User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 2.2074 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Why? The A-Rod trade made a much bigger splash and how did that one turn out?
Yeah, 'cause ARod's really sucked balls as a Yankee. Oh, wait...
The Yanks haven't won a WS with ARod, but correlation doesn't equal causation. Of course, you already knew that. (I think.)
Even if you accept that Wakefield gets invincible for one whole year out of five (which I do not), what makes you so sure that his first six starts (which were either good or excellent) predict his next 25 in any meaningful way?
I'm 99% sure that I could immerse myself in Wakefield data and emerge with six or seven consecutive very good starts that did not result in a whole year's excellence.
Off the top of my head, Wake was great in September/October 2003. How about his overall 2003?
Wakefield is coming off consecutive seasons of 4.63, 4.15, 4.87, and 4.09 ERAs. "Fluke" oversells his 2.11 start, but yeah, if you want to bet that Wakefield is about to post a sub-2.50 ERA in thirty starts, don't be shocked to find a long line of takers.
Let's do the math. His rookie season was in 1992 and he missed 1994 so that means this is his 15th year in the majors. 15 divided by 3 equals 5.
To believe RB's assertion, you would...have to rigidly adhere to the 5 year schedule and not realize that random clustering doesn't statistically invalidate data.
And John Elway averaged a Super Bowl win once every eight years.
Kevin:
Of course, and we've all gotten used to the fact that what you type in one post will not be carried into the next, so no one holds you fast to the one in 5 thing. What you meant, obviously, is that every so often Wakefield is brilliant and this is one of those years. And, what RB said in reply is (correctly), "No, that's not true." In 2002 he pitched brilliantly, no question. And he was excellent in 1995, the year I got married. But his start this year is better than those, and as I said, I hope he continues that for your sake, b/c I doubt he will. As good as he's been, his career trend leads one to conclude it's highly unlikely he'll even be as good as 2002.
Please stop subjecting the rest of the country to your theater.
Did anybody see this week's Family Guy?
"We now return to 'Asian girls who think tiny things are cute'"
I don't think the most important question has been asked in the previous 363 posts: Will Clemens face Julio Franco to beat the Franco-Johnson age matchup?
Colin Cowherd just played Suzyn Waldman's clip from the 7th inning stretch. I feel like pulling a Van Gogh.
You know Marv, if you go over all the points I made, the only one you took issue with with was the Hughes/Buchholz comparison. That's the only one. And I think that says more about your lack of knowledge of Buchholz than anything else.
NMC, he isn't talking to you... he's talking to some guy named "Marv." I don't know what
your name is, but your handle certainly makes it clear that this isn't you!
So don't take anything personally.
Aye!
Technically, it's just Clemens throwing pieces of wood.
I thought I had converted you to a Tornadoes fan.
I pictured that with our guy wearing an eyepatch and a parrot.
But yes, I do renounce my Red Sox fandom, as a direct result of #369. I've seen the light and the truth, and I am now a Yankee fan forever instead.
My company (and others like it) try their best to reflect the passions of sports fans, rather than lead this feeling. Now I wouldn't say that they're successful all of the time, but at the same time, this rivalry would be a big deal even if there wasn't a major sports broadcaster which recruited much of their behind-the-camera talent in the Northeast.
I have been called many nasty things here in Taiwan but I'm frakking holding the line like Leonidas in 300. Hey, as they say, we gotta do what we always do, fight'em till we can't.
So, Kevin, which is it? Do we "rigidly adhere" to what you say, or not? I was actually trying to put your claim in its best light. I'll cease doing so in the future and just stick to the letter of your claims, as ridiculous as they may be.
A 109 ERA+ is "consistently awwesome?"
But some people are fans for different reasons, and particularly in Boston, there is a contingent of "very good but not quite championship good" fans. They're a small contingent, and you can certainly make the case that they aren't "true" fans of the team. But some of them (and I know two) clearly felt that the team they grew up rooting for had changed forever when the Henry administration took over. And they drifted away.
That's just small-market salb918 complaining. I'm just as complicit - I'm reading this thread, aren't I? - in the drama; YankSox is good for baseball even if I'm pretty sick of it. There are enough online outlets for fans of other teams (uh...I guess this isn't one of them, though). But I snark every so often, it helps me fit in around here. My bad.
At first I read "I liked your article," then realized that nobody would say that and reread it. Thanks for the link!
It's poor grammar.
It's not poor grammar if it's an expression, which it clearly has become. Did you know what he meant when he said it? Did virtually every single person who read that know what he meant? If so, then it's passed out of literal meaning and into an expression.
Not John Maine awesome, of course. But awesome nonetheless.
I stared into the abyss of apostasy and turned away from it.
Really, though. Who chooses what team they root for? Isn't that kind of mercenary? I don't ever think I've made a conscious decision to root for this or that team.
Yeah, I basically inherited the Giants and Red Sox. As for UConn, I picked that up on my own at some point in high school or junior high. My relationship with the Celtics is more of a dalliance.
For the record Kevin, you can stop calling me a liar. On this board, you are well-known for distorting the truth, and here is yet another instance. I really find it hard to believe that the full quotation above, written in reply to my statement that I hope Wake continues his good start to the season, is meant to refer to his starts this year and not his career year-to-year performance. IOW, in order to call me a liar, you've actually lied about your own claim, just as I said you do (see #360). So, save your accusations and your shredded credibility. I didn't distort anything. I merely quoted you, fair and square. Your illogic, however, requires you to distort your own claims to save your "arguments" and your dishonesty frees you to do it.
O RLY
Here's the thread where McNally calls the payroll disparity a "mythos" which was created by the media. He later backs off to say it's not as big as people say it is. Well, it's back over $60M.
Gee, thanks?
O mighty Isis!!!! A pitcher who's consistently awesome when he's not posting a 4.86 ERA in two of his last three starts!!!! Which is pretty much what he's done for four straight years!!!! Before his alleged cicada-like 2007 unhittability!!!!!!!!!
You should apply to your university for funding for this research.
I'm not trying to attach values to these things - the Pedro and Manny acquisitions were big events in the pre-story to the 2004 club.
Well, those "wars" seem limited mostly to Red Sox/Yankee threads. On steroid threads, JC tends not to take much notice of kevin's lack of objectivity, which is just as apparent (probably more so) in those threads than it is in this one. Probably because they're on the same side of the aisle as to that issue. (Don't mean to dog on JC; this is just human nature, I suppose. But JC's pouncing on kevin for not being objective in "Bostonian" threads struck me as interesting, as compared to his reaction to kevin's schtick in the Bonds/steroids threads.)
Yo! Where's the love? What did I do?
Since I've been called out (and I guess graciousness from the fans of the team ahead in the standings has never been a real hallmark of this rivalry), I'll throw in my two cents for the record. First, I was there yesterday. Really a perfect day at the ballpark (not counting the announcement), crisp pitching, blooper plays by the opposition, great weather, Yankee shutout. All good.
The announcement was strange. After GBA (Lord help us), Take Me Out To he Ballgame starts and after the first verse, Bob Sheppard breaks in and (forgive me) I thought he was having a 96 year-old moment and announcing the next batter. Then he directs the crowd's attention to the owner's box/screen and you've seen the rest. A really strange moment, the crowd cheered pretty heartily, but seemed mostly surprised.
As to the signing, hell, what can I say? The Yankees need some pitching and Clemens is some pitching. I'm not a huge fan of his, but I don't think he can hurt and I feel like it's a somewhat fitting end to the Torre era (whether it works out or blows up). As for the Red Sox fan teeth-gnashing, I don't see why they really care. I would have rather the Yankees outbid the Sox for Matsuzaka in the offseason, but they were out-maneuvered on that one. They are where they are and they needed to do something to get some momentum and fill out the rotation. It certainly makes the summer a little more interesting.
The Red Sox are well ahead, they will be in the playoffs anyway. I'm hoping the Central teams beat up on each other, the Yankees make a run and either take the WC or grab the division from the Sox. (I do find the combination of "the Yankees have an unfair advantage because they spend their way out of problems" a bit inconsistent with the simultaneous "we didn't want/need him anyway" position.)
But I do find it amusing to see it so strenuously argued that four good games a knucklestopper makes. While the myth of Roger Clemens is a cinch to be exposed in the AL East heat.
Kevin and I agree about steroids issues. I disagree w/him about Bonds's character, and have not supported his arguments about it. I don't endorse all of his Kevin's arguments, nor have no idea why I should be responsible for doing so. I'll defend him when I see things he advances unfairly criticized, and not defend him in other cases. DMN and others can handle themselves.
O RLY"
INTERNET ARGUMENT!
IP H HR BB SO ERA
-----------------------
38 28 2 18 21 2.11
Then I think you have to do the same for this guy too:
36 35 2 17 23 3.00
Just my 2 cents.
And to the extent that I implied that you did or should, I apologize. God knows I have much more respect for you and your intellectual honesty than I have for his.
However, I think that, while it's accurate to say you'll "not defend him" in some cases, it's also fair to say that you don't jump his shite in steroid/Bonds threads as you have here, though his argumentative style is no more objective in those threads than it is here. Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things--just found it an interesting contrast.
Fair enough. So now you and the other guys who talk about it can finally zip it up about the payroll difference. Clemens will help the Yankees, and every start he makes will be a big story. Given the fact that to make the playoffs, the Yankees have to deal with the Red Sox, Twins, Tigers and Indians, as maybe the White Sox and whoever finishes second in the AL West, and that Tampa Bay is clearly better than they have been and Baltimore may be alittel better as well, they are going to need him.
Project much, kev? (You might note, if you bother to break beyond your cocoon of self-centeredness, that my "attitude" toward you differs significantly from my "attitude" toward, oh, I don't know...every single other poster on this site?
Oh, and "injecting objective data" (assuming your data to be that) into a discussion is not synonymous with using that data "objectively" within that discussion (IOW, if you're using someone else's "objective data" to support a preconceived conclusion, you're not using it "objectively." Which I suspect you realize. Or at least, as a scientist, I certainly hope you do).
VERONICA WORKS DAMMIT!!!!!!
What have <strike>you</strike>I brought to this thread?
Nothing. Nothing except namecalling and BS."
Fixed!
I have to disagree with this method of evaluating other posters.
Who determines "substance"? And how do they determine it? What some may regard as completely pointless, I might regard as vital.
Look, you can evaluate others any way you want to, but I won't let my silence on that imply my support of it.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=olney_buster&id=2862261
1. BL summarized the payroll issue well; but, as I have said, I think it is only a small contextual advantage and on the level of "fairness" I think Henry could spend more money if he wanted to and doesn't due to the Selig connection. Most Red Sox fans, IMO, believe they have better management, a better farm system, and a more or less equal talent base in comparison to the Yankees. kevin is more strident about it, and overstates it, but I think a lot of poeple in RSN more or less agree with most of what he said.
2. This is analogous to the ARod move in that sort of gets the the teams on an equal footing in a specific area (rotation in this case) by the Yankees spending big money.
3. In the Red Sox preview, Malcolm made a snarky (and unoriginal) remark about the Red Sox "lusting to emulate" the Yankees. In the sense that the Red Sox want to be the domninant team, that is of course true. However, underneath that, I think it is more true that the Cashman-led Yankees are lusting to emulate the Red Sox:
a. Build the system and hold on to prospects, unless you are trying to use them get young, high-level ML talent, like Beckett. (Hughes, Tabata, Ellsbury, Lester, Papelbon)
b. Pay more attention to detail in the back end of the roster by using the waiver wire and use money there to overpay for veterans who can fill a specfic role, instead of just getting the cheapest guy. (Farnsworth, Bruney, Rasner, Cora, Donnelly, etc.)
c. When you have a major weakeness that needs to be addressed, bludgeon the opposition with your money: Damon, Pettitte, Clemens, Matsuzaka, Drew, Lugo.
100. kevin Posted: May 06, 2007 at 06:11 PM (#2356392)
From AP wire story, with a few needed edits:
Clemens, who will turn 45 in August, agreed to a $28 million, one-year contract that will start when he is added to the major league roster, [srike]most likely in three to four weeks, after he cycles off his annual steroids regimen.
Slightly off topic: Today's Shaughnessy article says that Clemons is hated in Boston. Not by me. I appreciate his years here. Shaughnessy is probably right, though, about a lot of fans. But, I am better than them. And, while I'm at it, I am better than you, too.
Yes, you.
kinda like mcnally's nonsensical nickname for pedroia.
But not only was Veronica several degrees away from making sense to most of us (I understand it, but it takes a relatively rare baseball fan/teenage girl sleuth fan to get it without further explanation), but it didn't have a double meaning at all, which many good nicknames have.
wrong. and wrong again.
I guess this is technically true, since it was full of crap, and crap IS a substance.
Of course it's not a fluke. It's the exact same thing that happened in '04, '05, and to a lesser extent '06.
Wakefield April vs Final 2004-2007
It looks to me like the trend is for a lower BABIP and ERA when it's in the relatively colder April that goes up as it gets warmer (over his career, his 2 best ERA and BABIP months are April and Sept). It would be really neat if someone tried to match weather conditions to his individual games.
In light of 438 and 439, this may need to be edited.
a) kevin ignores the above
b) kevin claims the above lack substance (for example, because the us attorney is lying) and only his earlier article should stand
And b is the winner!
Why is that the key phrase (seriously)?
Tell them what they've won, Don Pardo!
Yeah... he didn't want to elaborate, because he didn't want to disclose whatever names actually were in the report. And since he didn't elaborate, we can't know what he would've said if he had.
That is to say, the people in the reality-based community, who wait for evidence before jumping to conclusions, couldn't know. If you draw conclusions by combining wishes and #### you made up, then sprinkling in some fairy dust, then maybe you can know, or at least act like you do.
Kurt Angle was involved in some falls count anywhere matches.
There is no way you can look at this signing and not say, "Boy the Yankees just got alot better". No way. Clemens can still pitch like the best in baseball (if only for 6 innings/game). My prediction? 135 IP, 3.00 ERA, and (with that lineup) 14 wins.
It's also funny how now the Yankees shafted Clemens after '03. Obviously giving him the Hummer was just their way of saying "Suck our d!cks".
Red Sox fans have hated Clemens from the day he signed with Toronto (even though it was Duquette who didn't want Clemens after a season of 242 IP with the 4th best ERA+ in the league); winning the next 2 Cy Youngs turned up the heat more, and then winning 2 World Series and another CYA in NY took them over the top. The guy could cure cancer, and he'd be faulted for not doing it soon enough; he could negotiate world peace, and someone would say "Yea, but what about cats and dogs?"
Yep, reading this thread the past 2 days has been a real treat.
ah, nevermind.
His name is Tim Lincecum, and he came from AAA Fresno.
Yes, look at what the statement says.
Its the Great Kahli. He hasn't been wrestling that long. I think he was in New Japan for about 5 years, before coming to ECW last year. They brought him over to the maincard in the last month or so.
Looking back at the complete stories, I think the first version is worded poorly. The prosecutor, as far as I can tell, does not say that there are "significant inaccuracies, including the five names in the report."
Make of this what you will...
They did redact those names for a reason, kevin. The guy probably likes keeping his job.
It's like watching Game 6 of the 1986 WS. You see the ball rolling toward Buckner, and you think the game's over, and then...wow.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main