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. OlePerfesser Posted: August 27, 2006 at 03:23 PM (#2158450)
Can someone shoot me now?

It would be better for all concerned if we used the ammo on one or more members of that 'pen. I nominate Tavarez first, of course.

The other factor that has been mentioned in connection with Timlin's meltdown is his WBC participation this spring. I doubt that it's the only thing, but it might be "a" thing with a 40-year-old.

His early-season appearances, it should also be noted, were probably much higher stress than they would have been if we hadn't utterly whiffed on the Ez-boys investments. If either one of those contracts is anything other than a total loss, but especially if both guys are respectable, then I think the whole 'pen equation is different all year.
   2. Rough Carrigan Posted: August 27, 2006 at 04:50 PM (#2158492)
And how many times did Timlin pitch last year when the team had a pretty good lead and it was a low leverage situation that they could have given to one of the guys Tito was letting rust from inactivity? I complained about this last year, btw. I would guess 10. It might not have mattered but Tito's bright enough to not always reach for the security blanket of some Camo Country cuddlin'. It might've been part of Timlin sucking so ferociously badly right now. Tito is just unable to relax and let a lesser pitcher come in with a 4 run lead or one such as that.

Oh, and don't read this morning's Glob or you'll be furious at Timlin's assessment of his work last night. Something along the lines of his pitches were real good.
   3. Darren Posted: August 27, 2006 at 05:21 PM (#2158511)
. It might not have mattered but Tito's bright enough to not always reach for the security blanket of some Camo Country cuddlin'.

He is? On what do you base this? Tito loves security blankets.
   4. Mattbert Posted: August 27, 2006 at 05:57 PM (#2158516)
Even the Mariners fans sitting around me knew that bringing in Timlin was a dumb idea:

"Well, at least they're not throwing Papelbon; now we have a chance."
"Weren't they just warming up Delcarmen? He's pretty good, isn't he?"

You mean this, Carrigan?
“I think I pitched exceptionally well, if you look at the replays,” Timlin said.
Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and sort of...disagree with you there. The Mariners are a pretty poor offensive team, and every ball hit that inning (mostly first pitches), including the outs, was a rocket.
   5. MM1f Posted: August 27, 2006 at 06:21 PM (#2158519)
Not to hijack but I cannot get any thread that is listed on the "Newsblog/Clutch Hits" part of the site to load. Minor Key, Sox Therapy and Hall o Merit threads pull up fine but i get a "MySQL" error when i try to pull up a regular post.

Anyone else getting this?
   6. Chip Posted: August 27, 2006 at 08:02 PM (#2158576)
Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and sort of...disagree with you there. The Mariners are a pretty poor offensive team, and every ball hit that inning (mostly first pitches), including the outs, was a rocket.,

He's always pitched up a lot, but gotten away with it because of heavy movement on his sinker. Doesn't look like the movement's there anymore - now it's just up and straight. Bad combo.
   7. Darren Posted: August 27, 2006 at 11:11 PM (#2158830)
Even the Mariners fans sitting around me knew that bringing in Timlin was a dumb idea:

"Well, at least they're not throwing Papelbon; now we have a chance."
"Weren't they just warming up Delcarmen? He's pretty good, isn't he?"


I guess it wasn't David Cameron.
   8. JC in DC Posted: August 27, 2006 at 11:37 PM (#2158848)
How'd the Sox do today? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
   9. 1k5v3L Posted: August 27, 2006 at 11:43 PM (#2158850)
David Cameron would've said:

"At least the Sox don't have Nageotte, who's certainly better than Papelbon."
   10. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:11 AM (#2158863)
Wow, it only took Yankees fans two years to recover from their team pulling the biggest choke in history. Must be tough on them, though, not having won a championship this millennium.
   11. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:15 AM (#2158865)
How'd the Sox do today? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I do not approve of this. Red Sox fans are, for the most part, good people, if misguided. They do not deserve to be mocked. You all have my pity.
   12. CONservative governMENt Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:42 AM (#2158894)
Wow, it only took Yankees fans two years to recover from their team pulling the biggest choke in history. Must be tough on them, though, not having won a championship this millennium.

Translation: But we can only spend $60M more than the Blue Jays! It's just not fair!
   13. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:45 AM (#2158896)
The Sox could've just used that $60M to buy the Oakland A's and would've had a better record...
   14. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:52 AM (#2158901)
Translation: But we can only spend $60M more than the Blue Jays! It's just not fair!

What are you talking about? Who's saying anything isn't fair? Try to follow me here: My team has won a championship in this millennium. JC's team hasn't. My team has never choked away a 3-0 playoff lead. JC's team hasn't. No mention of payroll, no mention of what's fair or unfair. Just the cold, hard, painful facts for Yankee fans.
   15. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 12:56 AM (#2158902)
Well, Darren, a millennium is a pretty small sample size. Give it a buzzillennium.

By your logic though, the Red Sox, despite their payroll and all, haven't been better than the Florida Marlins this millennium. And that's a pretty low bar.
   16. Paul Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:02 AM (#2158907)
Wow, it only took Yankees fans two years to recover from their team pulling the biggest choke in history. Must be tough on them, though, not having won a championship this millennium.


I'd like the statisticians to decide whether the odds were greater that the Yankees would lose 4 straight games or that the 1986 Red Sox would blow both a 2 run lead in extra innings,and the next game (or for that matter, the Angels in the 1986 playoffs up 3-1 in the 9th inning).
   17. Paul Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:05 AM (#2158908)
What I meant to say

I'd like the statisticians to decide whether the odds were greater that the Yankees would lose 4 straight games or that the 1986 Red Sox would blow both a 2 run lead in extra innings,and A 3-run lead in the 6th inning of the next game (or for that matter, the Angels in the 1986 playoffs up 3games to one and up by 3 runs in the 9th inning).
   18. CONservative governMENt Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:12 AM (#2158915)
My team has won a championship in this millennium. JC's team hasn't.

If we're cherry-picking endpoints then Yankee fans are likely giddy over the fact that the Red Sox, at 8-18, have the worst record in the major leagues for the month of August.

If a $70M payroll edge buys the Yankees a 6.5 game lead over Boston and a $60M payroll edge buys Boston a 2 game lead over Toronto, how do we sort out who the best GM is?
   19. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:12 AM (#2158916)
I'd like to see the odds on any Yankees fan reaching as far back as 1986 for a comparison if their team had just come back from 3 down on the Red Sox. It's irrelevant.
   20. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:17 AM (#2158924)
If we're cherry-picking endpoints then Yankee fans are likely giddy over the fact that the Red Sox, at 8-18, have the worst record in the major leagues for the month of August.

Cherry-picking endpoints? I'm starting with the current millennium. Seems perfectly reasonable. Far better than say, 1918 that I might have heard few times in the past.

If a $70M payroll edge buys the Yankees a 6.5 game lead over Boston and a $60M payroll edge buys Boston a 2 game lead over Toronto, how do we sort out who the best GM is?

There are a number of ways to sort that out, but of course, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
   21. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:19 AM (#2158926)
Well, Darren, you did write "the biggest choke in history". Maybe you meant "Red Sox History on NESN", which would explain why 1986 doesn't count?
   22. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:19 AM (#2158929)
BTW, what is it with this place? A Yankee fan comes on Sox Therapy to gloat, I respond in kind, and not one but two people jump to the defense of the poor little troll. The only one who seems to be on my side is rLr, a Yankee fan for chrissakes. And even then, it's only because he pities me. Yuck.
   23. CONservative governMENt Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:22 AM (#2158933)
BTW, what is it with this place? A Yankee fan comes on Sox Therapy to gloat, I respond in kind, and not one but two people jump to the defense of the poor little troll. The only one who seems to be on my side is rLr, a Yankee fan for chrissakes. And even then, it's only because he pities me. Yuck.

I apologize.
   24. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:24 AM (#2158934)
Just wait Darren. In about 20 more posts someone else will drop by and say how he's sick of Red Sox fans complaining about the Yankees' payroll advantage.
   25. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:29 AM (#2158940)
I'm actually with rLr here. It's not professional to pile it on Red Sox fans when the team is losing.

Mind you, Darren, I wasn't saying anything about the Red Sox current misfortunes (OK, that Oakland comment was borderline); I was more intrigued by your general assertion that the Red Sox are a better team because they've won more WS this millennium, or that 1986 doesn't count.

Btw, I'm truly curious to see what the Red Sox brain trust does in the offseason, especially if the Sox miss the playoffs. They have an old rotation, a whole lotta question marks in the pen beyond Papelbon and maybe Delcarment, and tons of unknowns in the infield.

The scariest thing is that the Sox have really pulled up anyone from the minors who can contribute this year or next year, or even in 2008 (OK, I'm selling David Murphy short here, but he looks like a trade bait to me). The really talented bunch won't make make a full impact until late 2008/2009. That's a long ways off, practially in the next millennium.

Petunia better be as good as Sox Nation thinks he is.
   26. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:29 AM (#2158941)
It's already happened.
   27. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:31 AM (#2158942)
I was more intrigued by your general assertion that the Red Sox are a better team because they've won more WS this millennium, or that 1986 doesn't count.

Because ringzzzz are all that matters. And the team that has won a ring most recently can set the enddate wherever they want to. At least that is what I've learne from Yankees fans over the years.
   28. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:36 AM (#2158944)
At least that is what I've learne from Yankees fans over the years.
Well, we're glad you've been paying attention. But I'm afarid the rules have changed, it's no longer about when you most recently won a ring, it's now about the sheer number of them. See, for example, this shirt. I figured you'd be a good guy to tell, Darren, since you seem to be the man in charge around ST these days.

Incidentally, should the Yankees win a World Series this year, we'll be changing the rules back, or possibly merging them in some way, so stay on your toes.
   29. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:36 AM (#2158945)
Because ringzzzz are all that matters. And the team that has won a ring most recently can set the enddate wherever they want to. At least that is what I've learne from Yankees fans over the years.

I always hated that attitude. What does it matter that the Yankees beat the Whiz Kids in 1950? What does it matter that the Tigers beat the Gashouse Gang in 1935? It's fun history, but it says nothing at all about the 2006 Yankees and Tigers, who may very well be the two best teams in baseball this year. What happened decades ago or even a couple years ago has little to do with it.
   30. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:39 AM (#2158948)
All those 26 > 5 shirts are lame and pathetic.

Of course the "Jeter Sucks, A-Rod Swallows" shirts are just as lame and pathetic.
   31. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 01:48 AM (#2158959)
Should rings won before 1918 count?
   32. The Original SJ Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:23 AM (#2158983)
BTW, what is it with this place? A Yankee fan comes on Sox Therapy to gloat, I respond in kind, and not one but two people jump to the defense of the poor little troll. The only one who seems to be on my side is rLr, a Yankee fan for chrissakes. And even then, it's only because he pities me. Yuck.

I do not approve of popping into a thread about the Sox bullpen to post something as meaningless as what JC posted. Sox/Yankee threads are hypersensitive anyway.
   33. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:34 AM (#2158996)
I do not approve of popping into a thread about the Sox bullpen to post something as meaningless as what JC posted. Sox/Yankee threads are hypersensitive anyway.


If we get enough of this kind of ####, pretty soon all conversation on this site will be banned. Give me a ####### break. What, a baseball site doesn't want Boston and NY traffic? We can't poke fun at each other? To hell with that:

6 1/2. That's all that matters. And w/o Sheffield and Matsui for most of the season. Will kick your asses next year as well.
   34. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:45 AM (#2159005)

6 1/2. That's all that matters.


It's actually 7 in the loss column. And 6 in the loss column for the wild card.

Yankee fans, don't even know how to mock properly. Dilettantes.
   35. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:49 AM (#2159012)
If we get enough of this kind of ####, pretty soon all conversation on this site will be banned. Give me a ####### break. What, a baseball site doesn't want Boston and NY traffic? We can't poke fun at each other?

It's not that I don't think you should be able to taunt and rub salt in their wounds. By all means, do so. But I just don't think it is sporting and choose to disassociate myself from it, as a Yankee fan.

I similarly think it's not very sporting for Red Sox fans to throw 2004 at us whenever they feel oppressed. But it's surely their right and I don't suggest they not be allowed to do so.
   36. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:51 AM (#2159015)
6 1/2. That's all that matters. And w/o Sheffield and Matsui for most of the season. Will kick your asses next year as well.

It's amazing that the Yankees managed to win despite missing two of their better players. Imagine if the Red Sox had suffered similar losses! What a stupid thing to write, almost as stupid as your first comment. I'd tell you to go back to CTR, but I know that place goes dead every time the Yanks lose 2 in a row or more.
   37. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:54 AM (#2159019)
It's amazing that the Yankees managed to win despite missing two of their better players. Imagine if the Red Sox had suffered similar losses! What a stupid thing to write, almost as stupid as your first comment. I'd tell you to go back to CTR, but I know that place goes dead every time the Yanks lose 2 in a row or more.

It's cool, Darren. If the Yankees blew, the cupboard was bare, and once-touted prospects were failing for us like milk spoils on a hot day, I'd be a little testy too. It would be hard on anyone to see an organization crumble as fast as Boston, to see a once-lauded GM squander away a down year for the Yanks with silly trades designed only to prove his brilliance. If I had to blow $50 to line John Henry's wallet while watching an inferior product, knowing full well that I'm being exploited like a underage hooker, I might well explode.

So I understand, that's what I'm saying.
   38. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 02:56 AM (#2159021)
What a stupid thing to write, almost as stupid as your first comment.


Interesting claims both. My first "comment" was a question, and there's nothing stupid about noting we're w/o Sheffield and Matsui and still kicking your small-town sorry asses.

Sporting? What's sporting about being a fan?
   39. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:01 AM (#2159026)
Sporting? What's sporting about being a fan?

I like to be friendly with other fans, even of teams I hate. I find it's easier to be friendly with other fans when I don't antagonize them with taunts and mockery. If your style of being a fan is more confrontational, that's fine, but I'm just saying I don't want to be lumped in with that.
   40. 1k5v3L Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:02 AM (#2159027)
once-touted prospects were failing for us like milk spoils on a hot day


Actually, Hanley and Anibal are doing pretty well...

And you gotta admit Papelbon and Delcarmen have been good. Hansen, not so much, and neither has Lester, but both of them were rushed. The jury is still out on Pedroia, but I really doubt he'll do much of anything this year. Maybe hit a few doubles...
   41. The Original SJ Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:05 AM (#2159030)
Besides, this is Sox Therapy, so it makes a difference, sort of.

Its like coming over to their house and peeing on the carpet.
   42. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:05 AM (#2159031)
And you gotta admit Papelbon and Delcarmen have been good.


Absolutely. The former's incredible, and the latter's pretty friggin' good.

I like both Lester and Hansen long-term. Pedroia I can't help but root against, simply b/c of Kevin's ludicrous praise of him.
   43. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:06 AM (#2159032)
Besides, this is Sox Therapy, so it makes a difference, sort of.

Its like coming over to their house and peeing on the carpet.


It's BTF. And I like peeing on carpets. The novelty of it is thrilling.
   44. villageidiom Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:10 AM (#2159035)
Some people posting in this thread are being complete asshats, or they are looking to the regulars at Sox Therapy for guidance. While Darren's comments seem to suggest he believes the former, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt, assume the latter, and try to provide the help that some of you are seeking.

If I'm responding to your comment and you are indeed an asshat, please disregard.

How'd the Sox do today? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
They lost to the Mariners, 6-3. Since you're on the internet, I thought I'd point out that mlb.com publishes all the scores of each team. To access this information, type http://www.mlb.com in your browser's address box, hit the enter key, and soon you'll be brought to today's scores. A few clicks of your mouse will unearth results from each and every game from this and other recent seasons. Enjoy!

Translation: But we can only spend $60M more than the Blue Jays! It's just not fair!
I'm not sure who your translator is, but you might want to get a new one. If you're doing it yourself, well, apparently you've already succumbed to blindness, because your translation doesn't relate to the quote you're translating. So let me spell it out for you.

The quote you cite was in response to what appeared to be a taunt from a Yankee fan who takes greater pleasure in the failure of other teams than the success of his own (though admittedly that interpretation presumes he's an asshat). Quite often in the past, Red Sox fans were subjected to this kind of taunting from that kind of person. Such taunting halted somewhat abruptly in October 2004, and remained relatively tame if existent at all, since then.

The comment that you cite points out, under the presumption that #8 is from an asshat, that #8 signals an end to the two-year schadenfreude-free period. It also expresses that the 5+ years since the last Yankees championship is a length to which Yankee fans are unaccustomed, given their team's storied success, and suggests that this might have contributed to the apparent taunting. You have translated this to be whining about payroll. No reasonable person would have made that translation, which is why I suggest you find a new translator.

Your post also implicitly suggests that some people perceive whining from Red Sox fans where no actual whining is taking place. Thanks for providing evidence of this; we at Sox Therapy are pleased with your contribution.

If we're cherry-picking endpoints then Yankee fans are likely giddy over the fact that the Red Sox, at 8-18, have the worst record in the major leagues for the month of August.
In this post you implicitly suggest that Yankee fans, as a class, partake in schadenfreude. See my earlier answer on that subject.

If a $70M payroll edge buys the Yankees a 6.5 game lead over Boston and a $60M payroll edge buys Boston a 2 game lead over Toronto, how do we sort out who the best GM is?
With 30 GMs, millions of variables, and only two equations provided, a unique answer does not exist. There are effectively an infinite set of solutions. A unique answer to your question will require a lot of hard work on your part to track down all the known information on all the GMs and to set up all the relevant equations. It might also be worth asking around for a good linear programming textbook to use as a reference.

- - - - - -

I'd like to take the time to thank each of you for coming to Sox Therapy to gain clarity where you only had confusion. We know it's a competitive environment out there, and you had many blogs to choose from; thank you for being discerning enough to choose ours. Now, if you don't mind, we'll return to the original thread topic.
   45. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:12 AM (#2159037)
I similarly think it's not very sporting for Red Sox fans to throw 2004 at us whenever they feel oppressed. But it's surely their right and I don't suggest they not be allowed to do so.

I have to say I think anything is fair game when someone comes into Sox Therapy and starts obviously trolling.

I'm done responding to JC, which is something I've said before but I've failed to follow up on here. The level of lameness that he's brought to this site, in this thread and others, is beneath contempt.
   46. Darren Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:14 AM (#2159039)
And dzop can bite me too, as if he didn't already know that.
   47. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:19 AM (#2159043)
I'm done responding to JC, which is something I've said before but I've failed to follow up on here. The level of lameness that he's brought to this site, in this thread and others, is beneath contempt.


Ooh, self-righteousness! I cannot believe people at this site are so sensitive. Remarkable.
   48. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:30 AM (#2159055)
JC,

Here's something to consider. The only person in this thread who thinks your comment in 8 and the ones that followed weren't kind of dickish is dzop.
   49. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:34 AM (#2159057)
And you gotta admit Papelbon and Delcarmen have been good.

Paplebon I'll grant you. But Delcarmen? Hell, Proctor's a better pitcher, and no one here in Yankee land had been praising him like he was the second coming of Dick Radatz. I simply fail to see how a system that produces one above-average major league player in 3 seasons is developing the core of a new, uber-Sox team that will dominate the Al East to infinity, and beyond! I mean, the two best players on the Sox are already so far down the defensive spectrum that the next position is "Retired". If you guys think Petunia and Dibblebon are going to lead you to the promised land, you've got a big surprise coming going by the name of "83-79".
   50. JC in DC Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:34 AM (#2159058)
I don't know who dzop is, actually. Is he "Bernie Williams?"

And really I just don't accept that it's "dickish" or "jackassish" to gloat. You all realize we have no actual stake in this, right? I could understand being condemned for gloating at Darren's glass eye (had he one), or your financial ruin (had you experienced it). I probably wouldn't do that.
   51. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:36 AM (#2159060)
I don't know who dzop is, actually. Is he "Bernie Williams?"

Ding! I'm doublin' to catcher, baby, and I'm lovin' every minute of it!
   52. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:38 AM (#2159061)
Here's something to consider. The only person in this thread who thinks your comment in 8 and the ones that followed weren't kind of dickish is dzop.

Here's a joke for ya: How many black people does it take to change a light bulb in Fenway Park?

Answer: It's a trick question! They don't let black people buy tickets to Fenway Park in Boston!
   53. villageidiom Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:39 AM (#2159064)
Timlin and the WBC is a fair argument. Does anyone have a list of players who did significant time in the WBC and didn't have some kind of injury and/or ineffectiveness this year? I'm assuming it's a short list.

But to me the question on that is, what do you do about it after the fact? If you have a player who volunteers for the WBC, at the start of the season do you plan to use him less throughout the season than you otherwise would have? That doesn't make sense to me, but neither does ignoring the likely fatigue. And whether this is something to lay at the feet of the manager (who determines playing time) or the GM (who acquires appropriate reserve players) isn't clear to me, but what's clear is that the manager and the GM need to be on the same page on this.

As I've suggested before, if either half of the Seanez/Tavarez duo works out, this isn't as big an issue; and the odds were in our favor that at least one of them would have worked out. Alas.

I don't recall Foulke ever being consistent coming out of spring training, which means either my memory has faded or his inconsistency was not due to his workload. And, as Mikael pointed out in the thread Darren linked at the top, his (and Timlin's) workload was apparently due largely to the distribution of game situations at the start of the season.
   54. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: August 28, 2006 at 03:40 AM (#2159065)
Jesus, you Red Sox fans really need this. And with our starting rotation, we Yankee fans really need this. The only ones who should be snorting here tonight are the fans of the other Sox.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
cardsfanboy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.6954 seconds
60 querie(s) executed