...they were right...according
to Jose himself.
What exactly is your point? Or are you simply looking for any chance to
contradict me? For "mockings" sake?
Wayback1918
Feb 10, 2012, 12:42:04 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 12:13 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Clipped for non-good newsreader people
> Certainly the effect of steroids on the game wasn't known a that
> time. The chant was simply mocking Canseco for mockings sake.
>
> ============================================
>
> And exactly what effect WAS that?
The effect of increasing offense by 25% ...and shreading HR records
like they were tissue paper. (I would have thought you knew about
it. It was in all the papers.)
>The point is...many people were already
> suspicious of anyone built like that regardless of what sport he played.
No they weren't.
> Steroid use has been around far longer than whenever you THINK it had an
> impact on the sport.
Really?...enlighten us. How long was it around?...and since it is far
long than I think, when did I start believing it was around?
>However widespread the use was thought to be, many if
> not most suspected Jose. Most significantly...they were right...according
> to Jose himself.
Produce some quotes then....
>
> What exactly is your point? Or are you simply looking for any chance to
> contradict me?
It not my fault your wrong so much.
Clipped for non-good newsreader people
> Certainly the effect of steroids on the game wasn't known a that
> time. The chant was simply mocking Canseco for mockings sake.
>
> ============================================
>
> And exactly what effect WAS that?
like they were tissue paper. (I would have thought you knew about
it. It was in all the papers.)
>The point is...many people were already
> suspicious of anyone built like that regardless of what sport he played.
> Steroid use has been around far longer than whenever you THINK it had an
> impact on the sport.
long than I think, when did I start believing it was around?
>However widespread the use was thought to be, many if
> not most suspected Jose. Most significantly...they were right...according
> to Jose himself.
>
> What exactly is your point? Or are you simply looking for any chance to
> contradict me?
Dano
Feb 10, 2012, 1:31:25 PM2/10/12
to
"Wayback1918" wrote in message
news:8eacd7c8-cc5a-492e...@j14g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
It not my fault your wrong so much.
=======================================
Fucking hilarious.
news:8eacd7c8-cc5a-492e...@j14g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
It not my fault your wrong so much.
Fucking hilarious.
0 new messages