As I detailed yesterday, Dan Shaughnessy tried to break the "myth of contention" around the Boston Red Sox in a recent column. He did so with his typical attempt to crap on the team while they were down. I posted this attempt yesterday. It was the June 2 column that Dan posted. Then the Red Sox won a few games in a row and the reactionary, narrative-driven Dan Shaughnessy changed his tune just a little bit. He didn't go entirely positive, but all that "Pablo Sandoval is the next Adrian Gonzalez" stuff is now followed by Dan briefly defending Sandoval. One would think Dan could stay somewhat consistent within a week, but apparently not. Say what you will about Dan. No really, say whatever you will say about Dan, he's a terrible trolling writer. Words feel too insignificant to document how annoying his writing is. So here is Dan's slightly sunny outlook on the Red Sox, based entirely on the team winning a few games (which is why he is overly-reactionary), along with some of the mini-contradictions in this column compared to what he wrote six days earlier.
It was the best inning of the season. It was the best game of the
season. It was a seven-run, eight-hit frame, starting with “Sweet
Caroline,’’ and ending after the Red Sox greeted Oakland’s fifth pitcher
of the inning with “Everything Is Awesome.’’
THE MYTH OF CONTENTION CONTINUES! WHEN WILL THE RED SOX STOP PRETENDING LIKE THEY ARE A FRANCHISE THAT CAN COMPETE FOR WORLD SERIES TITLES?
It was a breakthrough day in every way. The Sox had been 1-26 in games
in which they trailed after seven innings. They had not won three
straight since April 9-11. The victory gave the Sons of John Farrell a
three-game winning streak and kept them out of the cellar of the
American League East by a few percentage points.
Or as Dan wrote in his June 2 column:
And now here we are again. Worst-to-first has become worst-to-worst.
So a breakthrough that will ultimately lead the Red Sox back to being the worst team in the AL again. Naturally.
Best of all, now they get to leave town and play hundreds of miles from the angry fans and nonstop noise of Boston.
Not ironically, the angry fans are angry sportswriters who have started writing the team off and those making the nonstop noise are sportswriters like Dan Shaughnessy who write columns burying the 2015 Boston Red Sox. Dan is basically saying it's great the Red Sox are able to get away from him. It's like Dan knows he's terrible, but still continues to play the role. Dan is one of those creating the nonstop noise.
Boston’s baseball summer was beginning to feel like Deflategate 2
This makes no sense in the context of the Red Sox season, but is an obvious attempt by Dan to be like, "Hey remember that thing that the Patriots are being punished for? Here's a reference to that."
Upstairs in the press box, the sad stories and obits were being prepared.
Obits that looked exactly like this.
They were going to fall flat at the end of the homestand that featured
memorable support from ownership and the front office. They were going
to fall 6½ games out, their largest deficit of the season.
Of course it was early June, but Dan also lives in a world where he thinks the Red Sox have to win the division in order to make the playoffs. So 6.5 games out of the division lead is a disaster because the two Wild Cards don't exist in the fantasy world where Dan Shaughnessy spends most of his time.
Castillo hit his first home run of the season. Dustin Pedroia and Brock
Holt followed with back-to-back singles. Hanley Ramirez made it 4-2 with
a single. After a pitching change, David Ortiz made it 4-3 with a sac
fly. After another pitching change and a Mike Napoli strikeout, Pablo
Sandoval lined a single off the Wall in left, moving Hanley to third.
I like how Dan capitalizes the word "Wall" as if the Green Monster isn't a "wall" but an official "Wall." Maybe Dan is just a big Jon Snow fan and got confused.
The Sox got a much-needed break on Sandoval’s hit. It should have been
caught for the third out of the inning, but Oakland left fielder Mark
Canha gave up, turned, and watched it hit the base of the Wall.
Welp, the Red Sox got lucky on this hit, so it doesn't count as a real base hit. Pablo Sandoval is still, in Dan's own words of course:
looking like Crawford and Gonzalez from 2011
That was the only break the Sox needed. Xander Bogaerts put the Sox ahead with a two-run double and the jailbreak was on.
Now is Xander Bogaerts one of those Red Sox prospects who the team needs to:
stop perpetuating the fallacy of Boston’s amazing scouting and player development.
I'm guessing Xander is a product of this non-amazing scouting and crappy player development, but it also depends on which way the wind blows whether Dan will agree with his own opinion or not.
It gave the Sox a stay of execution from the ever-ready-to-bury talk show circuit.
You, Dan. That is you. You are a crucial leader of the ever-ready-to-bury talk show circuit. So to talk about this circuit in some way like you aren't talking about yourself is very funny for me to read. I know Dan wants to separate himself from those burying the Red Sox, as well as one of the loudest noisemakers in Boston when it's convenient for him, but it's simply not reality.
“This is a momentum-builder for us, no doubt’’ said Farrell. “The way
in which we won . . . it was as big as the win itself. It was a
much-needed win.’’
Dan says to stop celebrating this one meaningless victory. The Red Sox will lose again sometime this season and that will mean they are complete failures again. Dan is laying in wait for this to happen.
Indeed. The victory gave the Sox a 5-2 homestand after a 1-6 road trip.
So this means the Red Sox played well against the Twins? You know, the same Twins that Dan described as having,
no payroll, no star power, and no national following.
They also have a first-place team with the third-best record in the American League.
I can't believe the Red Sox, mythologize the idea they are contenders, beat the Twins since Dan has told me that the Twins are the little team that could. It's unbelievable to me this could occur.
It also validated (for one day, at least) the supportive commentary from
ownership and the front office that had made it a homestand of unusual
urgency
The failures are permanent until proven otherwise, while the success is temporary until proven otherwise. That's how it works for Dan, apparently. Once the Red Sox struggle over a stretch of games, this success against the Twins and A's will be forgotten. Meanwhile, this stretch of struggling will be intentionally magnified by Dan as further proof the Red Sox myth of contention is indeed a fact.
At the beginning of the homestand, Red Sox/Globe owner John Henry had
assured the constituency that the jobs of general manager Ben Cherington
and Farrell were safe.
But hasn't he read Dan's column about the myth of contention that surrounds the Red Sox? This isn't an opinion, but is a fact. John Henry is really messing up by not heeding the wise words of Dan Shaughnessy, even though Dan's words and opinion might change depending on what day it is and the Red Sox record over the last week.
Three days later, Cherington came forward and said the Sox still have
what it takes to win the AL East. He cited progress, and said we need to
be more patient as we wait for this $200 million squad to live up to
its potential and start playing better baseball.
"Fuck patience," says Dan Shaughnessy. What's the point of being patient when there are hot takes to be had which overreact to the Red Sox lack of success during the 2015 season? If the Red Sox can only win the World Series 3 times in 10 years then they don't deserve the patience they are asking for. How can patience be expected when the "myth of contention" is not being acknowledged by Red Sox management?
Ramirez and Sandoval were twin-tower lightning rods at Fenway throughout
the week. Ramirez was called out (by fans and media) for his bowser
tendencies, but was staunchly defended by Cherington.
Ramirez was called out by the media, which is a group that includes Dan Shaughnessy. Dan was already eagerly comparing Ramirez to Carl Crawford and/or Adrian Gonzalez. If you remember from past Dan Shaughnessy posts on this blog, Dan compared Adrian Gonzalez's swing to that of Ted Williams on multiple occasions. Of course, when Gonzalez struggled as a Red Sox, then Dan took every chance he could get to bash Gonzalez for lack of leadership and his many failures as a baseball player and human being. That's just how Dan works. One week he is comparing Hanley Ramirez to previous Red Sox free agents who didn't produce, the next week he's talking about how some have bashed Ramirez, as if he isn't a part of this group.
Sandoval was buried on the bench after a couple of errors and a
hitless week, then came back with two hits Sunday, including the lucky
laser to left.
Go easy on the Panda, folks.
Wait, what? Dan is telling people to go easy on Pablo Sandoval? This is the same Dan Shaughnessy who wrote TWO MONTHS INTO SANDOVAL'S TIME AS A RED SOX the following words,
But many of the Red Sox’ current problems are still rooted in arrogance,
NESN ratings (Messrs. Sandoval and Ramirez are looking like Crawford
and Gonzalez from 2011),
Dan already had Sandoval down as another Red Sox free agent bust two months into his tenure as a Red Sox. Dan explains Sandoval is just another example of:
A lot of big contracts have been given to the wrong people, and it might
be time for the Sox-loving world to stop perpetuating the fallacy of
Boston’s amazing scouting and player development.
But yes, go easy on Sandoval. Dan wouldn't want you to jump to any conclusions about Sandoval's performance or how it may or may not reflect on the ability of the Red Sox to judge talent. That would be crazy to do.
He is the ultimate streak player and he is a veteran who understands the
162-game haul. He is not prone to panic. He’s won three World Series.
Ah yes, the life of a fickle sportswriter who has no beliefs other than he believes he'll overreact to what just happened. One week Sandoval is looking like a free agent bust, the next week he's a veteran who won't panic and brings must needed World Series gravitas to the Red Sox team. It's funny how Dan's story changes as Sandoval's performance changes. But at no point, will Dan take back any of the dumb things he said prior. Never. Just forget about those things Dan said, because he certainly has.
He’s wildly overpaid and may be a burden at the end of his pact, but despite what you have seen he is not a burden today.
Well, I'll look for an update from Dan in the coming weeks after Sandoval is on a 2-for-24 streak at the plate. I'm sure Dan will see him as a burden at that point.
“It feels good to sweep the series,’’ said Sandoval, who always seems to be smiling and sweating.
As soon as Sandoval starts struggling, Dan will see this smiling as Sandoval simply not caring how well he performs because he's gotten paid. Dan will state that of course Sandoval is smiling, he took the Red Sox for millions of dollars and doesn't give a shit anymore. Dan will then explain Sandoval is sweating, not because he's working hard, but because either (a) Sandoval is overweight or (b) he's scared someone will see him for the fraud he truly is.
“I was glad to keep the line moving and I was excited to see my
teammates excited. It’s not how you start, it’s how you finish.’’
As many times as Dan has bashed the Red Sox, then followed it up with silence after being proven incorrect, these are words he should probably heed.
Winning three games in a row is a start. And getting out of town, away from the noise of us, may be just what this team needs.
The noise of "us." So Dan is self-aware to realize he is part of the parade of overreactive idiocy in the Boston media. Wouldn't it be nice if he did something about it rather than continue to write the same crap over and over again? That wouldn't allow Dan to be the troll that he truly is nor would it allow him the pageviews and attention he gets for being so negative. He doesn't care about the integrity of what he writes, as long as it gets attention.
We have the Red Sox.
We have the myth.
I think the only myth being perpetrated here is the myth that Dan Shaughnessy puts in his columns about the Red Sox being failures and non-contenders. Dan is the worst.
Welp, the Red Sox aren't playing well again, so of course Dan is back to ripping them.
Showing posts with label Red Sox. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Red Sox. Show all posts
Thursday, June 18, 2015
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
2 comments Dan Shaughnessy Gleefully Takes a Piss All Over the Red Sox; Exposes Them For the Failures They Are
Dan Shaughnessy loves to revel in the failures of Boston area sports teams. There is plenty of evidence this is true. Here. Here. Here. And here. So when the Red Sox are struggling he just can't help himself but to rub it in just a little bit and bash the team for even considering they could be a contending team. He's looked stupid in the past when he's bashed the Red Sox and then the team turned out to win the World Series that same year. I'm not sure if that will be the case for the 2015 season, but his trolling and asshole-ish glee at watching the Red Sox fail, all while holding the team to a ridiculous standard by acting like their recent success isn't impressive, is very much annoying to read. His disdain for common sense and hiding behind his telling "the truth" is just one of the many journalistic crimes he commits. Jay Mariotti likes Dan Shaughnessy, so that tells me all I need to know even if I didn't ever read Dan's writing.
So here he is reveling at the myth that the Red Sox are a contending team. You can feel his joy at being able to bash them dripping off the computer screen. He bashed them here on June 2, then the Red Sox starting winning games so he jumped back on the bandwagon, then they started losing games and he bashed them again.
The Red Sox are a myth,
The entire franchise. It doesn't exist. The Red Sox are the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus of professional sports, just created to give fans in the Boston area something to cheer for during the summer.
The myth of the Sox is that they are some kind of perennial playoff contender.
This isn't a myth. Over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs 10 times. 50% of the time over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs. That's a pretty impressive run of making the playoffs. It could be better, but it could also be worse. The bottom line is going into each season, the Red Sox are contenders to make the playoffs. Dan can argue this is ridiculous based on the eventual outcome of a season, but his protests don't make the fact the Red Sox are consistently playoff contenders false.
You know . . . three championships in 10 years.
Swell.
The only team that can say they have three championships in the last 10 years is the Giants. Before that, it would be the Yankees. Before that, it would be Oakland Athletics in the early 1970's. So the snide, "swell" is misinformed and needless. Three championships in 10 years is impressive, no matter how much Dan wants to downplay it.
But despite the hype, the highest prices in baseball, and the $200 million payroll, the Sox are no longer legitimate contenders. They are not a good team and they have not been a good team for quite some time.
"For quite some time." They won the 2013 World Series. The Red Sox have won 90+ games 11 times in the past 20 years. They have had 3 seasons with a losing record in the last 20 years. All this while playing in a division (the AL East) which had a team from that division make the World Series 13 times since 1990. But yeah, the Red Sox haven't been good for "for quite some time."
Simply because Dan recites a lie doesn't mean this lie becomes the truth.
“When you look at this team — and I tell you we’ve analyzed this team — this is a strong team,” said Henry. “They’ve just played not up to their capabilities.”
What else would the owner say? Would he say he doesn't think they put a good team together? Perhaps after the season is over the owner may say this, but of course he will think the team is strong prior to the season starting and during the season. This quote isn't the result of a delusion, but the result of Henry really believing the Red Sox put a good team together.
The Red Sox bottled some lightning in 2013, but clearly that was an outlier season, one that contributes to the ongoing phony narrative that the cutting-edge Sox are ahead of the curve and loaded with talent throughout the organization.
Ah yes, go ahead and crap on the World Series title in order to make it seem more significant than it was. Dan would really have freaked out if he covered the Red Sox from 1919-1945 when they didn't make the World Series once. The playoff set up was much different then, but the Red Sox were mostly terrible during that time. I imagine how bad Dan would flipped out believing the Red Sox wasted the golden years of Ted Williams' career. He would have gotten off so much bashing them in his column.
Wake up, people. Your baseball team is not smarter than all the other teams. Your farm system is not the best in the majors.
I'm not sure "people" think the Red Sox are smarter than other teams. They just try to use different methods of player evaluation from other teams. It's not them thinking they are smarter. Taking a different road to reach a destination doesn't necessarily mean the road you have chosen is the faster path (you can find that on a fortune cookie somewhere). The Red Sox having faith in the players in their farm system, and not wanting to trade players from that system, is a reflection that they like their own players. It doesn't mean the organization or fans think the Red Sox have the best farm system in the majors.
Your Red Sox are an aggregate 31 games under .500 (267-298) since Sept. 1, 2011. According to the Providence Journal, the 2015 Red Sox entered Tuesday as Boston’s worst baseball team since 1960 in the area of run differential — minus-48 after 51 games.
It's so weird how Dan Shaughnessy uses September 1, 2011 as the cut-off date. I really do believe many of these sportswriters needed to take more statistics courses in college. September 1 is a sort of random cut-off date that intentionally tries to mislead the reader on the Red Sox record during the 2011 season prior to September 1. The 2015 Red Sox aren't a very good team. It doesn't mean the entire organization is fatally flawed.
Despite these inconvenient truths, folks at the top continue to say that all is well. And rest assured the Sox soon will be OK because . . . you know . . . they are loaded with prospects.
Yet another contention by Dan that the Red Sox believe themselves to be "loaded" with prospects, but amazingly he can't seem to include a quote from the Red Sox that supports this belief. It's almost like Dan is exaggerating (or at best, misinterpreting) the Red Sox expectations for their prospects in order to make his point seem stronger.
Asked to characterize the state of his franchise, Henry answered, “From my perspective, it’s never been better. I think we’re as strong throughout the organization as we’ve ever been.’’
Henry says they are "strong throughout the organization," he didn't say they are "loaded with prospects."
“We have a strong commitment to winning,’’ added chairman Tom Werner. “We play for championships . . . It is our intention to play baseball in October every year.’’
Yep, nothing about prospects in that quote. Nothing about having a "loaded" system. The idea the Red Sox organization constantly talks about their loaded system is a fantasy that Dan tells himself in order to make his lies and deceptions seem more real.
Increasingly invisible Sox CEO Larry Lucchino (now “busy” with Rhode Island’s Triple A team and Boston’s 2024 Olympics bid) chimed in with, “We’re in it to win it, to win championships. If that means this kind of manic-depressive kind of course, maybe that’s not so terrible . . . We’re well prepared to be a successful franchise in the next several years.’’
Again, there is nothing said here about being "loaded" with prospects. It's just talk about where Lucchino wants the franchise to go and where he thinks the franchise currently is.
National media folks gushed about the new Red Sox lineup and predicted another worst-to-first season for Boston. Sports Illustrated and USA Today picked the Sox to finish first in the AL East — which, of course, is still possible in the toxic landfill that the division has become.
And when have national experts ever been wrong about anything? Just check out the ESPN experts' predictions for the 2014 season to see how wrong these "experts" were about the World Series participants. Expecting experts to be correct all the time, when that's not close to being the case, and then basing criticism of the Red Sox on not meeting the expectations of "experts" is ridiculous.
Sox starting pitchers mocked the naysayers, wearing T-shirts that said, “He’s the ace,’’ and after Clay Buchholz outpitched Philadelphia’s Cole Hamels on Opening Day, Henry noted to a reporter that the Sox did indeed have an ace starter.
Outpitching Cole Hamels is now turned into a bad thing, because it wasn't a sign of things to come for the entire season.
And now here we are again. Worst-to-first has become worst-to-worst.
Yes, here the Red Sox are "again." The last time they finished in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons was 1993-1994 and the Detroit Tigers were in the AL East at that point. But yeah, "again" the Red Sox are going to be in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons. It happens all the time, just as long the fact it hasn't happened in over 20 years gets ignored.
But many of the Red Sox’ current problems are still rooted in arrogance, NESN ratings (Messrs. Sandoval and Ramirez are looking like Crawford and Gonzalez from 2011), an insistence that an ace pitcher is not a good value, and a system philosophy that relies heavily on new metrics.
Except Sandoval and Ramirez are signed to smaller contracts than Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez were signed to, so Ramirez and Sandoval are not quite the burden Crawford and Gonzalez were on the Red Sox payroll. The new metrics have paid off for the Red Sox in the past ten years.
Turning their backs on arcane thinking (and 130 years of baseball history), the Sox are out to prove that a team does not need a true No. 1 starter. Instead, the organization chooses to live on the cutting edge of WAR, VORP, BABIP, DIPS, EqAS, and UZR.
So what? Other teams use these metrics and have success. At no point has any front office that uses advanced metrics stated these metrics are the end-all be-all to determine whether a player is successful or not. This is a constant misinterpretation baseball writers like Dan Shaughnessy (and Steve Dilbeck, Murray Chass, Jerry Green, Terence Moore) have, which is front offices that heavily use advanced metrics still factor in they need good players to be successful. They are simply using different metrics to evaluate players, along with the traditional player evaluation metrics.
OMG. LOL.
STFU.
Alex Speier’s feature on Mookie Betts in the Globe in February informed us that the Red Sox partnered with a technology company to measure how fast a baseball brain works. They developed a proprietary SAT-like testing system to tell them who the good hitters might be. One of the Sox draftees who crushed the neuroscouting tests was Jackie Bradley Jr., who has batted .192 over parts of three big league seasons.
This is compared to human baseball scouts who haven't missed on a prospect over the past 130 years, right? Human scouts are allowed to miss all of the time, but when new technology is used to scout or gather information about a prospect then it has to be correct 100% of the time or else it's considered absolutely useless. So the neuroscouting test didn't accurately show Jackie Bradley's skill level. Real human scouts use metrics that don't correctly evaluate a player's skill all the time.
A lot of big contracts have been given to the wrong people, and it might be time for the Sox-loving world to stop perpetuating the fallacy of Boston’s amazing scouting and player development.
They screw up sometimes. Yes, the Red Sox have missed on players who received big contracts.
There’s a nationwide insistence that no Sox minor leaguers can be dealt to the Phillies for Hamels because the Sox are just too gosh-darned loaded with great prospects.
Well, plus Hamels is a 30+ year old pitcher who is making a lot of money per year. He could end up being one of those big contracts the Red Sox have taken on which continue to perpetuate the fallacy of Boston's amazing scouting. Of course Dan complains the Red Sox have too many underachieving, expensive players and then bemoans they won't trade their prospects for a 30+ year old pitcher who has a large contract. I wouldn't expect him to be consistent in his criticism though.
the sad fact is that the Red Sox have not drafted and developed a big league starting pitcher or an All-Star position player since Buchholz and Jacoby Ellsbury were drafted by Theo Epstein 10 years ago.
What about Anthony Rizzo? (ducks as Red Sox fans throw things at me)
Another question. Shouldn't Hanley Ramirez and Justin Masterson count? They were both considered (and proved to be) ready for the majors when the Red Sox traded them and now they are back on the Red Sox team. I would probably count them both as players the Red Sox developed. Justin Masterson is a big league pitcher while Hanley Ramirez has made an All-Star team.
It’s fitting that the Minnesota Twins are in town this week. The Twins share Fort Myers with the Red Sox, and we feel sorry for them all spring. The Red Sox get all the attention and have all the fans and are nationally acclaimed as the brilliant, big-money franchise, always ahead of everybody else. The poor Twins have no payroll, no star power, and no national following.
They also have a first-place team with the third-best record in the American League.
This is absolutely laughable. With no sense of irony, in a column where Dan Shaughnessy bemoans that the Red Sox are "again" in last place in the AL East, he starts talking about the Twins coming to town. This is the same Twins team that has been last in the AL Central 6 times in the last 20 years. They have been next-to-last in the AL Central 4 times in the last 20 years. They have made zero World Series and one ALCS in that time, along with having a losing record in 11 of those seasons. THIS is the team he talks about as the antithesis of the Red Sox. Why? Because the Twins are currently in first place in the AL Central. Dan pays studious attention to the Red Sox recent history in an attempt to paint them as a failed franchise, while dismissing their successes, yet he pays attention to the Twins record this season and dismisses their recent history by simply not acknowledging it. He's the worst. This is what to expect from Dan Shaughnessy though. He's incapable of being a good writer when it comes to making a point outside of his trolling opinion.
We have the Red Sox.
We have the myth.
The biggest myth overall is that the Red Sox are a failing organization. They may not be succeeding right now, but they have the resources to improve quickly. Of course, when that improvement comes, and it will, Dan is going to forget entirely that he wrote this column. Just like he forgets the variety of other columns he's written bashing the Red Sox. Dan's only purpose as a writer is to serve as a troll and be negative. It gets him attention, which is mostly what he craves. He's horrible.
To add to the hilarity, Dan wrote this column on June 2 and then on June 8 he changed his tune about these Red Sox team. All of a sudden, after a few wins the myth of the Red Sox being contenders may not be a myth. I will have Dan's contradictory column about the Red Sox in my next post. He's the worst. Just the worst. He can't even troll consistently.
So here he is reveling at the myth that the Red Sox are a contending team. You can feel his joy at being able to bash them dripping off the computer screen. He bashed them here on June 2, then the Red Sox starting winning games so he jumped back on the bandwagon, then they started losing games and he bashed them again.
The Red Sox are a myth,
The entire franchise. It doesn't exist. The Red Sox are the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus of professional sports, just created to give fans in the Boston area something to cheer for during the summer.
The myth of the Sox is that they are some kind of perennial playoff contender.
This isn't a myth. Over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs 10 times. 50% of the time over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs. That's a pretty impressive run of making the playoffs. It could be better, but it could also be worse. The bottom line is going into each season, the Red Sox are contenders to make the playoffs. Dan can argue this is ridiculous based on the eventual outcome of a season, but his protests don't make the fact the Red Sox are consistently playoff contenders false.
You know . . . three championships in 10 years.
Swell.
The only team that can say they have three championships in the last 10 years is the Giants. Before that, it would be the Yankees. Before that, it would be Oakland Athletics in the early 1970's. So the snide, "swell" is misinformed and needless. Three championships in 10 years is impressive, no matter how much Dan wants to downplay it.
But despite the hype, the highest prices in baseball, and the $200 million payroll, the Sox are no longer legitimate contenders. They are not a good team and they have not been a good team for quite some time.
"For quite some time." They won the 2013 World Series. The Red Sox have won 90+ games 11 times in the past 20 years. They have had 3 seasons with a losing record in the last 20 years. All this while playing in a division (the AL East) which had a team from that division make the World Series 13 times since 1990. But yeah, the Red Sox haven't been good for "for quite some time."
Simply because Dan recites a lie doesn't mean this lie becomes the truth.
“When you look at this team — and I tell you we’ve analyzed this team — this is a strong team,” said Henry. “They’ve just played not up to their capabilities.”
What else would the owner say? Would he say he doesn't think they put a good team together? Perhaps after the season is over the owner may say this, but of course he will think the team is strong prior to the season starting and during the season. This quote isn't the result of a delusion, but the result of Henry really believing the Red Sox put a good team together.
The Red Sox bottled some lightning in 2013, but clearly that was an outlier season, one that contributes to the ongoing phony narrative that the cutting-edge Sox are ahead of the curve and loaded with talent throughout the organization.
Ah yes, go ahead and crap on the World Series title in order to make it seem more significant than it was. Dan would really have freaked out if he covered the Red Sox from 1919-1945 when they didn't make the World Series once. The playoff set up was much different then, but the Red Sox were mostly terrible during that time. I imagine how bad Dan would flipped out believing the Red Sox wasted the golden years of Ted Williams' career. He would have gotten off so much bashing them in his column.
Wake up, people. Your baseball team is not smarter than all the other teams. Your farm system is not the best in the majors.
I'm not sure "people" think the Red Sox are smarter than other teams. They just try to use different methods of player evaluation from other teams. It's not them thinking they are smarter. Taking a different road to reach a destination doesn't necessarily mean the road you have chosen is the faster path (you can find that on a fortune cookie somewhere). The Red Sox having faith in the players in their farm system, and not wanting to trade players from that system, is a reflection that they like their own players. It doesn't mean the organization or fans think the Red Sox have the best farm system in the majors.
Your Red Sox are an aggregate 31 games under .500 (267-298) since Sept. 1, 2011. According to the Providence Journal, the 2015 Red Sox entered Tuesday as Boston’s worst baseball team since 1960 in the area of run differential — minus-48 after 51 games.
It's so weird how Dan Shaughnessy uses September 1, 2011 as the cut-off date. I really do believe many of these sportswriters needed to take more statistics courses in college. September 1 is a sort of random cut-off date that intentionally tries to mislead the reader on the Red Sox record during the 2011 season prior to September 1. The 2015 Red Sox aren't a very good team. It doesn't mean the entire organization is fatally flawed.
Despite these inconvenient truths, folks at the top continue to say that all is well. And rest assured the Sox soon will be OK because . . . you know . . . they are loaded with prospects.
Yet another contention by Dan that the Red Sox believe themselves to be "loaded" with prospects, but amazingly he can't seem to include a quote from the Red Sox that supports this belief. It's almost like Dan is exaggerating (or at best, misinterpreting) the Red Sox expectations for their prospects in order to make his point seem stronger.
Asked to characterize the state of his franchise, Henry answered, “From my perspective, it’s never been better. I think we’re as strong throughout the organization as we’ve ever been.’’
Henry says they are "strong throughout the organization," he didn't say they are "loaded with prospects."
“We have a strong commitment to winning,’’ added chairman Tom Werner. “We play for championships . . . It is our intention to play baseball in October every year.’’
Yep, nothing about prospects in that quote. Nothing about having a "loaded" system. The idea the Red Sox organization constantly talks about their loaded system is a fantasy that Dan tells himself in order to make his lies and deceptions seem more real.
Increasingly invisible Sox CEO Larry Lucchino (now “busy” with Rhode Island’s Triple A team and Boston’s 2024 Olympics bid) chimed in with, “We’re in it to win it, to win championships. If that means this kind of manic-depressive kind of course, maybe that’s not so terrible . . . We’re well prepared to be a successful franchise in the next several years.’’
Again, there is nothing said here about being "loaded" with prospects. It's just talk about where Lucchino wants the franchise to go and where he thinks the franchise currently is.
National media folks gushed about the new Red Sox lineup and predicted another worst-to-first season for Boston. Sports Illustrated and USA Today picked the Sox to finish first in the AL East — which, of course, is still possible in the toxic landfill that the division has become.
And when have national experts ever been wrong about anything? Just check out the ESPN experts' predictions for the 2014 season to see how wrong these "experts" were about the World Series participants. Expecting experts to be correct all the time, when that's not close to being the case, and then basing criticism of the Red Sox on not meeting the expectations of "experts" is ridiculous.
Sox starting pitchers mocked the naysayers, wearing T-shirts that said, “He’s the ace,’’ and after Clay Buchholz outpitched Philadelphia’s Cole Hamels on Opening Day, Henry noted to a reporter that the Sox did indeed have an ace starter.
Outpitching Cole Hamels is now turned into a bad thing, because it wasn't a sign of things to come for the entire season.
And now here we are again. Worst-to-first has become worst-to-worst.
Yes, here the Red Sox are "again." The last time they finished in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons was 1993-1994 and the Detroit Tigers were in the AL East at that point. But yeah, "again" the Red Sox are going to be in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons. It happens all the time, just as long the fact it hasn't happened in over 20 years gets ignored.
But many of the Red Sox’ current problems are still rooted in arrogance, NESN ratings (Messrs. Sandoval and Ramirez are looking like Crawford and Gonzalez from 2011), an insistence that an ace pitcher is not a good value, and a system philosophy that relies heavily on new metrics.
Except Sandoval and Ramirez are signed to smaller contracts than Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez were signed to, so Ramirez and Sandoval are not quite the burden Crawford and Gonzalez were on the Red Sox payroll. The new metrics have paid off for the Red Sox in the past ten years.
Turning their backs on arcane thinking (and 130 years of baseball history), the Sox are out to prove that a team does not need a true No. 1 starter. Instead, the organization chooses to live on the cutting edge of WAR, VORP, BABIP, DIPS, EqAS, and UZR.
So what? Other teams use these metrics and have success. At no point has any front office that uses advanced metrics stated these metrics are the end-all be-all to determine whether a player is successful or not. This is a constant misinterpretation baseball writers like Dan Shaughnessy (and Steve Dilbeck, Murray Chass, Jerry Green, Terence Moore) have, which is front offices that heavily use advanced metrics still factor in they need good players to be successful. They are simply using different metrics to evaluate players, along with the traditional player evaluation metrics.
OMG. LOL.
STFU.
Alex Speier’s feature on Mookie Betts in the Globe in February informed us that the Red Sox partnered with a technology company to measure how fast a baseball brain works. They developed a proprietary SAT-like testing system to tell them who the good hitters might be. One of the Sox draftees who crushed the neuroscouting tests was Jackie Bradley Jr., who has batted .192 over parts of three big league seasons.
This is compared to human baseball scouts who haven't missed on a prospect over the past 130 years, right? Human scouts are allowed to miss all of the time, but when new technology is used to scout or gather information about a prospect then it has to be correct 100% of the time or else it's considered absolutely useless. So the neuroscouting test didn't accurately show Jackie Bradley's skill level. Real human scouts use metrics that don't correctly evaluate a player's skill all the time.
A lot of big contracts have been given to the wrong people, and it might be time for the Sox-loving world to stop perpetuating the fallacy of Boston’s amazing scouting and player development.
They screw up sometimes. Yes, the Red Sox have missed on players who received big contracts.
There’s a nationwide insistence that no Sox minor leaguers can be dealt to the Phillies for Hamels because the Sox are just too gosh-darned loaded with great prospects.
Well, plus Hamels is a 30+ year old pitcher who is making a lot of money per year. He could end up being one of those big contracts the Red Sox have taken on which continue to perpetuate the fallacy of Boston's amazing scouting. Of course Dan complains the Red Sox have too many underachieving, expensive players and then bemoans they won't trade their prospects for a 30+ year old pitcher who has a large contract. I wouldn't expect him to be consistent in his criticism though.
the sad fact is that the Red Sox have not drafted and developed a big league starting pitcher or an All-Star position player since Buchholz and Jacoby Ellsbury were drafted by Theo Epstein 10 years ago.
What about Anthony Rizzo? (ducks as Red Sox fans throw things at me)
Another question. Shouldn't Hanley Ramirez and Justin Masterson count? They were both considered (and proved to be) ready for the majors when the Red Sox traded them and now they are back on the Red Sox team. I would probably count them both as players the Red Sox developed. Justin Masterson is a big league pitcher while Hanley Ramirez has made an All-Star team.
It’s fitting that the Minnesota Twins are in town this week. The Twins share Fort Myers with the Red Sox, and we feel sorry for them all spring. The Red Sox get all the attention and have all the fans and are nationally acclaimed as the brilliant, big-money franchise, always ahead of everybody else. The poor Twins have no payroll, no star power, and no national following.
They also have a first-place team with the third-best record in the American League.
This is absolutely laughable. With no sense of irony, in a column where Dan Shaughnessy bemoans that the Red Sox are "again" in last place in the AL East, he starts talking about the Twins coming to town. This is the same Twins team that has been last in the AL Central 6 times in the last 20 years. They have been next-to-last in the AL Central 4 times in the last 20 years. They have made zero World Series and one ALCS in that time, along with having a losing record in 11 of those seasons. THIS is the team he talks about as the antithesis of the Red Sox. Why? Because the Twins are currently in first place in the AL Central. Dan pays studious attention to the Red Sox recent history in an attempt to paint them as a failed franchise, while dismissing their successes, yet he pays attention to the Twins record this season and dismisses their recent history by simply not acknowledging it. He's the worst. This is what to expect from Dan Shaughnessy though. He's incapable of being a good writer when it comes to making a point outside of his trolling opinion.
We have the Red Sox.
We have the myth.
The biggest myth overall is that the Red Sox are a failing organization. They may not be succeeding right now, but they have the resources to improve quickly. Of course, when that improvement comes, and it will, Dan is going to forget entirely that he wrote this column. Just like he forgets the variety of other columns he's written bashing the Red Sox. Dan's only purpose as a writer is to serve as a troll and be negative. It gets him attention, which is mostly what he craves. He's horrible.
To add to the hilarity, Dan wrote this column on June 2 and then on June 8 he changed his tune about these Red Sox team. All of a sudden, after a few wins the myth of the Red Sox being contenders may not be a myth. I will have Dan's contradictory column about the Red Sox in my next post. He's the worst. Just the worst. He can't even troll consistently.
Monday, June 8, 2015
2 comments Rob Bradford Makes the Ridiculous Argument That the Red Sox Run the Risk of Being Irrelevant
Much like the idea that the NBA lottery needs to be fixed NOW, I think the idea sports teams need to stay relevant is a fiction created by sportswriters. It's something I believe mainly sportswriters worry about. Winning makes a team relevant. Some teams have a great tradition in the area where they are located and are able to stay relevant even when the team isn't consistently making the playoffs or winning titles. I would consider Boston to be one of those areas, but Rob Bradford would not. He thinks more than winning, a team needs to stay relevant, and the Red Sox have lost for almost two straight seasons. TWO! The horror! So Rob Bradford claims the Red Sox need to win games or they will be in trouble of not being seen as relevant. The same fans who stuck it out with the team for 80 years when they didn't win a World Series (okay, not the exact same fans, but you get the point) will give up on the team after two years of not winning games. This is ridiculous and the argument the Red Sox need to stay relevant, not just win games, is ridiculous as well.
John Henry had every right to say the words in February.
"We play for championships," the Red Sox principal owner declared while greeting the media at the start of spring training.
Except the Red Sox don't look like they will win the World Series this year, so what's up with that? That's two straight years the Red Sox haven't won a World Series. Not winning a World Series at least every other year can make the fan base restless and cause them to focus on something other than the Red Sox.
That's how he should think. That's how the entire organization should think. Manager, coaches, players and front office. Every single person collecting a paycheck bearing Henry's signature.
I'm sure they all think that way. Simply because the Red Sox aren't winning the division right now doesn't mean the organization isn't still trying to win titles.
In recent days, even media members have been championship-driven.
Yes, because it's important to get the perspective of those whose sole job is to write narratives, storylines, and criticize the Red Sox. The media thinks the Red Sox should win titles? Well, that changes everything then! The sports media in Boston is so well-known for being calm, patient and not quick to panic when things are going badly. Naturally, it means something a group of people who have unreasonable expectations for sports teams in the Boston area think the Red Sox should win more championships.
They should be playing for championships, not division titles. With a run differential of minus-48 – worst in the American League and third-worst in the majors – neither looks likely.
I don't hate to be that guy who points this out, but a team can play for championships and still not win their division in the age of the wild card. So the Red Sox can play for championships and not win the AL East. And also, if a team is playing to win the division then that doesn't mean that team isn't playing to win a championship as well. First things first. Try to win the division, then focus on trying to win a World Series title.
But here's the reality: the Red Sox organization is playing for something almost as pressing as titles. They're playing for relevance.
Winning brings relevance. Professional sports teams can be relevant without winning games. The whole "they are playing to be relevant" thing is something made up by sportswriters to try and raise the stakes when a team isn't winning. I find it to be mostly bullshit. Boston isn't Miami or Tampa Bay where they have trouble drawing fans to see the team play.
To be clear, like Moe Greene said in The Godfather, we're talking business.
This isn't about the baseball side of things, which is so broken, there's no easy fix.
The Red Sox literally, LITERALLY, went from worst to first in the span of one season a few years ago. "The baseball side of things" can get fixed very quickly if a few things go right. When one minute there looks like no easy fix, that easy fix can suddenly just happen when pitchers start pitching well and the hitters start hitting the ball. It may not happen this year, but it could happen for the Red Sox next year. Trade in the drama for real sportswriting.
This organization will find itself at a crossroads this summer, trying to avoid the kind of ditch even a $200-plus million payroll or shock-and-awe transaction won't eliminate. If the Red Sox can't find a way to remain in contention for something -- anything – they'll be in danger of drowning in the kind of apathy their entire sport is desperately flailing to avoid.
(Yawns) The Red Sox didn't win a World Series for decades and it only galvanized the fan base. I'm not a fan of the "Boston fans are the best and all of the teams are irrevocably part of the city's DNA" crowd, but the Red Sox have a long history of support in Boston. This support won't go away due to a few losing seasons.
Yet it's really, really hard to sell patience when four out five Septembers have left local sports fans banking solely on Bill Belichick.
Oh no! The Red Sox haven't won a World Series four of the last five seasons!
What's funny is another writer could have written this column about the Patriots last year at this time and said, "It's really hard to sell patience when every year since 2004 local sports fans haven't had a reason to expect a championship from the Patriots. Since then, it's other local sports teams that have carried the championship torch for the city, all while banking on Belichick's genius and Brady's ability to bring another Super Bowl to the city."
But that would be silly to write a column that is even somewhat self-aware whose sole intent basically doesn't boil down to the sentence, "Derp, they don't win enough titles like they should to stay relevant."
And that is why staying within striking distance, no matter what the record, is of the utmost important to this organization at this time.
I just LOL'd all over my shirt. Yes, it is important to EVERY SINGLE PROFESSIONAL SPORTS ORGANIZATION to win as many games as possible in order to make the playoffs. So I don't know why staying within striking distance of winning the division wouldn't be important to the Red Sox.
But wait a second, "staying within striking distance." Bradford is clearly talking about striking distance of winning the division, but I thought in his own words,
They should be playing for championships, not division titles.
Now all of a sudden in order to prove his point that the Red Sox need to stay relevant, it's fine to play for division titles. When trying to hold the Red Sox to some ridiculous standard earlier a division title wasn't good enough. But now that he's preaching "relevance" the division title chase is very, very important. Now the franchise that needs to be playing for championships, not division titles, should play for division titles. Because of "relevance."
They entered Monday four games out of first place, the same distance separating the second-place Angels from the AL West-leading Astros. They're two games closer to first than the feel-good Cubbies.
The Cubs are in the National League. I'm not entirely sure the point here, other than the Red Sox aren't out of the running to win the division. If that's Rob Bradford's point, then this entire column where he says there is no easy fix for the baseball side of things has contradicted this point. I guess it's too much to expect Bradford not to contradict himself when the original point he wants to make is so weak.
If John Farrell's team pulled the same 22-29 stunt on June 1 the last time it came off a last-place finish, in 2013, it would be nine games out of first. And if that's the case, the big winners are the New England Revolution and the NBA Draft. Nobody would care what continent the Red Sox ownership group was on, which wouldn't be a good thing for the owners of Liverpool's soccer team.
The Red Sox have to stay relevant, because if they don't then...well, fans aren't going to stop coming to games in future seasons...but it would be bad because ummm...I'm not sure why. The Red Sox haven't been very good before and they managed to stay relevant. Their ability to have a large payroll and a brand name team sort of helps that stay true.
Think about how long it took for people to buy into that '13 club. In case you forgot, when it entered June 34-23 and in first place, fans remained leery
Who cares how long it took the fans to buy into that '13 club? Why in the hell does it matter? They bought in when the team was on its way to winning a World Series title. The whole "relevance is important" issue is really only something sportswriters care about. The Red Sox aren't going to have to worry about being irrelevant based on a few seasons of not making the playoffs.
From 2003-11 when things got bad, Sox fans got doubly angry. You know why? Because the organization had convinced families and fans to invest so much time and money into the brand that it was only common sense that the highs were going to be higher, and the lows were going to be lower.
The highs can get no higher than winning the World Series. Okay, maybe winning a World Series over multiple seasons can make the highs higher. Still, Bradford's argument that the Red Sox were successful and this is why they won't be relevant when they aren't successful is shockingly weak.
But thanks to the '13 World Series, the Red Sox found a way to rekindle interest.
Now the Red Sox find themselves facing something more crushing than watching someone else raise a championship trophy. They face apathy.
Want apathy? Let's talk about MLB teams that aren't in the Top 10 of MLB in home and road attendance. Talk to teams like Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Oakland and the Chicago White Sox about real fan apathy is like. But of course Rob Bradford quotes no attendance figures in here, because they don't back up his argument. So he talks in terms of "relevance," "interest," and "apathy" as if none of these terms are contained in the Red Sox attendance figures which remain in the Top 10 of the majors. When faced with facts that don't support your argument, ignore those facts.
The car isn't turning over. And when you're talking three last-place finishes, coupled with the cost of actually attending one of these games, this could result in the kind of loss of faith a Wally on every doorstep won't immediately cure.
Rob Bradford a few paragraphs ago: "The Red Sox are only a few games out of winning their close division."
Rob Bradford now: "The Red Sox are going to be in last place again."
Keep moving the goal around so it fits the point you want to make. And by the way, those three last place finishes are surrounded by a World Series title, a 90 win season, an 89 win season, two 95 win seasons, and another World Series title. So Bradford has absolutely no point.
In Seth Mnookin's 2006 book, "Feeding the Monster," he detailed a meeting after the 2005 season in which, "one of the team's financial advisors warned that a single 85-win season could cost the organization as much as $20 to $30 million in lost ticket and advertising revenue." At the same meeting, CEO Larry Lucchino, "raised the haunting legacies of teams like Baltimore, Colorado, Cleveland, and Toronto," who won big and led the league in attendance for portions of the '90s before falling on hard times that led to diminished interest in the 2000s.
Fortunately for the Red Sox, those 85 win seasons haven't been the norm over the past decade. Also, how much does a World Series victory or playoff appearance bring in? Because those have been prevalent for the Red Sox as well. And let's be somewhat honest, the Orioles had a terrible owner everyone hated and the team didn't win, the Rockies and Blue Jays don't have near the history in the local area the Red Sox have, and the Indians' had diminishing attendance due to the team losing games and not allowing fans to get engaged with players they knew would be traded. Nowhere among those four teams is there a large market team with the massive spending ability of the Red Sox that also has a strong, historic attachment to the local area.
It seems impossible to believe the same could happen to the Red Sox, but it's an issue they worried about 10 years ago, when they were coming off a World Series and three straight 95-win seasons.
Just because the Red Sox worried about this issue doesn't mean it was a real issue to worry about. Owners and CEO's worry about shit all the time that don't become reality. I would be more persuaded if it weren't for the fact this worry from Lucchino came a decade ago. It's old evidence of a concern that didn't turn out to be a real, genuine concern when the Red Sox actually failed to win 85 games.
They're well aware that the new newest wave of Red Sox fans are already a confused bunch, wondering who to believe after so many ups and downs. This might just be the season their minds are made up and they decide they'd rather play lacrosse than watch the Red Sox.
Or the fans may just tune out for one season and be right back ready to cheer for the Red Sox at the beginning of the 2016 season. If fans are so fickle as to run away when the Red Sox are losing, doesn't this mean they could come right back if the Red Sox have a good start to the 2016 season?
The clock is ticking. If the Sox remain four games out when Patriots preseason starts -- no matter what the record – then they might have dodged a bullet.
Four games out, not five games, of the division title. If the Red Sox are five games out of winning a division title when Patriots preseason starts, they will become irrelevant. This is the same division title that the franchise shouldn't be playing to achieve according to Rob Bradford.
If things go the other way, then the Red Sox will face the most perilous moment of John Henry's ownership. Football is already king, and the NFL's signature franchise resides 35 miles away in Foxboro. Good luck taking eyeballs away from the defending Super Bowl champs.
Could he be more dramatic about all of this? Good luck to any MLB franchise taking eyeballs away from the football team in the area (excepting a few MLB teams). Football is king in most cities. This may sound shocking, because it's only happened for as long as the Patriots and Red Sox have existed, but fans of the Red Sox and the Patriots can pay attention to both teams at the same time. Yes, it's true. This isn't an "either/or" proposition. If the Red Sox stink for one season then that doesn't mean the team will be irrelevant. This is a ridiculous argument for why the Red Sox are on the threshold of not becoming relevant.
The days are dire for the Red Sox, not just on the field, but in a much broader sense. They're fighting to remain relevant, and right now, they're losing.
In a broader sense, the argument for "relevance" is a losing argument. Fans care about winning and winning helps fans get engaged with the team. A team like the Red Sox that has such a vast history with the local area isn't going to have worry about relevance when not having success over a 2-3 year span. Cut the drama just for the purposes of pageviews.
John Henry had every right to say the words in February.
"We play for championships," the Red Sox principal owner declared while greeting the media at the start of spring training.
Except the Red Sox don't look like they will win the World Series this year, so what's up with that? That's two straight years the Red Sox haven't won a World Series. Not winning a World Series at least every other year can make the fan base restless and cause them to focus on something other than the Red Sox.
That's how he should think. That's how the entire organization should think. Manager, coaches, players and front office. Every single person collecting a paycheck bearing Henry's signature.
I'm sure they all think that way. Simply because the Red Sox aren't winning the division right now doesn't mean the organization isn't still trying to win titles.
In recent days, even media members have been championship-driven.
Yes, because it's important to get the perspective of those whose sole job is to write narratives, storylines, and criticize the Red Sox. The media thinks the Red Sox should win titles? Well, that changes everything then! The sports media in Boston is so well-known for being calm, patient and not quick to panic when things are going badly. Naturally, it means something a group of people who have unreasonable expectations for sports teams in the Boston area think the Red Sox should win more championships.
They should be playing for championships, not division titles. With a run differential of minus-48 – worst in the American League and third-worst in the majors – neither looks likely.
I don't hate to be that guy who points this out, but a team can play for championships and still not win their division in the age of the wild card. So the Red Sox can play for championships and not win the AL East. And also, if a team is playing to win the division then that doesn't mean that team isn't playing to win a championship as well. First things first. Try to win the division, then focus on trying to win a World Series title.
But here's the reality: the Red Sox organization is playing for something almost as pressing as titles. They're playing for relevance.
Winning brings relevance. Professional sports teams can be relevant without winning games. The whole "they are playing to be relevant" thing is something made up by sportswriters to try and raise the stakes when a team isn't winning. I find it to be mostly bullshit. Boston isn't Miami or Tampa Bay where they have trouble drawing fans to see the team play.
To be clear, like Moe Greene said in The Godfather, we're talking business.
This isn't about the baseball side of things, which is so broken, there's no easy fix.
The Red Sox literally, LITERALLY, went from worst to first in the span of one season a few years ago. "The baseball side of things" can get fixed very quickly if a few things go right. When one minute there looks like no easy fix, that easy fix can suddenly just happen when pitchers start pitching well and the hitters start hitting the ball. It may not happen this year, but it could happen for the Red Sox next year. Trade in the drama for real sportswriting.
This organization will find itself at a crossroads this summer, trying to avoid the kind of ditch even a $200-plus million payroll or shock-and-awe transaction won't eliminate. If the Red Sox can't find a way to remain in contention for something -- anything – they'll be in danger of drowning in the kind of apathy their entire sport is desperately flailing to avoid.
(Yawns) The Red Sox didn't win a World Series for decades and it only galvanized the fan base. I'm not a fan of the "Boston fans are the best and all of the teams are irrevocably part of the city's DNA" crowd, but the Red Sox have a long history of support in Boston. This support won't go away due to a few losing seasons.
Yet it's really, really hard to sell patience when four out five Septembers have left local sports fans banking solely on Bill Belichick.
Oh no! The Red Sox haven't won a World Series four of the last five seasons!
What's funny is another writer could have written this column about the Patriots last year at this time and said, "It's really hard to sell patience when every year since 2004 local sports fans haven't had a reason to expect a championship from the Patriots. Since then, it's other local sports teams that have carried the championship torch for the city, all while banking on Belichick's genius and Brady's ability to bring another Super Bowl to the city."
But that would be silly to write a column that is even somewhat self-aware whose sole intent basically doesn't boil down to the sentence, "Derp, they don't win enough titles like they should to stay relevant."
And that is why staying within striking distance, no matter what the record, is of the utmost important to this organization at this time.
I just LOL'd all over my shirt. Yes, it is important to EVERY SINGLE PROFESSIONAL SPORTS ORGANIZATION to win as many games as possible in order to make the playoffs. So I don't know why staying within striking distance of winning the division wouldn't be important to the Red Sox.
But wait a second, "staying within striking distance." Bradford is clearly talking about striking distance of winning the division, but I thought in his own words,
They should be playing for championships, not division titles.
Now all of a sudden in order to prove his point that the Red Sox need to stay relevant, it's fine to play for division titles. When trying to hold the Red Sox to some ridiculous standard earlier a division title wasn't good enough. But now that he's preaching "relevance" the division title chase is very, very important. Now the franchise that needs to be playing for championships, not division titles, should play for division titles. Because of "relevance."
They entered Monday four games out of first place, the same distance separating the second-place Angels from the AL West-leading Astros. They're two games closer to first than the feel-good Cubbies.
The Cubs are in the National League. I'm not entirely sure the point here, other than the Red Sox aren't out of the running to win the division. If that's Rob Bradford's point, then this entire column where he says there is no easy fix for the baseball side of things has contradicted this point. I guess it's too much to expect Bradford not to contradict himself when the original point he wants to make is so weak.
If John Farrell's team pulled the same 22-29 stunt on June 1 the last time it came off a last-place finish, in 2013, it would be nine games out of first. And if that's the case, the big winners are the New England Revolution and the NBA Draft. Nobody would care what continent the Red Sox ownership group was on, which wouldn't be a good thing for the owners of Liverpool's soccer team.
The Red Sox have to stay relevant, because if they don't then...well, fans aren't going to stop coming to games in future seasons...but it would be bad because ummm...I'm not sure why. The Red Sox haven't been very good before and they managed to stay relevant. Their ability to have a large payroll and a brand name team sort of helps that stay true.
Think about how long it took for people to buy into that '13 club. In case you forgot, when it entered June 34-23 and in first place, fans remained leery
Who cares how long it took the fans to buy into that '13 club? Why in the hell does it matter? They bought in when the team was on its way to winning a World Series title. The whole "relevance is important" issue is really only something sportswriters care about. The Red Sox aren't going to have to worry about being irrelevant based on a few seasons of not making the playoffs.
From 2003-11 when things got bad, Sox fans got doubly angry. You know why? Because the organization had convinced families and fans to invest so much time and money into the brand that it was only common sense that the highs were going to be higher, and the lows were going to be lower.
The highs can get no higher than winning the World Series. Okay, maybe winning a World Series over multiple seasons can make the highs higher. Still, Bradford's argument that the Red Sox were successful and this is why they won't be relevant when they aren't successful is shockingly weak.
But thanks to the '13 World Series, the Red Sox found a way to rekindle interest.
Now the Red Sox find themselves facing something more crushing than watching someone else raise a championship trophy. They face apathy.
Want apathy? Let's talk about MLB teams that aren't in the Top 10 of MLB in home and road attendance. Talk to teams like Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Oakland and the Chicago White Sox about real fan apathy is like. But of course Rob Bradford quotes no attendance figures in here, because they don't back up his argument. So he talks in terms of "relevance," "interest," and "apathy" as if none of these terms are contained in the Red Sox attendance figures which remain in the Top 10 of the majors. When faced with facts that don't support your argument, ignore those facts.
The car isn't turning over. And when you're talking three last-place finishes, coupled with the cost of actually attending one of these games, this could result in the kind of loss of faith a Wally on every doorstep won't immediately cure.
Rob Bradford a few paragraphs ago: "The Red Sox are only a few games out of winning their close division."
Rob Bradford now: "The Red Sox are going to be in last place again."
Keep moving the goal around so it fits the point you want to make. And by the way, those three last place finishes are surrounded by a World Series title, a 90 win season, an 89 win season, two 95 win seasons, and another World Series title. So Bradford has absolutely no point.
In Seth Mnookin's 2006 book, "Feeding the Monster," he detailed a meeting after the 2005 season in which, "one of the team's financial advisors warned that a single 85-win season could cost the organization as much as $20 to $30 million in lost ticket and advertising revenue." At the same meeting, CEO Larry Lucchino, "raised the haunting legacies of teams like Baltimore, Colorado, Cleveland, and Toronto," who won big and led the league in attendance for portions of the '90s before falling on hard times that led to diminished interest in the 2000s.
Fortunately for the Red Sox, those 85 win seasons haven't been the norm over the past decade. Also, how much does a World Series victory or playoff appearance bring in? Because those have been prevalent for the Red Sox as well. And let's be somewhat honest, the Orioles had a terrible owner everyone hated and the team didn't win, the Rockies and Blue Jays don't have near the history in the local area the Red Sox have, and the Indians' had diminishing attendance due to the team losing games and not allowing fans to get engaged with players they knew would be traded. Nowhere among those four teams is there a large market team with the massive spending ability of the Red Sox that also has a strong, historic attachment to the local area.
It seems impossible to believe the same could happen to the Red Sox, but it's an issue they worried about 10 years ago, when they were coming off a World Series and three straight 95-win seasons.
Just because the Red Sox worried about this issue doesn't mean it was a real issue to worry about. Owners and CEO's worry about shit all the time that don't become reality. I would be more persuaded if it weren't for the fact this worry from Lucchino came a decade ago. It's old evidence of a concern that didn't turn out to be a real, genuine concern when the Red Sox actually failed to win 85 games.
They're well aware that the new newest wave of Red Sox fans are already a confused bunch, wondering who to believe after so many ups and downs. This might just be the season their minds are made up and they decide they'd rather play lacrosse than watch the Red Sox.
Or the fans may just tune out for one season and be right back ready to cheer for the Red Sox at the beginning of the 2016 season. If fans are so fickle as to run away when the Red Sox are losing, doesn't this mean they could come right back if the Red Sox have a good start to the 2016 season?
The clock is ticking. If the Sox remain four games out when Patriots preseason starts -- no matter what the record – then they might have dodged a bullet.
Four games out, not five games, of the division title. If the Red Sox are five games out of winning a division title when Patriots preseason starts, they will become irrelevant. This is the same division title that the franchise shouldn't be playing to achieve according to Rob Bradford.
If things go the other way, then the Red Sox will face the most perilous moment of John Henry's ownership. Football is already king, and the NFL's signature franchise resides 35 miles away in Foxboro. Good luck taking eyeballs away from the defending Super Bowl champs.
Could he be more dramatic about all of this? Good luck to any MLB franchise taking eyeballs away from the football team in the area (excepting a few MLB teams). Football is king in most cities. This may sound shocking, because it's only happened for as long as the Patriots and Red Sox have existed, but fans of the Red Sox and the Patriots can pay attention to both teams at the same time. Yes, it's true. This isn't an "either/or" proposition. If the Red Sox stink for one season then that doesn't mean the team will be irrelevant. This is a ridiculous argument for why the Red Sox are on the threshold of not becoming relevant.
The days are dire for the Red Sox, not just on the field, but in a much broader sense. They're fighting to remain relevant, and right now, they're losing.
In a broader sense, the argument for "relevance" is a losing argument. Fans care about winning and winning helps fans get engaged with the team. A team like the Red Sox that has such a vast history with the local area isn't going to have worry about relevance when not having success over a 2-3 year span. Cut the drama just for the purposes of pageviews.
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
6 comments Tom Brady Killed Baseball in Boston
Bill Speros of Boston.com, who refers to his column as "Obnoxious Boston Fan," wrote about how now that the Patriots have won another Super Bowl, the Red Sox will now need to keep pace and none of this will ever be enough for fans of these Boston-area teams. Basically, it's the type of crap no one wants to read coming from a group of fans who have nine championships since 2001. It must be those higher standards these fans have acquired over the past decade that will always leave them unsatisfied. Then the closing part of the column says that Boston is a football town now and not a baseball town. At this point, I think I would disagree. It's another "Baseball is dying" column, but more on a local level, and it blames the Patriots and Tom Brady for baseball's death in Boston.
Also, I don't really find Bill Speros obnoxious. Possibly trolling for pageviews? Yes. Looking for something exciting to talk about during the February lull? Probably. Obnoxious? Probably not obnoxious, even though he may want to be.
The sports psyche of Boston is layered with strata that constantly twist both emotion and attention.
One day, Tom Brady sucks.
The next, he's a four-time Super Bowl champion.
That's every city with a professional sports team. I know it feels good to think that Boston is special and more important because the fans have knee-jerk reactions to their team's failures/successes, but it's exclusive to Boston in the same way this fragile fan psyche is exclusive to every city with a major sports franchise. Sorry, I know it sucks to only be a little special.
Those who called for Jimmy G. last fall can take some solace in the fact that he now has as many Super Bowl rings as Peyton Manning, and one more than Dan Marino.
Because being the starting quarterback for the Super Bowl-winning team and being the backup quarterback for the Super Bowl-winning team are virtually the same thing.
We're fickle and blessed. Fans can write off the Red Sox one day, and turn their focus to Patriots training camp the next.
Any city with multiple teams does this. Again, I know you desperately want these fans to be special, but other than having three major sports franchises in one city and one major sports franchise a short-ish drive away, they aren't that special. Nearly every fan base is fickle.
This week, the Patriots were riding Duck Boats while the Red Sox were counting down to Truck Day. Boston was once a "hockey town with a baseball team." It became the unquestioned domain and property of the Red Sox from the moment Bobby Orr left town until the day Tom Brady arrived. There was a brief gap when the Red Sox and Celtics shared the throne during Larry Bird's prime.
Generally teams that are the most successful tend to become the most popular team in a certain city for a period of time. It's not always permanent. Times change, the popularity of a team when that team is successful rarely changes. It's all cyclical.
Sometime in the past 15 years, and the moment depends on your perspective and preference, Boston became a "football town with a baseball team."
It's official then. Baseball is dead in Boston and it's been dead during the time the Red Sox won three World Series titles. Wow, that's interesting for me to find out. I seem to recall the Red Sox being very popular in Boston over the past 15 years.
The Red Sox have won three World Series Cups in this century, but the Patriots have won four Lombardi Trophies. Where the Red Sox have mixed success with epic failure during this era, the Patriots have remained remarkably consistent when it comes to winning seasons, and playoff appearances.
But remember, baseball has a competitive balance issue where the teams that spend the most money, like the Red Sox, dominate in the regular season and the playoffs. If only baseball had a salary cap like the NFL does, then there would be the competitive balance shown by the Patriots' success over the last 15 years.
In about 99 percent of the nation, this "dilemma" over which local team is No. 1 in the hearts and minds of fans seems nonsensical. The NFL team wins.
Well, the NFL is much more popular than MLB, but since there is really no way of measuring which local team has the fans' heart the most, I guess we'll just take his obnoxious word for it.
There are no wrong choices. It's really a matter of preference.
And Bill Speros is rambling a little bit now.
New York may be the only other big city in America where the local NFL team [teams] is not the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most "popular" team in town. The Yankees dominate the conversation in the Big Apple nine months each year.
You know, if two NFL teams are not the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most popular team in town, then in 99% of the nation the NFL team doesn't win. Math says so. 2 divided by 32 is 6.25%. So maybe in 93.75% of the nation the NFL is the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most popular team in town. Factor in that four NFL teams (Green Bay, Jacksonville, Washington, Buffalo) don't have another major sports franchise in their city or share their favorite major sports franchise with another city, then that means the NFL team is the most popular team in town in 81.25% of the nation, not 99%.
And yes, I know Green Bay fans are probably also Milwaukee Brewers fans and there is a strong overlap between Redskins fans with Orioles/Nationals fans (the Redskins play in Maryland, which isn't even in Washington, D.C.) and Bills fans are probably Mets/Yankees fans. I also know it's impossible to say what the most popular team in town is, but I just want to take the obnoxious crown away from Bill Speros.
Oh, and by the way, the St. Louis Cardinals are a bigger deal in St. Louis than any of the other major sports franchises. I'm not sure there is even an argument to be made here against this. So that's 78.125% of the NFL cities where the NFL team is king.
Boston is a Patriots Town in February of 2015, even if the team's name says "New England" and its home games are played in Foxborough.
Thanks for killing baseball in Boston* Tom Brady. You asshole. First you cheat, then you cheat again, and now you murder baseball in Boston. When will your misdeeds end?
*At least until the Red Sox win a World Series title or have success in the playoffs.
The Celtics, meanwhile, are losing season-ticket holders, never mind casual fans. It's not that people aren't interested. They just fail to see the financial logic in spending top dollar to watch a team that's building to rebuild with players who won't be here in the long run.
Which does make sense. It's 2015 and completely possible to devotedly support a sports team without attending their games.
The 2013 Red Sox demonstrated that Boston has potential to be a baseball city again. But that was a miraculous run, in the wake of a devastating terrorist attack, and carried a season climax unmatched in 95 years.
It was a season climax unmatched in 95 years, unless Speros wants to count the 2004 and 2007 seasons, which also matched the 2013 season climax. I'm pretty sure that the 2004 season was the most memorable of all the Red Sox championships over the last decade, but I understand Speros' need to try and explain away the excitement of the 2013 Red Sox title as if were unparalleled in order to pretend like the Red Sox aren't as popular in Boston as the Patriots are. He has to bend the truth and do some revisionist history to get there of course.
They followed up that with their least-interesting season since the 1994 lockout.
Translation: They weren't very good. I would also argue that the Red Sox were interesting in that they started trading away players and adjusted their strategy to team-building for the immediate future, but I see Speros takes the same position that Bill Simmons tends to take with the Red Sox. Not winning games equals not being an interesting team.
David Ortiz and Pablo Sandoval Tweeted their excitement over watching the Patriots' parade.
Jackie Bradley Jr. told WEEI.com Thursday he was going "to go all Marshawn Lynch this year." Bradley hit .198 last year with 30 RBI and eight steals.
"Least Mode" to "Beast Mode."
Somebody should probably first tell Jackie Bradley, Jr. that Lynch plays for the Seahawks and not the Patriots.
A few members of the Patriots went to the Celtics game Wednesday night.
BASEBALL IS DYING! THE NBA IS MORE POPULAR THAN MLB! HERE IS PROOF!
Or when the Bruins bring the Stanley Cup into Fenway Park.
THE NHL IS MORE POPULAR THAN MLB! THE RED SOX NEED BRUINS PLAYERS TO SHOW UP IN ORDER TO GET A CROWD AT FENWAY PARK!
Or when the World Series trophy gets carried onto the 50-yard-line at Gillette Stadium.
THE ONLY WAY ANYONE IN BOSTON CARED ABOUT THE RED SOX WINNING THE WORLD SERIES IS IF THE RED SOX TEAM SHOWED UP AT A PATRIOTS GAME.
No other city in the country boasts that kind of camaraderie among its teams.
Pretty sure this is false. Again, Speros wants to equate some sort of inherent superiority and camaraderie among the teams in the Boston area that would be there anyway if multiple teams in one area won a title over a short time span.
The Red Sox, especially, cannot afford to take another year off on the field. Not after what happened in Glendale.
They must win the World Series in order to satiate Red Sox fans who insist on their teams winning titles every other year or else they won't feel like they can support a non-exciting team.
Boston fans will never be "spoiled" - at least not until my late father can see the Red Sox win a World Series in his lifetime. He never will. Therefore, all those titles will never be enough for some of us.
That's pretty much the definition of being spoiled.
The fans here have high expectations because they put up the cash via tickets, luxury boxes, and TV viewership, to allow it to happen.
Every city with a major sports team puts up cash via tickets, luxury boxes and TV viewership. And yet, every team's fan base doesn't act like winning is a God-given right and try to explain away that the unreasonable expectations come from how much more they sweat into their team than you do for your favorite team. No really, Patriots and Red Sox fans aren't special because they put up cash for the team. I know, it's crazy to read, but every NFL and MLB team has fans that put up money to support that team. No matter what your mommy and daddy told you, you aren't special for being a fan of your favorite team.
"We're on to Cincinnati," the cries for Jimmy G., New England's 5-1 run in the middle of the season, clinching home-field, beating Baltimore and Indy, and Deflategate served to calcify and crystallize the Patriots fan base. You saw a wondrous coalition develop between the Newbies. the Red White and Blue Hats, the Old Guard, the Stat Boys, the Brady and Gronk Groupies, and the Regular Joes.
Isn't it amazing how winning brings everyone together? This only happens with the Patriots though. Every other team's fan base splinters apart when success arrives.
By the time Sunday's game began, whatever and whoever constitutes Patriot Nation was 100 percent unified behind the team, its legacy, its coach, and its players.
Thanks Bill Simmons. I love hearing hyperbolic stories about how fans are unified behind a super-special team that is more super-special than any other team that has ever competed for a title ever before. In fact, I love hearing these stories so much that I feel like I have heard similar stories about the Red Sox all three times they have won the World Series in the last decade.
After the interception, after the win, after the trophy presentation, after Gronk finally runs out of energy, after Julian Edelman checks off everyone on Tinder in his Zip Code,
It's a recent reference to Julian Edelman's sexual habits! How timely and shows that Bill is in touch with "the kids" and what they like.
No matter what the NFL says about Deflategate, the Patriots are now the most powerful franchise in the most powerful league in American sports.
Okay. I don't think it really matters that much, but okay. Next year a different team may win the Super Bowl and they will be the most powerful franchise in American sports. Also, if the Dallas Cowboys do anything controversial then I guarantee Speros' opinion of how powerful the Patriots are will be tested.
They boast the greatest NFL QB who ever played, and perhaps the greatest NFL coach ever - depending on where you put Lombardi, Tom Landry, and Belichick's mentor - Bill Parcells.
I certainly wouldn't put Bill Parcells in there with Lombardi, Belichick and Landry. Of course, Parcells coached the Patriots, the Giants, and Cowboys, so he's going to automatically be thrown in the conversation as one of the greatest coaches ever simply because of that.
The task for the Red Sox is no longer securing, or maintaining their spot, as Boston's Most Popular Team. That is gone forever.
Oh yeah, forever. Sure, I believe that. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction to the Patriots winning the Super Bowl. Boston is now a football town even though Boston doesn't even really have a professional football team. If the Red Sox win another World Series I am supposed to believe that they won't be the most popular team in Boston again? Please. The Red Sox won't be the most popular team in Boston from now on? What a lie.
I don't even really think of Boston when I think of the Patriots. When I think of Boston, I think of the Celtics and the Red Sox. I simply don't believe that Boston's most popular team isn't the Red Sox just because the Patriots won another Super Bowl title.
Demographics and time cannot be denied. The Patriots fan base is getting younger and the Red Sox fan base is getting older.
As soon as Tom Brady retires and the Patriots' dynasty is over, the Red Sox aren't going to be the most popular team in Boston again? I don't believe this for a second. I can't argue the demographics, but I find it hard to believe Boston isn't still a baseball town and won't be a baseball town once again in the very near future.
David Ortiz is the lone threat the Red Sox have in terms of increasing their popularity, aside from not finishing in last place. His rise in Boston has coincided with that of Brady's. They are inexorably linked in the minds of millions of fans. But Ortiz is a DH and Brady's a quarterback.
This guy seems to have been suckling at the teat of Bill Simmons for quite a while. I bet Bill Speros is Boston.com's answer to Bill Simmons. They seem to write very similarly by getting success and popularity confused, making proclamations that involve reading the minds of large amounts of people, and trying to find a link between two Boston-area athletes because no other major sports teams exist in the same realm as Boston-area sports teams exist.
Ortiz spoke for the city in the wake of the Marathon Bombing. His place in Boston's Sports Pantheon is secured.
"The Boston Sports Pantheon." He writes so much like Bill Simmons it's kind of weird. Get your own writing style. All that's missing are more pop culture references and a few dozen YouTube clips embedded in this column.
Brady is sharing his family with the world on social media, and has put down his multi-million dollar roots in Brookline. He's embraced his public persona.
I remember just a few short years ago how the question was whether Tom Brady spent enough time in Boston and there were complaints that he shouldn't train in California during the offseason. One move to Brookline and a Super Bowl win later and these complaints are all forgotten.
Ortiz lives in Weston [something I had to look up] and makes public appearances for his various charities, but otherwise enjoys his privacy.
Just a few short years ago Ortiz was the guy even the FCC couldn't censor who was standing up for Boston Strong. After a last place season he's a hermit who isn't even a real citizen of Boston because he only shows up to support his stupid, last place charities.
Even with Big Papi, the Red Sox are facing a fourth-and-long when it comes to achieving sports supremacy in Boston again. Two last-place finishes around a World Series title haven't helped.
Because Red Sox fans expect a World Series every year or else they are just going to lose interest. It's not that they are spoiled, it's just the high expectations. How dare the Red Sox have two last place finishes with a World Series title in between these last place finishes. How do they expect to take back the city of Boston from the Patriots with a performance like that?
But interested in the Red Sox heading into 2015 seems surprisingly high.
Probably because they are still a very popular team and Boston is still a baseball town.
That's impressive considering last year's disastrous campaign, and the fact that Clay Buchholz continues to loom like the Blizzard of 2015 on the WBZ radar map as the Opening Day starter.
Bill Speros out of one side of his mouth: "Boston is now a football town because nobody likes baseball anymore and the Red Sox haven't had the sustained success the Patriots have had. Red Sox fans are going to have declining interest in supporting a team that are losers. They are forever the second most popular team in Boston."
Bill Speros out of the other side of his mouth: "There is a lot of interest in the Red Sox even though they came in last place last year. Even if the Red Sox aren't very good, the fans seem to want to see them play."
Younger viewers get restless and/or bored watching baseball. They don't watching football. Fantasy football, and the ever-streaming second screen, cure whatever downtime exists. Folks over 40 like me have been conditioned by decades of watching baseball to understand and appreciate the nuances between each play, and the anticipation before each pitch.
My son, not so much.
Another Bill Simmons staple. What his friends and family like is the perfect representation of what everyone else likes as well. Therefore, if Bill's friends don't like something then the public as a whole doesn't like it. In this case, Speros' son doesn't like baseball, so obviously this means the Patriots have taken over Boston and it's no longer a baseball town.
The Red Sox get this, and so does Ortiz. All they have to do is check this website, either local newspaper, Twitter, tune into WEEI or The Sports Hub, or turn on ESPN and the NFL Network, to see or hear how much energy the Patriots absorb before, during, and after the season.
The NFL is the most popular sport in the United States. This is true for nearly every city that has an NFL team. Again, it's not just specific to the New England area. This also doesn't mean that Boston isn't a baseball town. The Patriots just won the Super Bowl and took up a lot of air time prior to winning the Super Bowl due to the accusations they deflated footballs against the Colts. The Red Sox will get a lot of coverage once something controversial happens with them or even if they have success on the field.
Rightly or wrongly, the success of the Patriots will now become the burden of both the Red Sox, and Bruins as they approach the postseason.
The Celtics may be the big winners here. The euphoria of watching endless highlights of Sunday's Super Bowl will help temper the frustration and malaise gripping the "Green Teamers."
So the Celtics are allowed to be terrible and nobody in New England cares because they are focused on the Patriots? But the Red Sox are not allowed to be terrible or else this proves that baseball is dying in Boston? So baseball in Boston is dying because the Red Sox have only won the World Series once since 2007? But the Celtics haven't won a title since 2008 and they are not a very good team, but they are big winners because everyone in the Boston area will be focused on how great the Patriots are? Mediocrity helps the Celtics, but only goes to prove how Boston is not a baseball town anymore when the Red Sox are mediocre. So perhaps the big concern for the Red Sox being mediocre goes to show how many fans in Boston really care about the team? Maybe this means Boston is still a baseball town?
Most Red Sox home spring training games are sold out, or close to it.
You are ruining your own point right now. By stating that the Patriots are now the team Boston fans care about the most, then talking about how popular the Red Sox are, even coming off a last place finish, it's just proof that the Red Sox still have juice in Boston despite being a bad team. It seems like there is a lot of interest in a sport that has declining popularity in the Boston area.
Their eyes will be focused on the Red Sox for as long as the rotation of No. 3 starters, and the newly re-loaded lineup, remain competitive.
So, as I said previously, when the Red Sox are a good team again then they will once again be the most popular team in Boston. Thereby proving that Boston is still a baseball town. It sounds silly to write, "Oh, the Patriots won another Super Bowl and no one is talking about the Red Sox right now so this obviously means the Patriots are the most popular team in Boston." It's so reactionary when written in February off a Patriots Super Bowl victory.
Last summer, baseball season in Boston was finished by July 4.
I'm surprised Speros didn't say that date was Red Sox fans' day of independence from watching terrible baseball.
This year, the Red Sox might not even get that much time.
Like every other team that isn't very good, fan interest tends to decrease. Measuring the peak of excitement about the Patriots versus the excitement for the Red Sox when coming off a last place season where they traded some of their best players and drawing a hard-and-fast conclusion about baseball's popularity is ridiculous. In fact, it's pretty obnoxious. So I guess Bill Speros can consider his mission to be successful.
Also, I don't really find Bill Speros obnoxious. Possibly trolling for pageviews? Yes. Looking for something exciting to talk about during the February lull? Probably. Obnoxious? Probably not obnoxious, even though he may want to be.
The sports psyche of Boston is layered with strata that constantly twist both emotion and attention.
One day, Tom Brady sucks.
The next, he's a four-time Super Bowl champion.
That's every city with a professional sports team. I know it feels good to think that Boston is special and more important because the fans have knee-jerk reactions to their team's failures/successes, but it's exclusive to Boston in the same way this fragile fan psyche is exclusive to every city with a major sports franchise. Sorry, I know it sucks to only be a little special.
Those who called for Jimmy G. last fall can take some solace in the fact that he now has as many Super Bowl rings as Peyton Manning, and one more than Dan Marino.
Because being the starting quarterback for the Super Bowl-winning team and being the backup quarterback for the Super Bowl-winning team are virtually the same thing.
We're fickle and blessed. Fans can write off the Red Sox one day, and turn their focus to Patriots training camp the next.
Any city with multiple teams does this. Again, I know you desperately want these fans to be special, but other than having three major sports franchises in one city and one major sports franchise a short-ish drive away, they aren't that special. Nearly every fan base is fickle.
This week, the Patriots were riding Duck Boats while the Red Sox were counting down to Truck Day. Boston was once a "hockey town with a baseball team." It became the unquestioned domain and property of the Red Sox from the moment Bobby Orr left town until the day Tom Brady arrived. There was a brief gap when the Red Sox and Celtics shared the throne during Larry Bird's prime.
Generally teams that are the most successful tend to become the most popular team in a certain city for a period of time. It's not always permanent. Times change, the popularity of a team when that team is successful rarely changes. It's all cyclical.
Sometime in the past 15 years, and the moment depends on your perspective and preference, Boston became a "football town with a baseball team."
It's official then. Baseball is dead in Boston and it's been dead during the time the Red Sox won three World Series titles. Wow, that's interesting for me to find out. I seem to recall the Red Sox being very popular in Boston over the past 15 years.
The Red Sox have won three World Series Cups in this century, but the Patriots have won four Lombardi Trophies. Where the Red Sox have mixed success with epic failure during this era, the Patriots have remained remarkably consistent when it comes to winning seasons, and playoff appearances.
But remember, baseball has a competitive balance issue where the teams that spend the most money, like the Red Sox, dominate in the regular season and the playoffs. If only baseball had a salary cap like the NFL does, then there would be the competitive balance shown by the Patriots' success over the last 15 years.
In about 99 percent of the nation, this "dilemma" over which local team is No. 1 in the hearts and minds of fans seems nonsensical. The NFL team wins.
Well, the NFL is much more popular than MLB, but since there is really no way of measuring which local team has the fans' heart the most, I guess we'll just take his obnoxious word for it.
There are no wrong choices. It's really a matter of preference.
And Bill Speros is rambling a little bit now.
New York may be the only other big city in America where the local NFL team [teams] is not the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most "popular" team in town. The Yankees dominate the conversation in the Big Apple nine months each year.
You know, if two NFL teams are not the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most popular team in town, then in 99% of the nation the NFL team doesn't win. Math says so. 2 divided by 32 is 6.25%. So maybe in 93.75% of the nation the NFL is the unquestioned winner when it comes time to pick the most popular team in town. Factor in that four NFL teams (Green Bay, Jacksonville, Washington, Buffalo) don't have another major sports franchise in their city or share their favorite major sports franchise with another city, then that means the NFL team is the most popular team in town in 81.25% of the nation, not 99%.
And yes, I know Green Bay fans are probably also Milwaukee Brewers fans and there is a strong overlap between Redskins fans with Orioles/Nationals fans (the Redskins play in Maryland, which isn't even in Washington, D.C.) and Bills fans are probably Mets/Yankees fans. I also know it's impossible to say what the most popular team in town is, but I just want to take the obnoxious crown away from Bill Speros.
Oh, and by the way, the St. Louis Cardinals are a bigger deal in St. Louis than any of the other major sports franchises. I'm not sure there is even an argument to be made here against this. So that's 78.125% of the NFL cities where the NFL team is king.
Boston is a Patriots Town in February of 2015, even if the team's name says "New England" and its home games are played in Foxborough.
Thanks for killing baseball in Boston* Tom Brady. You asshole. First you cheat, then you cheat again, and now you murder baseball in Boston. When will your misdeeds end?
*At least until the Red Sox win a World Series title or have success in the playoffs.
The Celtics, meanwhile, are losing season-ticket holders, never mind casual fans. It's not that people aren't interested. They just fail to see the financial logic in spending top dollar to watch a team that's building to rebuild with players who won't be here in the long run.
Which does make sense. It's 2015 and completely possible to devotedly support a sports team without attending their games.
The 2013 Red Sox demonstrated that Boston has potential to be a baseball city again. But that was a miraculous run, in the wake of a devastating terrorist attack, and carried a season climax unmatched in 95 years.
It was a season climax unmatched in 95 years, unless Speros wants to count the 2004 and 2007 seasons, which also matched the 2013 season climax. I'm pretty sure that the 2004 season was the most memorable of all the Red Sox championships over the last decade, but I understand Speros' need to try and explain away the excitement of the 2013 Red Sox title as if were unparalleled in order to pretend like the Red Sox aren't as popular in Boston as the Patriots are. He has to bend the truth and do some revisionist history to get there of course.
They followed up that with their least-interesting season since the 1994 lockout.
Translation: They weren't very good. I would also argue that the Red Sox were interesting in that they started trading away players and adjusted their strategy to team-building for the immediate future, but I see Speros takes the same position that Bill Simmons tends to take with the Red Sox. Not winning games equals not being an interesting team.
David Ortiz and Pablo Sandoval Tweeted their excitement over watching the Patriots' parade.
Jackie Bradley Jr. told WEEI.com Thursday he was going "to go all Marshawn Lynch this year." Bradley hit .198 last year with 30 RBI and eight steals.
"Least Mode" to "Beast Mode."
Somebody should probably first tell Jackie Bradley, Jr. that Lynch plays for the Seahawks and not the Patriots.
A few members of the Patriots went to the Celtics game Wednesday night.
BASEBALL IS DYING! THE NBA IS MORE POPULAR THAN MLB! HERE IS PROOF!
Or when the Bruins bring the Stanley Cup into Fenway Park.
THE NHL IS MORE POPULAR THAN MLB! THE RED SOX NEED BRUINS PLAYERS TO SHOW UP IN ORDER TO GET A CROWD AT FENWAY PARK!
Or when the World Series trophy gets carried onto the 50-yard-line at Gillette Stadium.
THE ONLY WAY ANYONE IN BOSTON CARED ABOUT THE RED SOX WINNING THE WORLD SERIES IS IF THE RED SOX TEAM SHOWED UP AT A PATRIOTS GAME.
No other city in the country boasts that kind of camaraderie among its teams.
Pretty sure this is false. Again, Speros wants to equate some sort of inherent superiority and camaraderie among the teams in the Boston area that would be there anyway if multiple teams in one area won a title over a short time span.
The Red Sox, especially, cannot afford to take another year off on the field. Not after what happened in Glendale.
They must win the World Series in order to satiate Red Sox fans who insist on their teams winning titles every other year or else they won't feel like they can support a non-exciting team.
Boston fans will never be "spoiled" - at least not until my late father can see the Red Sox win a World Series in his lifetime. He never will. Therefore, all those titles will never be enough for some of us.
That's pretty much the definition of being spoiled.
The fans here have high expectations because they put up the cash via tickets, luxury boxes, and TV viewership, to allow it to happen.
Every city with a major sports team puts up cash via tickets, luxury boxes and TV viewership. And yet, every team's fan base doesn't act like winning is a God-given right and try to explain away that the unreasonable expectations come from how much more they sweat into their team than you do for your favorite team. No really, Patriots and Red Sox fans aren't special because they put up cash for the team. I know, it's crazy to read, but every NFL and MLB team has fans that put up money to support that team. No matter what your mommy and daddy told you, you aren't special for being a fan of your favorite team.
"We're on to Cincinnati," the cries for Jimmy G., New England's 5-1 run in the middle of the season, clinching home-field, beating Baltimore and Indy, and Deflategate served to calcify and crystallize the Patriots fan base. You saw a wondrous coalition develop between the Newbies. the Red White and Blue Hats, the Old Guard, the Stat Boys, the Brady and Gronk Groupies, and the Regular Joes.
Isn't it amazing how winning brings everyone together? This only happens with the Patriots though. Every other team's fan base splinters apart when success arrives.
By the time Sunday's game began, whatever and whoever constitutes Patriot Nation was 100 percent unified behind the team, its legacy, its coach, and its players.
Thanks Bill Simmons. I love hearing hyperbolic stories about how fans are unified behind a super-special team that is more super-special than any other team that has ever competed for a title ever before. In fact, I love hearing these stories so much that I feel like I have heard similar stories about the Red Sox all three times they have won the World Series in the last decade.
After the interception, after the win, after the trophy presentation, after Gronk finally runs out of energy, after Julian Edelman checks off everyone on Tinder in his Zip Code,
It's a recent reference to Julian Edelman's sexual habits! How timely and shows that Bill is in touch with "the kids" and what they like.
No matter what the NFL says about Deflategate, the Patriots are now the most powerful franchise in the most powerful league in American sports.
Okay. I don't think it really matters that much, but okay. Next year a different team may win the Super Bowl and they will be the most powerful franchise in American sports. Also, if the Dallas Cowboys do anything controversial then I guarantee Speros' opinion of how powerful the Patriots are will be tested.
They boast the greatest NFL QB who ever played, and perhaps the greatest NFL coach ever - depending on where you put Lombardi, Tom Landry, and Belichick's mentor - Bill Parcells.
I certainly wouldn't put Bill Parcells in there with Lombardi, Belichick and Landry. Of course, Parcells coached the Patriots, the Giants, and Cowboys, so he's going to automatically be thrown in the conversation as one of the greatest coaches ever simply because of that.
The task for the Red Sox is no longer securing, or maintaining their spot, as Boston's Most Popular Team. That is gone forever.
Oh yeah, forever. Sure, I believe that. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction to the Patriots winning the Super Bowl. Boston is now a football town even though Boston doesn't even really have a professional football team. If the Red Sox win another World Series I am supposed to believe that they won't be the most popular team in Boston again? Please. The Red Sox won't be the most popular team in Boston from now on? What a lie.
I don't even really think of Boston when I think of the Patriots. When I think of Boston, I think of the Celtics and the Red Sox. I simply don't believe that Boston's most popular team isn't the Red Sox just because the Patriots won another Super Bowl title.
Demographics and time cannot be denied. The Patriots fan base is getting younger and the Red Sox fan base is getting older.
As soon as Tom Brady retires and the Patriots' dynasty is over, the Red Sox aren't going to be the most popular team in Boston again? I don't believe this for a second. I can't argue the demographics, but I find it hard to believe Boston isn't still a baseball town and won't be a baseball town once again in the very near future.
David Ortiz is the lone threat the Red Sox have in terms of increasing their popularity, aside from not finishing in last place. His rise in Boston has coincided with that of Brady's. They are inexorably linked in the minds of millions of fans. But Ortiz is a DH and Brady's a quarterback.
This guy seems to have been suckling at the teat of Bill Simmons for quite a while. I bet Bill Speros is Boston.com's answer to Bill Simmons. They seem to write very similarly by getting success and popularity confused, making proclamations that involve reading the minds of large amounts of people, and trying to find a link between two Boston-area athletes because no other major sports teams exist in the same realm as Boston-area sports teams exist.
Ortiz spoke for the city in the wake of the Marathon Bombing. His place in Boston's Sports Pantheon is secured.
"The Boston Sports Pantheon." He writes so much like Bill Simmons it's kind of weird. Get your own writing style. All that's missing are more pop culture references and a few dozen YouTube clips embedded in this column.
Brady is sharing his family with the world on social media, and has put down his multi-million dollar roots in Brookline. He's embraced his public persona.
I remember just a few short years ago how the question was whether Tom Brady spent enough time in Boston and there were complaints that he shouldn't train in California during the offseason. One move to Brookline and a Super Bowl win later and these complaints are all forgotten.
Ortiz lives in Weston [something I had to look up] and makes public appearances for his various charities, but otherwise enjoys his privacy.
Just a few short years ago Ortiz was the guy even the FCC couldn't censor who was standing up for Boston Strong. After a last place season he's a hermit who isn't even a real citizen of Boston because he only shows up to support his stupid, last place charities.
Even with Big Papi, the Red Sox are facing a fourth-and-long when it comes to achieving sports supremacy in Boston again. Two last-place finishes around a World Series title haven't helped.
Because Red Sox fans expect a World Series every year or else they are just going to lose interest. It's not that they are spoiled, it's just the high expectations. How dare the Red Sox have two last place finishes with a World Series title in between these last place finishes. How do they expect to take back the city of Boston from the Patriots with a performance like that?
But interested in the Red Sox heading into 2015 seems surprisingly high.
Probably because they are still a very popular team and Boston is still a baseball town.
That's impressive considering last year's disastrous campaign, and the fact that Clay Buchholz continues to loom like the Blizzard of 2015 on the WBZ radar map as the Opening Day starter.
Bill Speros out of one side of his mouth: "Boston is now a football town because nobody likes baseball anymore and the Red Sox haven't had the sustained success the Patriots have had. Red Sox fans are going to have declining interest in supporting a team that are losers. They are forever the second most popular team in Boston."
Bill Speros out of the other side of his mouth: "There is a lot of interest in the Red Sox even though they came in last place last year. Even if the Red Sox aren't very good, the fans seem to want to see them play."
Younger viewers get restless and/or bored watching baseball. They don't watching football. Fantasy football, and the ever-streaming second screen, cure whatever downtime exists. Folks over 40 like me have been conditioned by decades of watching baseball to understand and appreciate the nuances between each play, and the anticipation before each pitch.
My son, not so much.
Another Bill Simmons staple. What his friends and family like is the perfect representation of what everyone else likes as well. Therefore, if Bill's friends don't like something then the public as a whole doesn't like it. In this case, Speros' son doesn't like baseball, so obviously this means the Patriots have taken over Boston and it's no longer a baseball town.
The Red Sox get this, and so does Ortiz. All they have to do is check this website, either local newspaper, Twitter, tune into WEEI or The Sports Hub, or turn on ESPN and the NFL Network, to see or hear how much energy the Patriots absorb before, during, and after the season.
The NFL is the most popular sport in the United States. This is true for nearly every city that has an NFL team. Again, it's not just specific to the New England area. This also doesn't mean that Boston isn't a baseball town. The Patriots just won the Super Bowl and took up a lot of air time prior to winning the Super Bowl due to the accusations they deflated footballs against the Colts. The Red Sox will get a lot of coverage once something controversial happens with them or even if they have success on the field.
Rightly or wrongly, the success of the Patriots will now become the burden of both the Red Sox, and Bruins as they approach the postseason.
The Celtics may be the big winners here. The euphoria of watching endless highlights of Sunday's Super Bowl will help temper the frustration and malaise gripping the "Green Teamers."
So the Celtics are allowed to be terrible and nobody in New England cares because they are focused on the Patriots? But the Red Sox are not allowed to be terrible or else this proves that baseball is dying in Boston? So baseball in Boston is dying because the Red Sox have only won the World Series once since 2007? But the Celtics haven't won a title since 2008 and they are not a very good team, but they are big winners because everyone in the Boston area will be focused on how great the Patriots are? Mediocrity helps the Celtics, but only goes to prove how Boston is not a baseball town anymore when the Red Sox are mediocre. So perhaps the big concern for the Red Sox being mediocre goes to show how many fans in Boston really care about the team? Maybe this means Boston is still a baseball town?
Most Red Sox home spring training games are sold out, or close to it.
You are ruining your own point right now. By stating that the Patriots are now the team Boston fans care about the most, then talking about how popular the Red Sox are, even coming off a last place finish, it's just proof that the Red Sox still have juice in Boston despite being a bad team. It seems like there is a lot of interest in a sport that has declining popularity in the Boston area.
Their eyes will be focused on the Red Sox for as long as the rotation of No. 3 starters, and the newly re-loaded lineup, remain competitive.
So, as I said previously, when the Red Sox are a good team again then they will once again be the most popular team in Boston. Thereby proving that Boston is still a baseball town. It sounds silly to write, "Oh, the Patriots won another Super Bowl and no one is talking about the Red Sox right now so this obviously means the Patriots are the most popular team in Boston." It's so reactionary when written in February off a Patriots Super Bowl victory.
Last summer, baseball season in Boston was finished by July 4.
I'm surprised Speros didn't say that date was Red Sox fans' day of independence from watching terrible baseball.
This year, the Red Sox might not even get that much time.
Like every other team that isn't very good, fan interest tends to decrease. Measuring the peak of excitement about the Patriots versus the excitement for the Red Sox when coming off a last place season where they traded some of their best players and drawing a hard-and-fast conclusion about baseball's popularity is ridiculous. In fact, it's pretty obnoxious. So I guess Bill Speros can consider his mission to be successful.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
6 comments Paul Hoynes Thinks MLB Should Have a Salary Cap to Create the Competitive Balance That Already Exists
Over the last 48 NBA Finals, 15 different NBA teams have won the NBA Title. 27 different teams have played in the Super Bowl with 18 teams winning a Super Bowl. Of the last 48 World Series, 27 different teams have been represented and 20 different teams have won the World Series. So obviously MLB has to do something about the competitive balance issue they have which has allowed a larger diversity of teams to win that major sport's title. Well, not really, but that's your view if you are Paul Hoynes of Cleveland.com. A salary cap fixes all of a sport's issues. Just ask the NBA, where only nine different teams have won the NBA Title since 1980. A salary cap will fix everything, because small market teams like the Cleveland Indians just can't compete in the current market.
There is never going to be competitive balance in baseball.
This is a trick statement. There is already some competitive balance. Small market teams like the A's and Rays are competing for division titles. You can't fool me!
In a game where the players have proven time and time again that they will strike to prevent it, perhaps it was never meant to be.
By the way, Hoynes will blame the players for MLB not having a salary cap. It's their fault. If Selig really felt a salary cap was so necessary, don't you think he would have pushed it harder during negotiations for the CBA? So it seems neither side wants a salary cap, but Hoynes still thinks it's a good idea to ensure the type of competitive balance the sport already has.
Bud Selig leaves the commissioner's office on Jan. 24. He has accomplished more than anyone who has held the office before him, but he couldn't wrestle this problem into submission.
I don't hate Bud Selig as much as it seems others do, but let's simmer down a bit.
Selig championed revenue sharing and it has kept many teams, the Indians included, afloat during troubled times.
Yeah, you are welcome Miami Marlins. While writers complain about a lack of parity, the revenue from high revenue teams is awarded to lower revenue teams who don't spend as much and are able to make a profit as a result. I still don't know how I feel about this system, but while Hoynes complains about a lack of salary cap, some of the excessive spending on free agents leads to asses in seats, which leads to revenue, which helps keep teams like the "non-competitive" Indians afloat.
But afloat and competitive are different things, especially when the use of revenue sharing funds can be siphoned to other areas besides player payroll.
Which is why it is the responsibility of the team receiving this revenue sharing to use these funds in the best possible manner to improve the team.
He instituted one wild-card team for each league in 1994 to the groans and wails of purists. It worked so well that he added another wild card to each league in 2013.
It's not a wild card, it's a one game playoff. I'm so frustrated with this set up I'm going to stop typing now.
But all that progress suffers when the Red Sox can simply open their wallet and pay free agent infielders Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez a reported $183 million in combined salaries.
Because when has it ever not worked out after a large market team opened up it's wallet and spent money on free agents? I can remember all the World Series won by the Rockies after signing Denny Neagle and Mike Hampton. Who can forget the Texas Rangers dynasty led by Alex Rodriguez and Chan Ho Park? More recently, the addition of Adrian Gonzalez (through trade) and Carl Crawford led to a World Series victory for the Red Sox...of course after they had traded both players. Not to mention the Dodgers recently had the highest payroll in the majors with Hanley Ramirez on that roster and it didn't even turn into an NLCS appearance this past season. But yeah, progress is suffering because the teams that spend the most money are always winning the World Series and are the only teams that can compete. Just don't pay attention to what's really happening and this statement may be true.
Two years ago the Red Sox won the World Series. This year they finished last in AL East at 71-91.
And of course, Ramirez and Sandoval are the two players that will make the only difference in the Red Sox winning 71 games again or winning the World Series. Over the last five years here is how many games that have been won by the Red Sox compared to Hoynes' hometown Cleveland Indians.
The Red Sox have won 416 games.
The Indians have won 394 games.
That's a difference of 22 wins over five seasons with a difference in payroll of $477 million (Going by Opening Day payroll of about $816 million for the Red Sox and $339 million for the Indians). The Red Sox paid $21.68 million for each additional win and the same number of playoff appearances (one each), but it's a huge problem when teams like the Red Sox spend money due to competitive parity being totally ruined.
During the course of the 2014 season, much was written about Boston rebuilding with young players such as Brock Holt, Xander Bogaerts, Mookie Betts, Christian Vazquez and others...The rebuilding effort lasted about a half a season before Boston's owners waved their wallet at the problem.
Those writers like Dan Shaughnessy who claimed the Red Sox were rebuilding with young players were mistaken at the time and they are mistaken now. Ben Cherington made it clear that he was dumping payroll so that he could clear up the books and make a run at free agents or players through trade this offseason. The mistake was not listening to what Cherington said when he stated things like:
"We felt like what made the most sense for us was to try to focus on impact major league talent that is ready and we have a lot of good young players, we have strength in our farm system, so that is already a strength," Cherington said. "Although there were some prospect packages or prospects available to us that were very attractive, we wanted to add to the major league team and really give ourselves a head start on like I said building again and becoming as good as we can as quickly as possible.
"...becoming as good as we can as quickly as possible." Sure sounds like they were going to be a player in the free agent market didn't it? Cherington was focusing on "impact major league talent that is ready..." which would lead one to believe they weren't just rebuilding around young players. But again, it's better to paint the Red Sox as going against their word of rebuilding slowly, even though that wasn't their word.
The wealth of the Boston ownership and the loyalty of Red Sox Nation has allowed it to work the system. They're good at developing their own players and have been aggressive on the international free agent market. Plus they have more than enough money to correct mistakes and fill holes.
Because the money has helped them so much over two of the last three seasons when they essentially gave up on the season, sold off the expensive players Paul Hoynes is horrified they were able to sign and ended up being last place in the AL East. The list of teams who have thrown money at players to fix holes and correct mistakes which ultimately led to failure is quite long. What caused the Red Sox to go to such extremes in rebuilding is that they had expensive players who ended up being mistakes or had players they wanted to unload in order to temporarily lower payroll. The only reason the Red Sox have to sign Ramirez (to play left field it seems) is because Crawford didn't work out in left field and the Red Sox ended up trading him.
It is a tough combination to beat. Sandoval and Ramirez both received qualifying offers from their old clubs, the Giants and Dodgers, respectively. It means the Red Sox, if they sign both players, will forfeit two high draft picks in June, but not their first pick. That will be protected because of their last place finish this year.
The Red Sox also have a competitive balance pick from the A's. WHAT? A competitive balance pick went to a team who is the very reason competitive balance picks are necessary! What madness has baseball wrought without a salary cap?
There are 29 other teams in the big leagues and not all of them are as talented or as wealthy as the Red Sox.
And yet, 26 of them have appeared in one of the last 48 World Series and 19 of them have won the World Series over the last 48 seasons. This is better than two leagues with a salary cap, the NFL and the NBA, can claim. Anyway, despite the fact Paul hasn't even come close to pointing out why a salary cap would be beneficial, instead choosing to focus on why no salary cap is supposedly hurting the competitive balance in MLB, let's move on.
This is what happens when there is no salary cap. The teams that can afford to burn money do it whenever necessary.
While true, this doesn't mean these teams that burn money also have the most success. The Indians have a better record than the Red Sox over the last three seasons and the Kansas City Royals just made the World Series. The St. Louis Cardinals aren't a small market team, they also don't spend money on expensive free agents that often, and they have been one of the dominant National League teams over the past five years. The other dominant National League team over the past five years is the San Francisco Giants, another team not well-known for flashing cash around to acquire big name free agents. The Giants do have a high payroll but three of their six players making double-digit millions in 2014 were homegrown and five of these players were already on the Giants' team when they signed their contract to make $10 million or more per season.
Certain teams can spend money, that's well-known, but spending money isn't the same thing as having success and winning championships. Paul Hoynes should not get these two things confused with each other.
The teams that can't, have no choice but to stand and watch.
Except, not really. Again, the Kansas City Royals just appeared in the World Series, while the Rays and A's have both been very successful in the last decade without a large payroll. It can be done and teams that can't pay for expensive free agents can still compete.
It seems as if every team takes its shot now and then. The rich teams just have more ammunition.
The teams that have a larger margin of error also tend to spend bigger in great quantities than other teams who spend money on free agents only occasionally. The mistakes the rich teams make are bigger mistakes. This tends to even things out at times.
The Indians spent a combined $104 million on free agents Nick Swisher and Michael Bourn before the 2013 season. Halfway through their four-year deals it has not been money well spent.
And yet, the Indians have won 177 games over the last two years despite having Swisher and Bourn on the roster. Also, they have the reigning Cy Young Award winner and a starting rotation of under-25 guys like Trevor Bauer, Danny Salazar, T.J. House, along with a 27 year old Carlos Carrasco. But yeah, those two contracts haven't been good for the Indians, but they also haven't ruined the Indians team like Hoynes would like you to believe.
The Twins spent $84 million last off-season on free-agent pitchers Ricky Nolasco, Phil Hughes and Mike Pelfrey.
Hughes was pretty good last year and the Twins' problem wasn't simply that they spent $25.5 million on these three players last year. It's not like if they three pitchers had pitched well then the Twins would have won 90 games necessarily. Common sense shows that it's not just about spending money on free agents, but spending money on the right free agents and filling in the roster around these players. That's why the Red Sox signing Ramirez and Sandoval isn't the best example of why MLB needs a salary cap. These two players could just easily be two more Carl Crawford-type contracts for the Red Sox. They may not be, but that's the risk the Red Sox are taking. Even if it works, there is no guarantee of another World Series victory in Boston.
Giancarlo Stanton wasn't a free agent when the Marlins gave him a 13-year, $325 million extension earlier this month, but it certainly was a shot across the bow that carries no expectation of a repeat performance. Especially by Marlins fans, who have a firm grasp on what is here today is not necessarily here tomorrow.
By the way, a salary cap in MLB would do more to prevent the Marlins from building around Stanton because they couldn't necessarily afford to spend money on pitchers like Jose Fernandez or Henderson Alvarez. After giving Stanton the contract they did, the Marlins could conceivably not have the cap room to spend money to keep the rest of their young team together. The Marlins may not keep these players together anyway, but at least they have control over how much they spend if they did want to keep Fernandez and Alvarez.
Other than screaming, "IT'S BAD FOR THE GAME" and ignoring recent and long-term evidence this isn't true, Paul Hoynes hasn't given a good reason for why MLB needs a salary cap. Baseball has competitive balance, regardless of whether Hoynes wants to believe it or not.
The current bargaining agreement ends after the 2016 season.
Will that be the time the owners once again try to impose a cap on team payrolls? Will this generation of players, untouched by labor strife and under new union leadership, respond as steadfastly as their predecessors?
They probably will. A salary cap isn't the cure-all that Paul Hoynes presents it as. I think the players are smart enough to realize this. Baseball's economic structure isn't perfect by any means, but a salary cap wouldn't necessarily go a long way to ensuring competitive balance. It seems MLB is doing decently right now in ensuring there is competitive balance in the sport even without a salary cap. Again, rich teams spending money on free agents doesn't immediately lead to a World Series title.
Or will baseball simply continue to be a game where only the uber-rich can compete as owners?
If baseball is a game where only the uber-rich can compete as owners then what does that make the other sports like football and basketball where fewer teams have won titles over the last 48 years? Rich teams have the chance to acquire good, expensive players, but as is seen time and again, this doesn't mean that team won't regret signing those expensive players. All teams have to be smart in making personnel moves. It's just some teams have the money to acquire expensive free agents and other teams do not. In acquiring these expensive free agents comes risk for these rich teams.
Where teams like the Indians, owned by Paul Dolan and family, have no realistic chance at ending a World Series drought that will be entering its 67th year come opening day in 2015?
The Indians have no realistic chance at ending their World Series drought? Two years ago the Indians were in the one game Wild Card playoff, just like the Kansas City Royals and San Francisco Giants were in the one game Wild Card playoff this year. Don't give me this crap about the Indians not having a realistic chance to compete for a World Series.
There is never going to be competitive balance in baseball.
This is a trick statement. There is already some competitive balance. Small market teams like the A's and Rays are competing for division titles. You can't fool me!
In a game where the players have proven time and time again that they will strike to prevent it, perhaps it was never meant to be.
By the way, Hoynes will blame the players for MLB not having a salary cap. It's their fault. If Selig really felt a salary cap was so necessary, don't you think he would have pushed it harder during negotiations for the CBA? So it seems neither side wants a salary cap, but Hoynes still thinks it's a good idea to ensure the type of competitive balance the sport already has.
Bud Selig leaves the commissioner's office on Jan. 24. He has accomplished more than anyone who has held the office before him, but he couldn't wrestle this problem into submission.
I don't hate Bud Selig as much as it seems others do, but let's simmer down a bit.
Selig championed revenue sharing and it has kept many teams, the Indians included, afloat during troubled times.
Yeah, you are welcome Miami Marlins. While writers complain about a lack of parity, the revenue from high revenue teams is awarded to lower revenue teams who don't spend as much and are able to make a profit as a result. I still don't know how I feel about this system, but while Hoynes complains about a lack of salary cap, some of the excessive spending on free agents leads to asses in seats, which leads to revenue, which helps keep teams like the "non-competitive" Indians afloat.
But afloat and competitive are different things, especially when the use of revenue sharing funds can be siphoned to other areas besides player payroll.
Which is why it is the responsibility of the team receiving this revenue sharing to use these funds in the best possible manner to improve the team.
He instituted one wild-card team for each league in 1994 to the groans and wails of purists. It worked so well that he added another wild card to each league in 2013.
It's not a wild card, it's a one game playoff. I'm so frustrated with this set up I'm going to stop typing now.
But all that progress suffers when the Red Sox can simply open their wallet and pay free agent infielders Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez a reported $183 million in combined salaries.
Because when has it ever not worked out after a large market team opened up it's wallet and spent money on free agents? I can remember all the World Series won by the Rockies after signing Denny Neagle and Mike Hampton. Who can forget the Texas Rangers dynasty led by Alex Rodriguez and Chan Ho Park? More recently, the addition of Adrian Gonzalez (through trade) and Carl Crawford led to a World Series victory for the Red Sox...of course after they had traded both players. Not to mention the Dodgers recently had the highest payroll in the majors with Hanley Ramirez on that roster and it didn't even turn into an NLCS appearance this past season. But yeah, progress is suffering because the teams that spend the most money are always winning the World Series and are the only teams that can compete. Just don't pay attention to what's really happening and this statement may be true.
Two years ago the Red Sox won the World Series. This year they finished last in AL East at 71-91.
And of course, Ramirez and Sandoval are the two players that will make the only difference in the Red Sox winning 71 games again or winning the World Series. Over the last five years here is how many games that have been won by the Red Sox compared to Hoynes' hometown Cleveland Indians.
The Red Sox have won 416 games.
The Indians have won 394 games.
That's a difference of 22 wins over five seasons with a difference in payroll of $477 million (Going by Opening Day payroll of about $816 million for the Red Sox and $339 million for the Indians). The Red Sox paid $21.68 million for each additional win and the same number of playoff appearances (one each), but it's a huge problem when teams like the Red Sox spend money due to competitive parity being totally ruined.
During the course of the 2014 season, much was written about Boston rebuilding with young players such as Brock Holt, Xander Bogaerts, Mookie Betts, Christian Vazquez and others...The rebuilding effort lasted about a half a season before Boston's owners waved their wallet at the problem.
Those writers like Dan Shaughnessy who claimed the Red Sox were rebuilding with young players were mistaken at the time and they are mistaken now. Ben Cherington made it clear that he was dumping payroll so that he could clear up the books and make a run at free agents or players through trade this offseason. The mistake was not listening to what Cherington said when he stated things like:
"We felt like what made the most sense for us was to try to focus on impact major league talent that is ready and we have a lot of good young players, we have strength in our farm system, so that is already a strength," Cherington said. "Although there were some prospect packages or prospects available to us that were very attractive, we wanted to add to the major league team and really give ourselves a head start on like I said building again and becoming as good as we can as quickly as possible.
"...becoming as good as we can as quickly as possible." Sure sounds like they were going to be a player in the free agent market didn't it? Cherington was focusing on "impact major league talent that is ready..." which would lead one to believe they weren't just rebuilding around young players. But again, it's better to paint the Red Sox as going against their word of rebuilding slowly, even though that wasn't their word.
The wealth of the Boston ownership and the loyalty of Red Sox Nation has allowed it to work the system. They're good at developing their own players and have been aggressive on the international free agent market. Plus they have more than enough money to correct mistakes and fill holes.
Because the money has helped them so much over two of the last three seasons when they essentially gave up on the season, sold off the expensive players Paul Hoynes is horrified they were able to sign and ended up being last place in the AL East. The list of teams who have thrown money at players to fix holes and correct mistakes which ultimately led to failure is quite long. What caused the Red Sox to go to such extremes in rebuilding is that they had expensive players who ended up being mistakes or had players they wanted to unload in order to temporarily lower payroll. The only reason the Red Sox have to sign Ramirez (to play left field it seems) is because Crawford didn't work out in left field and the Red Sox ended up trading him.
It is a tough combination to beat. Sandoval and Ramirez both received qualifying offers from their old clubs, the Giants and Dodgers, respectively. It means the Red Sox, if they sign both players, will forfeit two high draft picks in June, but not their first pick. That will be protected because of their last place finish this year.
The Red Sox also have a competitive balance pick from the A's. WHAT? A competitive balance pick went to a team who is the very reason competitive balance picks are necessary! What madness has baseball wrought without a salary cap?
There are 29 other teams in the big leagues and not all of them are as talented or as wealthy as the Red Sox.
And yet, 26 of them have appeared in one of the last 48 World Series and 19 of them have won the World Series over the last 48 seasons. This is better than two leagues with a salary cap, the NFL and the NBA, can claim. Anyway, despite the fact Paul hasn't even come close to pointing out why a salary cap would be beneficial, instead choosing to focus on why no salary cap is supposedly hurting the competitive balance in MLB, let's move on.
This is what happens when there is no salary cap. The teams that can afford to burn money do it whenever necessary.
While true, this doesn't mean these teams that burn money also have the most success. The Indians have a better record than the Red Sox over the last three seasons and the Kansas City Royals just made the World Series. The St. Louis Cardinals aren't a small market team, they also don't spend money on expensive free agents that often, and they have been one of the dominant National League teams over the past five years. The other dominant National League team over the past five years is the San Francisco Giants, another team not well-known for flashing cash around to acquire big name free agents. The Giants do have a high payroll but three of their six players making double-digit millions in 2014 were homegrown and five of these players were already on the Giants' team when they signed their contract to make $10 million or more per season.
Certain teams can spend money, that's well-known, but spending money isn't the same thing as having success and winning championships. Paul Hoynes should not get these two things confused with each other.
The teams that can't, have no choice but to stand and watch.
Except, not really. Again, the Kansas City Royals just appeared in the World Series, while the Rays and A's have both been very successful in the last decade without a large payroll. It can be done and teams that can't pay for expensive free agents can still compete.
It seems as if every team takes its shot now and then. The rich teams just have more ammunition.
The teams that have a larger margin of error also tend to spend bigger in great quantities than other teams who spend money on free agents only occasionally. The mistakes the rich teams make are bigger mistakes. This tends to even things out at times.
The Indians spent a combined $104 million on free agents Nick Swisher and Michael Bourn before the 2013 season. Halfway through their four-year deals it has not been money well spent.
And yet, the Indians have won 177 games over the last two years despite having Swisher and Bourn on the roster. Also, they have the reigning Cy Young Award winner and a starting rotation of under-25 guys like Trevor Bauer, Danny Salazar, T.J. House, along with a 27 year old Carlos Carrasco. But yeah, those two contracts haven't been good for the Indians, but they also haven't ruined the Indians team like Hoynes would like you to believe.
The Twins spent $84 million last off-season on free-agent pitchers Ricky Nolasco, Phil Hughes and Mike Pelfrey.
Hughes was pretty good last year and the Twins' problem wasn't simply that they spent $25.5 million on these three players last year. It's not like if they three pitchers had pitched well then the Twins would have won 90 games necessarily. Common sense shows that it's not just about spending money on free agents, but spending money on the right free agents and filling in the roster around these players. That's why the Red Sox signing Ramirez and Sandoval isn't the best example of why MLB needs a salary cap. These two players could just easily be two more Carl Crawford-type contracts for the Red Sox. They may not be, but that's the risk the Red Sox are taking. Even if it works, there is no guarantee of another World Series victory in Boston.
Giancarlo Stanton wasn't a free agent when the Marlins gave him a 13-year, $325 million extension earlier this month, but it certainly was a shot across the bow that carries no expectation of a repeat performance. Especially by Marlins fans, who have a firm grasp on what is here today is not necessarily here tomorrow.
By the way, a salary cap in MLB would do more to prevent the Marlins from building around Stanton because they couldn't necessarily afford to spend money on pitchers like Jose Fernandez or Henderson Alvarez. After giving Stanton the contract they did, the Marlins could conceivably not have the cap room to spend money to keep the rest of their young team together. The Marlins may not keep these players together anyway, but at least they have control over how much they spend if they did want to keep Fernandez and Alvarez.
Other than screaming, "IT'S BAD FOR THE GAME" and ignoring recent and long-term evidence this isn't true, Paul Hoynes hasn't given a good reason for why MLB needs a salary cap. Baseball has competitive balance, regardless of whether Hoynes wants to believe it or not.
The current bargaining agreement ends after the 2016 season.
Will that be the time the owners once again try to impose a cap on team payrolls? Will this generation of players, untouched by labor strife and under new union leadership, respond as steadfastly as their predecessors?
They probably will. A salary cap isn't the cure-all that Paul Hoynes presents it as. I think the players are smart enough to realize this. Baseball's economic structure isn't perfect by any means, but a salary cap wouldn't necessarily go a long way to ensuring competitive balance. It seems MLB is doing decently right now in ensuring there is competitive balance in the sport even without a salary cap. Again, rich teams spending money on free agents doesn't immediately lead to a World Series title.
Or will baseball simply continue to be a game where only the uber-rich can compete as owners?
If baseball is a game where only the uber-rich can compete as owners then what does that make the other sports like football and basketball where fewer teams have won titles over the last 48 years? Rich teams have the chance to acquire good, expensive players, but as is seen time and again, this doesn't mean that team won't regret signing those expensive players. All teams have to be smart in making personnel moves. It's just some teams have the money to acquire expensive free agents and other teams do not. In acquiring these expensive free agents comes risk for these rich teams.
Where teams like the Indians, owned by Paul Dolan and family, have no realistic chance at ending a World Series drought that will be entering its 67th year come opening day in 2015?
The Indians have no realistic chance at ending their World Series drought? Two years ago the Indians were in the one game Wild Card playoff, just like the Kansas City Royals and San Francisco Giants were in the one game Wild Card playoff this year. Don't give me this crap about the Indians not having a realistic chance to compete for a World Series.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
0 comments Dan Shaughnessy Antagonizes Derek Jeter Who Antagonizes Shaughnessy Back, Making Derek Jeter My Hero for the Day
Dan Shaughnessy is a troll. It's well-known and been discussed on this blog at length. He's the worst, just like I call about 10 other sportswriters "the worst." Shaughnessy is his own kind of trolling worst though. He's antagonistic towards others, writes columns with a snarky tone just in case he's wrong and doesn't want to be called on it, and has really curly hair that isn't funny except for the fact he's a troll so it's funny because he has a whi-fro. So Dan Shaughnessy wanted to ask Derek Jeter if he was going to play the three games of the season in Boston if the Yankees were out of the playoff hunt. See, Ted Williams didn't play his last three games before retiring, so that's the angle Dan took. So The Jeter came back at Dan with a little snark of his own and it was fairly glorious. The Jeter is my hero of the day now.
Every Red Sox fan knows Ted Williams hit a home run in his final at-bat in the big leagues.
(Bengoodfella makes a joke about the pink hat Red Sox fans not knowing who Ted Williams is)
What you probably don’t know is that the Red Sox had three more games on the schedule, in New York, after Williams’s farewell blast.
I did know that, but only because I am a loser and had very few friends as a child. I always pointed this out when the talk about Ted Williams insisting on playing the last game of the season when he was hitting .400 in 1941 began. Williams did hit a home run in his last at-bat in the majors, but he also didn't play in the last three games of the season. It doesn't change what Williams did, only alters the story around it a little bit.
Williams didn’t go with his teammates to Yankee Stadium. The Sox were already 29 games out of first place and nobody seemed to mind him finishing on a high note.
And 1960 Bill Simmons had stopped paying attention to the Red Sox because he was a baseball widow at that point, while 1960 Dan Shaughnessy wrote a column about how Ted Williams isn't the leader we thought he was because he retired before winning the Red Sox a World Series. He would write that Williams has a swing like Harry Hooper, but Williams prefers to be standoffish and short to the media rather than answer questions about his shortcomings. Then later Shaughnessy says the same thing about Carl Yastrzemski, who had a swing like Ted Williams, but couldn't win the Red Sox a title. The cycle continued until modern day when Shaughnessy once wrote Adrian Gonzalez had a swing like Ted Williams and later ripped Gonzalez for all of his shortcomings.
All of which brings us to Derek Sanderson Jeter, the 40-year-old captain of the New York Yankees, who plans to hang up his spikes at the end of the season.
I never knew Derek Jeter's middle name. I always assumed he didn't have a middle name or his middle name was "Captain" or "Clutch."
The Yankees play their final home game against the Orioles Thursday, Sept. 25. And then they finish their season in Boston with three games against the Red Sox. Any chance Jeter would pull a Ted if the Yankees are out of playoff contention?
I don't know Dan, why don't you ask Derek Jeter? But don't ask him, antagonize the shit out of him. That'll get him to give you a straight answer.
I’ve been thinking about this for weeks
Apparently Dan thinks about pointless things when he can't rip the Red Sox/Patriots/Celtics/Bruins for being terrible disappointments. Dan already called the Red Sox the Kansas City Royals of the East, then ended up with egg on his face as the Red Sox signed Rusney Castillo to a $72.5 million deal. So he's going to stay away from criticizing the Red Sox too much at this point. He looked like an asshole the last time he went all-in on the Red Sox for trading Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett and Carl Crawford and then the Red Sox won the World Series the next year.
So what about it, Derek: “If the Yankees are eliminated from postseason play by Sept. 25, is it possible you won’t play the games in Boston?’’
Yes, the man who has never answered a question he didn't want to and never answered a question that in any way involved speculation during his career is now going to start doing exactly this. Sure.
Ever-polite, Jeter put up his hand and stopped me in mid-question.
“I don’t deal in hypotheticals,’’ he said.
Then Jeter smiled and said, "I only deal in attractive brunettes. Bring one of those to The Jeter, then we can talk."
Fair enough. Let’s try it another way.
“If you’re healthy, will you play the games in Boston?’’
That's pretty much the exact same question re-phrased. Seems like it is still a hypothetical.
“Why would I not?’’ he answered.
That seems clear enough. Jeter will play in Boston. He will be the same guy he has been for 20 seasons. He will honor his team and Major League Baseball. He will not do anything that would compromise the integrity of the game.
Not playing in the final games in Boston would not be compromising the integrity of baseball. In fact, I probably wouldn't play in the final three games if I were Jeter, because I would want my last few games to be played in New York and not on the road. It is not failing to honor MLB by skipping the last three games in Boston. I see how Dan is already painting a story in his mind for when Jeter skips those final three games.
“Do you know what Ted did in his last game?’’ I asked.
“He hit a home run, right?’’ answered Jeter.
Every Red Sox fan knows this. So does this mean The Jeter is really a Red Sox fan?
Williams’s homer cut a Sox deficit to 4-3. Williams was sent out to left field for the ninth inning, then replaced by Carroll Hardy. The Sox rallied in the bottom of the inning. Willie Tasby wound up batting with the bases loaded and one out, and the Sox won the game when Baltimore’s infield butchered a double play grounder.
Most of you know I'm not a huge fan of stories that are slightly factually incorrect in order to create a narrative or make the story more exciting and engaging. I make exceptions. In this case, Ted Williams hit a home run in his last at-bat and I don't understand the need for Dan Shaughnessy to try and make it seem like Williams did something to the integrity of baseball by being lifted in the 9th inning. That's just Dan though. He's not happy until everyone is unhappy.
If Tasby walked in that at-bat, Williams would have been due up with the bases loaded in a 4-4 game. But he’d already been lifted.
Yes, but Tasby didn't walk and Williams never would have batted. Crisis averted, history hasn't changed. We all move on.
The game had been compromised.
What? The game had been compromised because of a situation that never occurred potentially occurring? This makes no sense. Ted Williams was lifted after getting a chance to take his position in left field one more time. Dan Shaughnessy sucks.
A decade later, in his official autobiography with John Underwood, Williams claimed the decision to blow off the Yankee series was made before the final Fenway game:
“The team still had a doubleheader in New York that weekend, but I went to [manager Mike] Higgins and said, ‘Mike this is the last game I’m going to play. I don’t want to go to New York.’ “He said, ‘All right, you don’t have to go.’ Regardless of what I had done, this was it, I’d had it.’’
Here is the main issue that prevents me from giving a shit or thinking this situation is an issue...Ted Williams would never have batted even if he stayed in the game. If anything, with Ted Williams hitting behind Tasby there is less of a chance Orioles would have walked Tasby to get the bases loaded for Ted Williams. No matter who lifted Williams or why he was lifted, he was never going to bat in the 9th inning. So it doesn't matter.
According to the late Roy Mumpton of the Worcester Telegram, Williams had told some writers that he wanted to go out with a homer. Mumpton told Ed Linn, another Williams biographer,
“If he hadn’t hit the home run, he would have gone on to New York. I’m sure of that.’’
In his 1961 book on Williams (“The Eternal Kid”), Linn wrote, “The official Red Sox line was that it had been understood all along that Ted would not be going to New York unless the pennant race was still alive. The fact of the matter, of course, is that Williams made the decision himself, and he did not make it until after he had hit the home run.’’
It does not matter. Ted Williams had earned the right to exit the game in the way he wanted to exit the game. Just like Derek Jeter has earned this right. After 20 years of hearing all about he plays the game the right way and respects the game of baseball, I can't handle hearing about how Jeter has compromised the integrity of baseball by skipping the last three games of this season. It's too much for my emotions to handle.
Linn claimed Williams’s equipment bag was packed for the trip to the Big Apple.
And yet, it happened over 50 years ago and it doesn't matter now.
Jeter would never do this. It would fly in the face of everything his career has stood for. Right?
“I can’t even think about that,’’ said the Yankee captain. “I’ve gone my entire career without answering hypotheticals. I don’t like jinxing anything. I’m playing today.’’
That is the third time Jeter has essentially answered the same question based on a hypothetical. Now comes time for The Jeter to burn Dan Shaughnessy.
That sounds as if he’s leaving some wiggle room for not coming to Boston.
“I’m not leaving any wiggle room,’’ he said. “I’ve never spoken on a hypothetical in my entire career. My job is playing the game today, Sept. 2. That’s the game I’m playing.’’
If Dan kept asking the same questions over and over again to guys like Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford, then no wonder they were short with him and wouldn't give him the answers he wants.
“Yeah, I understand it,’’ said Jeter. “Mo didn’t pitch in Houston last year [the Yankees played meaningless games in Houston after Mariano Rivera said goodbye to the fans at Yankee Stadium].
“It depends on the situation, I guess. I don’t know what Ted’s situation was and I didn’t know him well enough to comment on it.
And after Mariano Rivera didn't pitch in the last games of the season on the road against Houston baseball was never the same. When a Hall of Famer like Rivera doesn't show respect for the game of baseball and comprises the integrity of the sport then it is amazing there was even a 2014 season to be played. It almost ruined the sport.
“Don’t dissect this,’’ he added, smiling. “It’s not complicated. Don’t complicate things for yourself.’’
There you go, Jeter. The Jeter is showing contempt for Shaughnessy and being condescending towards him as well. I always knew The Jeter had good qualities hidden somewhere.
As I excused myself from the captain’s cubicle, Jeter had one question.
So after Dan Shaughnessy was done asking the same question four times to Derek Jeter and hinted (at least in this column) the right thing to do would be to play the last three games in Boston, Jeter wanted to taunt Dan some for not doing his job.
“You never asked Ted about it?’’ he wondered.
Now this is a valid point. Dan Shaughnessy, who inexplicably has won awards for his writing, had a chance to ask Ted Williams exactly what happened. Whether Williams pulled himself from those last three games as a plan prior to his home run or this was planned after he hit the home run against the Orioles? After all, since Dan seems so concerned about it and he would have access to Ted Williams, doesn't this seem like a logical question to ask?
“No,’’ I said.
And why would Dan ask Ted Williams? If Dan isn't trolling his readers, tearing into a Boston-area player for his perceived shortcomings or simply trying to gain attention, what does it benefit him to do actual sports journalism? Dan isn't capable of real journalism that isn't purely a ploy to gain attention for himself.
“Well, you blew it,’’ he acknowledged. “You blew your opportunity.’’
You bleeeeeeeeew it!
This makes me wish Jeter had talked more. Maybe this is Jeter's plan. He will just buck up to all of the asshole sportswriters who have annoyed him through the years. It's funny and it's true. He could have asked Ted Williams these questions and he didn't. Dan had chances and he never took them.
But see what Jeter probably knows is that Dan Shaughnessy didn't want to ask Ted Williams. He didn't care to ask Ted Williams when the decision to not play in the final three games of the 1960 season was made. Dan has no interest in that. He only has interest in how Ted Williams didn't play the last three games of the 1960 season as it relates to how he can write an article about Derek Jeter not playing against the Red Sox during the last week of this season. That's all. Long-term, Dan wants a chance to rip Jeter if he doesn't play in those last three games of the season, and short-term, he wants to antagonize Jeter by asking him questions Dan knows he won't answer.
Sad, but true.
Thanks, Captain Yankee. See you at Fenway Sept. 28.
Could Dan be more of a dick? "See you at Fenway Sept. 28." The Jeter didn't say he would be playing in those games for sure. He said he didn't answer hypotheticals and was planning on playing. I'm just glad Jeter got Dan back by pointing out how all the mystery surrounding when the decision for Williams to not play in the last regular season games of his career could have been partially avoided if Dan had just done real journalism and asked Williams if/when given the chance.
I hope Jeter doesn't play so Dan can rip him for not playing. That's an article I would cover right here on this blog.
Every Red Sox fan knows Ted Williams hit a home run in his final at-bat in the big leagues.
(Bengoodfella makes a joke about the pink hat Red Sox fans not knowing who Ted Williams is)
What you probably don’t know is that the Red Sox had three more games on the schedule, in New York, after Williams’s farewell blast.
I did know that, but only because I am a loser and had very few friends as a child. I always pointed this out when the talk about Ted Williams insisting on playing the last game of the season when he was hitting .400 in 1941 began. Williams did hit a home run in his last at-bat in the majors, but he also didn't play in the last three games of the season. It doesn't change what Williams did, only alters the story around it a little bit.
Williams didn’t go with his teammates to Yankee Stadium. The Sox were already 29 games out of first place and nobody seemed to mind him finishing on a high note.
And 1960 Bill Simmons had stopped paying attention to the Red Sox because he was a baseball widow at that point, while 1960 Dan Shaughnessy wrote a column about how Ted Williams isn't the leader we thought he was because he retired before winning the Red Sox a World Series. He would write that Williams has a swing like Harry Hooper, but Williams prefers to be standoffish and short to the media rather than answer questions about his shortcomings. Then later Shaughnessy says the same thing about Carl Yastrzemski, who had a swing like Ted Williams, but couldn't win the Red Sox a title. The cycle continued until modern day when Shaughnessy once wrote Adrian Gonzalez had a swing like Ted Williams and later ripped Gonzalez for all of his shortcomings.
All of which brings us to Derek Sanderson Jeter, the 40-year-old captain of the New York Yankees, who plans to hang up his spikes at the end of the season.
I never knew Derek Jeter's middle name. I always assumed he didn't have a middle name or his middle name was "Captain" or "Clutch."
The Yankees play their final home game against the Orioles Thursday, Sept. 25. And then they finish their season in Boston with three games against the Red Sox. Any chance Jeter would pull a Ted if the Yankees are out of playoff contention?
I don't know Dan, why don't you ask Derek Jeter? But don't ask him, antagonize the shit out of him. That'll get him to give you a straight answer.
I’ve been thinking about this for weeks
Apparently Dan thinks about pointless things when he can't rip the Red Sox/Patriots/Celtics/Bruins for being terrible disappointments. Dan already called the Red Sox the Kansas City Royals of the East, then ended up with egg on his face as the Red Sox signed Rusney Castillo to a $72.5 million deal. So he's going to stay away from criticizing the Red Sox too much at this point. He looked like an asshole the last time he went all-in on the Red Sox for trading Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett and Carl Crawford and then the Red Sox won the World Series the next year.
So what about it, Derek: “If the Yankees are eliminated from postseason play by Sept. 25, is it possible you won’t play the games in Boston?’’
Yes, the man who has never answered a question he didn't want to and never answered a question that in any way involved speculation during his career is now going to start doing exactly this. Sure.
Ever-polite, Jeter put up his hand and stopped me in mid-question.
“I don’t deal in hypotheticals,’’ he said.
Then Jeter smiled and said, "I only deal in attractive brunettes. Bring one of those to The Jeter, then we can talk."
Fair enough. Let’s try it another way.
“If you’re healthy, will you play the games in Boston?’’
That's pretty much the exact same question re-phrased. Seems like it is still a hypothetical.
“Why would I not?’’ he answered.
That seems clear enough. Jeter will play in Boston. He will be the same guy he has been for 20 seasons. He will honor his team and Major League Baseball. He will not do anything that would compromise the integrity of the game.
Not playing in the final games in Boston would not be compromising the integrity of baseball. In fact, I probably wouldn't play in the final three games if I were Jeter, because I would want my last few games to be played in New York and not on the road. It is not failing to honor MLB by skipping the last three games in Boston. I see how Dan is already painting a story in his mind for when Jeter skips those final three games.
“Do you know what Ted did in his last game?’’ I asked.
“He hit a home run, right?’’ answered Jeter.
Every Red Sox fan knows this. So does this mean The Jeter is really a Red Sox fan?
Williams’s homer cut a Sox deficit to 4-3. Williams was sent out to left field for the ninth inning, then replaced by Carroll Hardy. The Sox rallied in the bottom of the inning. Willie Tasby wound up batting with the bases loaded and one out, and the Sox won the game when Baltimore’s infield butchered a double play grounder.
Most of you know I'm not a huge fan of stories that are slightly factually incorrect in order to create a narrative or make the story more exciting and engaging. I make exceptions. In this case, Ted Williams hit a home run in his last at-bat and I don't understand the need for Dan Shaughnessy to try and make it seem like Williams did something to the integrity of baseball by being lifted in the 9th inning. That's just Dan though. He's not happy until everyone is unhappy.
If Tasby walked in that at-bat, Williams would have been due up with the bases loaded in a 4-4 game. But he’d already been lifted.
Yes, but Tasby didn't walk and Williams never would have batted. Crisis averted, history hasn't changed. We all move on.
The game had been compromised.
What? The game had been compromised because of a situation that never occurred potentially occurring? This makes no sense. Ted Williams was lifted after getting a chance to take his position in left field one more time. Dan Shaughnessy sucks.
A decade later, in his official autobiography with John Underwood, Williams claimed the decision to blow off the Yankee series was made before the final Fenway game:
“The team still had a doubleheader in New York that weekend, but I went to [manager Mike] Higgins and said, ‘Mike this is the last game I’m going to play. I don’t want to go to New York.’ “He said, ‘All right, you don’t have to go.’ Regardless of what I had done, this was it, I’d had it.’’
Here is the main issue that prevents me from giving a shit or thinking this situation is an issue...Ted Williams would never have batted even if he stayed in the game. If anything, with Ted Williams hitting behind Tasby there is less of a chance Orioles would have walked Tasby to get the bases loaded for Ted Williams. No matter who lifted Williams or why he was lifted, he was never going to bat in the 9th inning. So it doesn't matter.
According to the late Roy Mumpton of the Worcester Telegram, Williams had told some writers that he wanted to go out with a homer. Mumpton told Ed Linn, another Williams biographer,
“If he hadn’t hit the home run, he would have gone on to New York. I’m sure of that.’’
In his 1961 book on Williams (“The Eternal Kid”), Linn wrote, “The official Red Sox line was that it had been understood all along that Ted would not be going to New York unless the pennant race was still alive. The fact of the matter, of course, is that Williams made the decision himself, and he did not make it until after he had hit the home run.’’
It does not matter. Ted Williams had earned the right to exit the game in the way he wanted to exit the game. Just like Derek Jeter has earned this right. After 20 years of hearing all about he plays the game the right way and respects the game of baseball, I can't handle hearing about how Jeter has compromised the integrity of baseball by skipping the last three games of this season. It's too much for my emotions to handle.
Linn claimed Williams’s equipment bag was packed for the trip to the Big Apple.
And yet, it happened over 50 years ago and it doesn't matter now.
Jeter would never do this. It would fly in the face of everything his career has stood for. Right?
“I can’t even think about that,’’ said the Yankee captain. “I’ve gone my entire career without answering hypotheticals. I don’t like jinxing anything. I’m playing today.’’
That is the third time Jeter has essentially answered the same question based on a hypothetical. Now comes time for The Jeter to burn Dan Shaughnessy.
That sounds as if he’s leaving some wiggle room for not coming to Boston.
“I’m not leaving any wiggle room,’’ he said. “I’ve never spoken on a hypothetical in my entire career. My job is playing the game today, Sept. 2. That’s the game I’m playing.’’
If Dan kept asking the same questions over and over again to guys like Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford, then no wonder they were short with him and wouldn't give him the answers he wants.
“Yeah, I understand it,’’ said Jeter. “Mo didn’t pitch in Houston last year [the Yankees played meaningless games in Houston after Mariano Rivera said goodbye to the fans at Yankee Stadium].
“It depends on the situation, I guess. I don’t know what Ted’s situation was and I didn’t know him well enough to comment on it.
And after Mariano Rivera didn't pitch in the last games of the season on the road against Houston baseball was never the same. When a Hall of Famer like Rivera doesn't show respect for the game of baseball and comprises the integrity of the sport then it is amazing there was even a 2014 season to be played. It almost ruined the sport.
“Don’t dissect this,’’ he added, smiling. “It’s not complicated. Don’t complicate things for yourself.’’
There you go, Jeter. The Jeter is showing contempt for Shaughnessy and being condescending towards him as well. I always knew The Jeter had good qualities hidden somewhere.
As I excused myself from the captain’s cubicle, Jeter had one question.
So after Dan Shaughnessy was done asking the same question four times to Derek Jeter and hinted (at least in this column) the right thing to do would be to play the last three games in Boston, Jeter wanted to taunt Dan some for not doing his job.
“You never asked Ted about it?’’ he wondered.
Now this is a valid point. Dan Shaughnessy, who inexplicably has won awards for his writing, had a chance to ask Ted Williams exactly what happened. Whether Williams pulled himself from those last three games as a plan prior to his home run or this was planned after he hit the home run against the Orioles? After all, since Dan seems so concerned about it and he would have access to Ted Williams, doesn't this seem like a logical question to ask?
“No,’’ I said.
And why would Dan ask Ted Williams? If Dan isn't trolling his readers, tearing into a Boston-area player for his perceived shortcomings or simply trying to gain attention, what does it benefit him to do actual sports journalism? Dan isn't capable of real journalism that isn't purely a ploy to gain attention for himself.
“Well, you blew it,’’ he acknowledged. “You blew your opportunity.’’
You bleeeeeeeeew it!
This makes me wish Jeter had talked more. Maybe this is Jeter's plan. He will just buck up to all of the asshole sportswriters who have annoyed him through the years. It's funny and it's true. He could have asked Ted Williams these questions and he didn't. Dan had chances and he never took them.
But see what Jeter probably knows is that Dan Shaughnessy didn't want to ask Ted Williams. He didn't care to ask Ted Williams when the decision to not play in the final three games of the 1960 season was made. Dan has no interest in that. He only has interest in how Ted Williams didn't play the last three games of the 1960 season as it relates to how he can write an article about Derek Jeter not playing against the Red Sox during the last week of this season. That's all. Long-term, Dan wants a chance to rip Jeter if he doesn't play in those last three games of the season, and short-term, he wants to antagonize Jeter by asking him questions Dan knows he won't answer.
Sad, but true.
Thanks, Captain Yankee. See you at Fenway Sept. 28.
Could Dan be more of a dick? "See you at Fenway Sept. 28." The Jeter didn't say he would be playing in those games for sure. He said he didn't answer hypotheticals and was planning on playing. I'm just glad Jeter got Dan back by pointing out how all the mystery surrounding when the decision for Williams to not play in the last regular season games of his career could have been partially avoided if Dan had just done real journalism and asked Williams if/when given the chance.
I hope Jeter doesn't play so Dan can rip him for not playing. That's an article I would cover right here on this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)