Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

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.

   1. Dan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:08 AM (#2586075)
We only need the good Daisuke for 3-4 innings with a short hook. If the wheels start to come off, we have a fully rested pen. Or at least the guys in it who matter. We can get 2 innings apiece tomorrow from MDC, Okajima, and Papelbon if we truly need to. That's 6 innings of the game. I like our chances. Of course if Daisuke allows 4 runs in the first inning, it's kind of moot.
   2. Jon T. Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:10 AM (#2586076)
Don't forget 2 innings from Beckett
   3. tfbg9 Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:10 AM (#2586077)
Lopez and Gagne will be that much sharper should we need them for the 15th and 16th innings.
   4. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:14 AM (#2586080)
Francona said he didn't "think" Beckett would be available tomorrow. But it was a postgame Q&A;on the field with fans going crazy, so not sure it means anything.

On the other hand, I suspect a lot of managers would have just said "everyone's available, except for Schillling," right then and there.
   5. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:18 AM (#2586082)
The Red Sox have a big leg up tomorrow as long as the Matsuzaka blowup inning isn't the first or second. On the other hand, I have a hard time imagining Francona pulling a starter before the fifth inning (before the fifth is over, yes, but not before it starts), and he is still using Gagne in close games, is he not? And the Red Sox didn't destroy Westbrook, much as it seems obvious that they would do so. But how could that happen twice in a row?
   6. Darren Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:24 AM (#2586084)
Francona said he didn't "think" Beckett would be available tomorrow. But it was a postgame Q&A;on the field with fans going crazy, so not sure it means anything.


I heard it as "I would think so." During the game the Fox guys said they had talked to Ferrell and I think they said Ferrell said Beckett could be available.
   7. vhailorx Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:27 AM (#2586086)
No, I don't think francona will use gagne is a close game unless (like in game 2) he has exhausted his other pitching options. gagne is ahead of lopez and (probably) lester in the bullpen, but that's about it. Game 7 has to be a slight advantage to the sox (maybe as high as 65-35 given they are at home, but no more), but westbrook can be very good from time to time and if the game is close towards the end, it will come down to betancourt/perez/mastny/borowski v. okajima/timlin/delcarmen/papelbon. should be a great game.

also, PJ Martinez, I thought francona said beckett WAS available tomorrow in his postgame comments? did i misunderstand?
   8. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:47 AM (#2586091)
You guys are probably right, since there are two of you and what you heard makes more sense. I certainly hope so, anyway.
   9. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:52 AM (#2586093)
Manny Delcarmen needs a bounceback IP or two.
   10. GIANTlhbASS Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:58 AM (#2586094)
You guys are probably right, since there are two of you


He definitely said yes. I was surprised how quickly he assented when asked the question. What a game, what a year.
   11. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:00 AM (#2586096)
I don't know why, but the Indians went fishing tonight when they've been patient this entire series.
   12. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:02 AM (#2586097)
What's the fascination, if it is true, what's the fascination with J.D. Drew?. On behalf of an eager constituency, ... thank you.
   13. vhailorx Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:09 AM (#2586098)
amen, Mr. Bamberger Ryan....
   14. chris p Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:33 AM (#2586103)
What's the fascination, if it is true, what's the fascination with J.D. Drew?. On behalf of an eager constituency, ... thank you.

huh? i'm not getting this post

afaic, i'm rooting for the guy. it sounds like he's been through a tough season, with his kid going through surgery and all.
   15. Dan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:05 AM (#2586107)
Chris, it's a reference to Bob Ryan's question to Theo about the team pursuing Drew last fall.
   16. CFiJ Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:17 AM (#2586111)
Interesting how rooting interest can sway when you're a third-party fan. Coming into the series, I was hoping for Cleveland to win it, but with Daisuke to have a good game. Coming into this game, I was hoping the Indians would put Schilling and the Red Sox away. Now, with Daisuke pitching game seven, I'm hoping for post-season heroics, a great game that put the Sox into the World Series and make Matsuzaka a hero in New England.
   17. Dave Cyprian Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:58 AM (#2586122)
Great win - just a great win. What a gorgeous swing by Drew, don't you agree? The pitch wasn't that bad, it was down and away.

The big thing I noticed is how angry and frustrated the Indians felt the entire game after the 3rd inning. It didn't matter what stuff Schill had at that point, they were hacking and moaning. Meanwhile the Sox are loose... I hope it carries on to tonight.

QUALITY START MATSUZAKA - YOU KNOW YOU WANT IT, YOU KNOW YOU CAN GET IT!
   18. vhailorx Posted: October 21, 2007 at 07:42 AM (#2586129)
it seemed pretty clear to me that the home plate ump was calling a very tight strike zone all night long (actually, the only time i thought he expanded the zone at all was on the 3-1 pitch to Ortiz in the 1st inning, which he called a strike), and that really seemed to get inside Fausto's head. He just never looked comfortable and didn't seem to have any idea re: how to adjust to/deal with a non-ideal strike zone. I'm a boston fan and therefore haven't watched many cleveland games this season. If anyone has seen more of his games, do you know if this is a recurring problem with him, or did he just succumb to post-season jitters in this outing?

assuming of course that people agree with my assessment of the umpiring tonight.
   19. Richard Gadsden Posted: October 21, 2007 at 10:46 AM (#2586138)
If we go to lots of extra innings tonight and Beckett, Lester and Wakefield all get used, is it possible that Buchholz gets recalled to the roster to start Game One of the World Series?
   20. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: October 21, 2007 at 12:22 PM (#2586143)
I'm hoping Tavarez makes the roster, should they win tonight.

I am hoping that Westbrook at Fenway is different than Westbrook at the Jake.

I am hoping that Dice-K has a good game at Fenway for a change.
   21. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 21, 2007 at 12:29 PM (#2586144)
If we go to lots of extra innings tonight and Beckett, Lester and Wakefield all get used, is it possible that Buchholz gets recalled to the roster to start Game One of the World Series?
Sadly, no. He's shut down. There's not time to get him back into game shape.

Schilling's 7 IP, 2 R start actually slightly increased his career postseason ERA, from 2.23 to 2.25. Obviously it helped him that the offense went off on Fausto, but he came up big, again. Crazy.

While I was happy to get to bed at a reasonable hour, the Sox may regret letting Aaron Laffey stymie them for 4.2 innings. The Indians got to rest Betancourt and Lewis even in a game where they only got six outs from their starter.
   22. bunyon Posted: October 21, 2007 at 12:36 PM (#2586146)
What a gorgeous swing by Drew, don't you agree? The pitch wasn't that bad, it was down and away.

Agreed. That was a beautiful piece of hitting.

I'm actually bummed - not really an Indians fan but good friends with many, including my father in law. They told me they'd blow it. Ah well.
   23. BadMutha Posted: October 21, 2007 at 01:04 PM (#2586152)
Re no. 18, as has likely been apparent Fausto has been struggling this series with control problems largely due to the pileup of innings aftr his stupid and illfated closer experiment last season. I have watched ~140 Tribe games this season and while I agree with your assessment of last night's strike zone, Fausto all season has been more or less able to adapt to whatever zone's been called game by game (assuming there are low strikes being called in some form - if there are not, he's in trouble and everybody knows it). I think his g6 frustration had more to do with his inability to control his pitches at all when it mattered than where he was being asked to throw them. I turned to my wife after he was unable to challenge Drew in the 2-1 count and told her it was going to be a loooong night for Cleveland. Sure enough he had to straighten it within the zone on the 3-2 pitch and the rest was history. I think Victor arguing with the ump after that half inning was simply an unsuccessful attempt to bolster Fausto's confidence rather than legitimate beefing about the strikezone. As a side note, Rafael Perez has been overused throughout the season and misused pretty much all series, and as a result has no confidence level either (either pitching or throwing to secondbase) - he's been a key part of our pitching staff all season whom we've sorely missed this series.

No. 17, Eric Wedge's lack of effective leadership creates a very tight team. Two years ago the chokiness that Wedge engenders cropped up down the stretch to give the White Sox the division. Last year they were tight all season. This year they were tight in the regular season against Boston and New York. And now in the postseason they've choked yet again. And as was likely apparent it's not just altering their approach at the plate, though you're right that they certainly did that from the moment Grady leapt into a very hittable 2-0 pitch with two runners on and no one out against what appeared at the time to be a fairly vulnerable Schilling, and popped helplessly to right. But it's the chokes in the field that show most obviously how little confidence the team has - whether the three miscues in g5 or the even more ridiculous ones last night. The image of Wedge's head in hands over the dugout rail in g5 will likely be his lasting legacy - he had little choice after putting all his eggs in one basket by busherly and prematurely talking about the importance of winning the series at the Jake.

None of this is to take anything away from the Sox, who as you all know are clearly one of the best teams in baseball. The Sox managed to tie us for the best record in the bigs this year (albeit with four more home games and more offdays after the first week of the season), and the Sox managed to turn us into pansies during many of the regular season matchups too (though not as much so as the Yankees did). After the demise of the Yankees this season, I think it's safe to say that Boston truly is the best team money can buy. Got a hole in right? Sign JD Drew to a contract for more money than Cleveland's entire roster makes this year. Need a shortstop? Voila Julio Lugo for more money annually than anyone for Cleveland has made in a long long time. And need a pitcher? Throw a season and a half worth of Cleveland's total payroll overseas for Dice K.

Impressive stuff - it seems the torch has been passed, and who doesn't like to see the Yankees being painted into a corner and having to play catch up?!?

Best of luck to your Sox in g7 - here's hoping, even if only for vanity's sake, that, win or lose, the Tribe actually shows up and plays to win this time!
   24. BadMutha Posted: October 21, 2007 at 01:07 PM (#2586153)
Correction - the choke down the stretch in 2005 came against the White Sox but cost the Tribe the Wild Card not the division as I mistakenly wrote above.

Eric Wedge says "you're welcome" for that one too!
   25. JB H Posted: October 21, 2007 at 01:37 PM (#2586163)
More important than the win last night, the Sox pretty much locked up the series lead in OPS and runs, thus allowing me to ##### endlessly if they lose
   26. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 02:34 PM (#2586188)
“I don’t know if the term ‘switched on’ is the right term or the right way to describe, but I am all on for tomorrow,” Matsuzaka said.
   27. RobertMachemer Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:08 PM (#2586204)
Lastly, benching Coco Crisp for Jacoby Ellsbury had exactly the effect that many here said it would. He hit better than Coco likely would have and he looked a bit foolish on a ball near the monster.
That's pretty tough. Ellsbury went an (on the surface) unremarkable 1 for 5 (albeit with some hard-luck on balls put in play). I know that there's not much faith in Crisp's offense right now (and justifiably so), but I think saying that Ellsbury's offense was better than what Crisp would have done is being way too quick to assume the worst of Crisp.
   28. Mister High Standards Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:10 PM (#2586205)
I think it's safe to say that Boston truly is the best team money can buy.


Its amazing what a devout fan base can do. Perhaps Clevland fans could take a lesson rather than whine about their payroll. If their team doesn't want to invest take it up with them, don't whine about teams that think winning is actually important.
   29. BadMutha Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:18 PM (#2586208)
Re #28, I'm sorry Mister High Standards, but I must have missed your high standards on this.

Where does the devoutness of a fan base rank vis-a-vis the size and deep pockets of a particular market?

I'm very proud that my little team representing a smaller and economically-depressed region is poised to pit its team with a payroll only 40% of the Sox' against the New Goliath in a game seven tonight, win or lose.

I remember these same arguments coming from Yankee fans for so many years it saddens me to hear them from Sox fans too - the Sox really are the New Yankees then in your book eh?
   30. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:21 PM (#2586209)
Do we really have to have the big market argument? Do people really take pride in the fact that Larry Lucchino is a good businessman, with a strong marketing staff? I certainly couldn't care less.

The Red Sox have structural advantages and advantages built on good business practice. This results in the baseball operations people having a big leg up on baseball ops people from most other teams - though a big disadvantage to the Yankees. If fans of other teams want to point out that the Red Sox have structural advantages, I don't see any point in denying it.
   31. Baldrick Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:23 PM (#2586212)
Have you seen Crisp "hit" this series? If that's any indication of what he's likely to do today, Ellsbury could out-hit him if he only got to stand up there hold a crown of broccoli. At least he might could get a bunt down.
   32. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:33 PM (#2586217)
Cleveland's already blown a postseason series (1999) to the Red Sox when they had three chances to finish it. Right now they're kind of reminding me of the 1996 Cardinals after they took a 3-1 lead over the Braves. Back then the Cardinals looked in the mirror and said "Wait a minute---what are WE doing here?", and then proceeded to lose the last three games by a total of 32 to 1. The Indians definitely have had that look about them in the last two games.
   33. BadMutha Posted: October 21, 2007 at 03:43 PM (#2586226)
Re #30, Matt Clement of A., I think your point is wisely offered - and Theo and the boys in the front office are indeed truly top notch.

I will again submit however that the Sox have a chance to finish off this series largely as a result of Cleveland's choke factor (or at least the one specifically having arisen during Eric Wedge's tenure) having resurfaced at the most untimely of moments.

That's not to say the Sox are a bad team. Just a very lucky one to have been handed this many opportunities.
   34. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:21 PM (#2586248)
Got a hole in right? Sign JD Drew to a contract for more money than Cleveland's entire roster makes this year. Need a shortstop? Voila Julio Lugo for more money annually than anyone for Cleveland has made in a long long time. And need a pitcher? Throw a season and a half worth of Cleveland's total payroll overseas for Dice K.


Um Julio Lugo was not a good move.
   35. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:34 PM (#2586253)
So, what does T.J. Simers think about Drew now?
   36. Mister High Standards Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:38 PM (#2586255)
Where does the devoutness of a fan base rank vis-a-vis the size and deep pockets of a particular market?


The fact that you can't put two and two together, might expain why that region "economically-depressed".

Part of the organazation is the front office, part of the front office is the marketing and sales staff. The RedSox do a better job of it than just about anyone. The organazation INVESTS in it's team, that is a reason to be praised not vilified. It takes some "interesting" spin to do otherwise.

Have it however you want, Dice K is going to pitch a gem. The indians are going to cough it up, and then Beckett is going to win the Cy Young.

I came into the series, not really all that fired up, but this DB whining about market size is just another point in favor the new american socialism, that needs to be ripped up by its roots!
   37. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:40 PM (#2586256)
I was only able to watch the first inning last night. Buck said, "With one swing, Drew erases all memories of a bad first year in Boston."

Is this true? If he puts up career norms in every other year of this contract, does a well-placed slam (in the ALCS, of course; not the Series) 100% make up for his 2007?

In addition, with the amount of information we have now, Sox fans, would you be in favor of Ellsbury starting in CF with Crisp on the bench next year?
   38. Mister High Standards Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:46 PM (#2586262)

Is this true? If he puts up career norms in every other year of this contract, does a well-placed slam (in the ALCS, of course; not the Series) 100% make up for his 2007?


Yup.

The dudes kid was battling for his life. Even if he didn't hit that grandslam it would have made no difference from my perspective (assuming he plays up to par down the road).
   39. Gaelan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:49 PM (#2586263)
The fact that you can't put two and two together, might expain why that region "economically-depressed".


This is both unkind and untrue.
   40. BadMutha Posted: October 21, 2007 at 04:54 PM (#2586265)
Re #36:
The fact that you can't put two and two together, might expain why that region "economically-depressed".

Part of the organazation is the front office, part of the front office is the marketing and sales staff. The RedSox do a better job of it than just about anyone. The organazation INVESTS in it's team, that is a reason to be praised not vilified. It takes some "interesting" spin to do otherwise.


Yes I admit I do not see the two & two here or how it is supposed to be put together.

Cleveland has a good front office staff too, and does decent marketing and sales. And yes my compliments to the Sox for very effective marketing and sales. But comparing the breadth and depth of the respective markets is like comparing apples & oranges - you can only expect to pull so many diamonds out of a smaller section of coalfield.
   41. Baldrick Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:08 PM (#2586275)
Is this true? If he puts up career norms in every other year of this contract, does a well-placed slam (in the ALCS, of course; not the Series) 100% make up for his 2007?


For sure.

Frankly, if he puts up career norms in every other year that will 100% make up for his 2007.
   42. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:13 PM (#2586281)
That's not to say the Sox are a bad team. Just a very lucky one to have been handed this many opportunities.


the series isn't over until it's over, so wait until they've actually choked before you say they've choked. you sound like a red sox fan prior to 2004.
   43. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:15 PM (#2586284)
Cleveland is a notably less populous metropolitan area than Boston, and probably less affluent, too. So there is that.

That said, I assume this year has been a pretty good one for the Indians revenue-wise, and, given the team's generally shrewd front office, I wouldn't be surprised if they start to beef up the payroll a bit if they can find some helpful FA's or salary dump trades. They have their core of excellent homegrown talent, and they can probably afford to spend a little around the edges now with their postseason earnings and (I assume) increased ticket sales.

When the Sox and Indians faced each other in '99, it was actually the Indians who had the larger payroll, if I'm not mistaken. After that run, though, the Indians scaled back and went through their small-market downturn on the success cycle, then built back up to where they are now.

The Sox, with a larger market, a rejuvenated rivalry with the Yankees, and an impending sale of the team, redoubled their spending, further driving fan interest and revenue. Since the new owners arrived, this process has continued, obviously, and in what appears to be a more sustainable fashion.

The Indians may not have the luxury of that particular business model, but I would expect their payroll to increase considerably over the next 3-4 years, up toward the 90-100m range. I would imagine they can afford that if they continue to win.
   44. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:23 PM (#2586293)
The Indians may not have the luxury of that particular business model, but I would expect their payroll to increase considerably over the next 3-4 years, up toward the 90-100m range. I would imagine they can afford that if they continue to win.

The problem is that this may not be sustainable, and part of payroll includes multiyear commitments. They may want to avoid an inflated payroll should the team underperform.
   45. JB H Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:48 PM (#2586304)
Is this true? If he puts up career norms in every other year of this contract, does a well-placed slam (in the ALCS, of course; not the Series) 100% make up for his 2007?

If there was a season-long "world series title added" stat that was equivalent to those game-long win probability stats I would guess that Drew has performed pretty close to his preseason projection after that grand slam.
   46. JB H Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:49 PM (#2586307)
Actually thinking about it a bit more, I'm sure he's wildly over performing his preseason projection for that imaginary stat.
   47. tribefan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 05:54 PM (#2586308)
The Indians may not have the luxury of that particular business model, but I would expect their payroll to increase considerably over the next 3-4 years, up toward the 90-100m range. I would imagine they can afford that if they continue to win.

They can afford it. Easily.
   48. Darren Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:04 PM (#2586314)
Yes, it's all the fans! We're so wonderful that we make a $150 mil. payroll possible! (/ridiculousness)
   49. Lassus Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:08 PM (#2586318)
The fact that you can't put two and two together, might expain why that region "economically-depressed".

This is both unkind and untrue.


Gaelan, you should know by now that his username is a hilarious bit of irony, as he has pretty much the lowest standards for discourse and and intelligent opinions on the site. Just let him yammer.
   50. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:17 PM (#2586323)
I will again submit however that the Sox have a chance to finish off this series largely as a result of Cleveland's choke factor (or at least the one specifically having arisen during Eric Wedge's tenure) having resurfaced at the most untimely of moments.

That's not to say the Sox are a bad team. Just a very lucky one to have been handed this many opportunities.


I think the Red Sox are in this position because they've outscored the Indians 19-3 in the last two games. It seems a stretch to chalk that up to being lucky. Eric Wedge could have been the impossible offspring of an unholy John McGraw-Earl Weaver tryst and it wasn't changing the outcome of these last two games.
   51. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:23 PM (#2586332)
Fausto Carmona obviously has great stuff. Did he also get mildly lucky with the home plate umpires assigned to his games this year? In his two games in this series, he has appeared incapable of dealing with a small strike zone. Of course, that could just as easily be postseason nerves or fatigue after a lot of innings thrown from April to September, but it did make me wonder how he sustained that 3-ish ERA over the whole season, even with that incredible sinking fastball. (Granted, Boston's offense is better and certainly more patient than most, so the Sox may have been particularly well-suited to exploiting this issue.)
   52. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:28 PM (#2586337)
I would argue that the Yankee lineup is more patient than the Sox lineup, and Carmona smacked them around like nobody's business.

I think that a sample size of 30 as opposed to 2 tells me that it's more likely that he's been unlucky with umpires in the postseason, not in the regular season. If there's anything to this, of course.
   53. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:32 PM (#2586341)
I gotta say, the tone of this thread is really bizarre.

The Indians fans seem to have already given up on Game 7, and so we're debating whether the Red Sox have a major structural advantage over the Indians. You would think that after the two teams each won three games against each other, we'd be talking about, you know, today's game.

The Sox fans crowing about their superior fanbase are one good Jake Westbrook start from looking pretty silly.

I like the Red Sox' chances, but I liked the Game 3 matchup, too, and Westbrook shut the offense down.
   54. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:34 PM (#2586342)
The Indians fans seem to have already given up on Game 7

My impression is that this is reverse hoodoo.
   55. tfbg9 Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:38 PM (#2586347)
What were the TV ratings for last night's ballgame, in the 1st inning in CLE and BOS? How about for the last 10 years, in terms of % of sets watching the game? That will tell you something. One of the reasons, I'd guess the most important, BOS has money as an organization is that BOS/NE is the most baseball-crazy place in the USA, not only due to marketing. Family, tradtion, Ted Williams, the whacky ride of 1967-2004, the NYY's and the rivalry, 1918, Fenway, everything. The Sox have scratch primarily because the region can't get enough baseball.
   56. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:42 PM (#2586350)
One of the reasons, i'd guess the most important, BOS has money as an organization is that BOS/NE is the most baseball-crazy place in the USA, not only due to marketing. Family, tradtion, Ted Williams, the whacky ride of 1967-2004, the NYY's and the rivalry, 1918, everything. The Sox have scratch primarily because the region can't get enough baseball.

The only problem with this, tibby, is that Boston was not run as a moneyed franchise until fairly recently. Are you implying that all previous ownership groups pocketed all of the profits?
   57. tfbg9 Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:48 PM (#2586364)
Matsuzaka's only 7-5 tonight. I'd have guessed 8-5...hmmm.
   58. tfbg9 Posted: October 21, 2007 at 06:50 PM (#2586367)
Are you implying that all previous ownership groups pocketed all of the profits?


??? I'm saying the potential fanbase cares, percentage-wise more than any other market, and tunes in. So the Bud ads cost more than they might. The current owners were smart enough to own the network, tivvy, so that's helped a lot too, yes.
   59. Dan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 07:00 PM (#2586381)
I would argue that the Yankee lineup is more patient than the Sox lineup,

The Red Sox drew 52 more walks in 2007 than the Yankees.
   60. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: October 21, 2007 at 07:24 PM (#2586402)
The Sox fans crowing about their superior fanbase are one good Jake Westbrook start from looking pretty silly.

Whether the Sox win or lose tonight, that argument is silly. And it has nothing to do with whether either team will win tonight, so it's doubly silly. Exponentially silly, really.

edit---(the argument "our fanbase is superior to your fan base".)
   61. Mister High Standards Posted: October 21, 2007 at 08:07 PM (#2586446)
They can afford it. Easily.


They can afford it now. ANd they some how brain wash their fan base into thinking it's somehow an issue of haves versus have nots. It's really an issue of the willing versus the unwilling.

The outcome of this game isn't all that important to me. Because i know the RedSox will continue to invest. While, the cheap skate indians will do who knows what.

The issue of whose fan base is "better" isn't even an issue. One team fans show up when they win, the other has pretty much shown up non stop since 1967. One fan base has blamed ownership when they cheaped out, the other fan base blames the teams that actually invest in their teams.

I'm not even sure how much a part if the redsox fan base I am at this point. My issue is fans of "smaller" market teams blaming payroll whenever things start to go poorly. If Payroll really is a problem, then stop supporting a team that isn't investing sufficiently.
   62. PJ Martinez Posted: October 21, 2007 at 08:10 PM (#2586451)
"I think that a sample size of 30 as opposed to 2 tells me that it's more likely that he's been unlucky with umpires in the postseason, not in the regular season."

Yeah, that is probably the more logical way of looking at it. Looking over his gamelogs, I see that Carmona did have a few games of 4 or more walks-- and usually got away with it, except for an August 31st game umpired by John Hirschbeck, in which he walked 6 and gave up five earned runs (even that game could have been a lot worse, it seems, run-wise).
   63. tribefan Posted: October 21, 2007 at 08:42 PM (#2586502)
The Indians fans seem to have already given up on Game 7,

No sir. Westbrook will rise to the occasion again.

One fan base has blamed ownership when they cheaped out, the other fan base blames the teams that actually invest in their teams.

I don't know about the whole fan base. Most Indians fans I know are well aware that Dolan is a cheapass and could easily boost the payroll. He didn't start his own RSN because he was poor and losing money. I couldn't give a #### how much the Sox or Yanks spend.
   64. Mister High Standards Posted: October 21, 2007 at 08:49 PM (#2586513)
Tribefan, then clearly my comments weren't directed at you. Kudos. Perhaps "badmutha" could take a lesson.
   65. Miko Supports Shane's Spam Habit Posted: October 21, 2007 at 09:11 PM (#2586533)
is that Boston was not run as a moneyed franchise until fairly recently.

What does that mean? I once spent some time looking through the payroll numbers on Doug Pappas's old site and seem to remember the Sox consistently having competitive payrolls.

Doesn't the Jake figure into this economic disparity theme in an odd way? Wasn't there a period where new stadiums like the Jake and the ballpark at Arlington were so successful at raising revenue that they were putting mid market teams on equal footing with the big market teams? This helped fuel the run to get new stadiums built. Then, regional cable co's like Yes and NESN emerged, and the economic landscaped returned pretty much to where it was before.

I remember reading about that, but don't remember seeing revenue figures.
   66. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 21, 2007 at 09:19 PM (#2586547)
I remember that when I moved to that area in late summer of 1997, the WEEI idiots were talking about how the Yawkey Trust wouldn't spend money, the team was being run on a shoestring, claiming it was a "mid-market," and would never be any good again. We know what happened immediately thereafter, of course, but the general feeling in 1997 was one of anger, doom, and gloom. It's quite amazing how 10 years later, this same franchise is basically the same thing as the Yankees.

And I do think I actually remember some quotes to the "mid-market" effect from John Harrington from around that time.
   67. Darren Posted: October 21, 2007 at 10:49 PM (#2586625)
“I don’t know if the term ‘switched on’ is the right term or the right way to describe, but I am all on for tomorrow,” Matsuzaka said.


Matsuzaka paused for a moment, looking reflectively at the sky, and added "Donkey donkey donkey donkey."
   68. Joel W Posted: October 21, 2007 at 11:54 PM (#2586708)
Darren, it never gets old, ever.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Eugene Freedman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.6939 seconds
41 querie(s) executed