Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on May 23, 2006 17:30:14 GMT -5
I am well acquainted with the work of Ken Tremendous. All this picking on Mike Celizic of late has been less interesting to me, as I would never go to MSNBC to read that clown and had never heard of him until this year. FJM needs to go back to the bread and butter that is listening to 3 minutes of Joe Morgan and becoming incredulous that he has won multiple sports Emmys despite lacking even a rudimentary knowledge of the sport beyond what he gleaned from his (stellar) playing career, and a disdain for gaining any more of such knowledge. Btw, Borat, you are right about ARod.
|
|
VelvetElvis
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
pka MrPathetic
Posts: 934
|
Post by VelvetElvis on May 23, 2006 19:49:17 GMT -5
What about the work of Elliot Awesome? apparently he will be making an appearance in DC on Thursday night! Look out for him, Jack!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2006 20:13:23 GMT -5
How do all you A-Rod consignetti classify his home run tonight? Up 4-1 in the 7th, 3 run shot...
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on May 23, 2006 20:52:53 GMT -5
How do all you A-Rod consignetti classify his home run tonight? Up 4-1 in the 7th, 3 run shot... I would classify that as "putting away the game" (unlike last night's HR ), although with Boston's offense and our middle relief, anything is still possible. FWIW, it's a 7-4 game now, so that HR is the difference in the game. I'm still not sold that he's entirely a clutch player, but Borat has correctly pointed out he is not entirely unclutch. EDIT: A-Rod's HR turned out to be the game-winner, the Sox made it close late (it's bad news bears if your best middle reliever is Scott freakin' Proctor). So add one to the list, Borat. Borat, I realize now your arguments were more to illustrate A-Rod's production and not Jeter's lack thereof. Your post was just a little too anti-Jeter for my taste (nothing personal, of course). And you're 100% right: Jeter gets the benefit of the doubt cause he has 4 rings. But he deserves the benefit of the doubt, because they don't win any of those WS without him (well, maybe the SD series, but that's it). A-Rod just needs 1 good WS to get the monkey off his back. Nothing he does now in May or June or even September will matter until he produces on the biggest stage and wins a ring.
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 24, 2006 8:58:04 GMT -5
Ddin't you get that memo, Buffalo? That home run didn't count b/c it wasn't in the 9th inning with 2 outs on a full count off of Papelbon. The Yankees actually lost last night, 5-4. A-Rod sucks. How do all you A-Rod consignetti classify his home run tonight? Up 4-1 in the 7th, 3 run shot...
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 24, 2006 9:15:57 GMT -5
Rockaway As the Yanks comebacks off of the Mets and Texas illustrated, there is no such thing as "putting the game away". Especially when your middle relievers are Scott Proctor and Kyle Farnsworth and you're facing a pretty good Red Sox offense. Jeter is a really good player, especially offensively, but he is an overrated defensive shortstop and had the distinct benefit of playing for some loaded Yankee teams. While there is no doubt in my mind that his contributions were extremely helpful to the Yanks run between 96 and 2000, do you really believe that if Jeter was drafted by the Mariners or Athletics and A-Rod or Miguel Tejada were drafted by the Yankees, we'd be talking about how terrific a player Derek Jeter is? I don't. Derek Jeter would be in the Edgar Renteria/Michael Young class of SS, a really good player on a bad team, and we'd be talking about Tejada or A-Rod as one of the greatest players in the history of the sport based on a combination of defensive prowess (A-Rod should be at SS for the Yanks), offensive domination, and, of course, World Championships. I have no way of proving this theory of course, but I suppose time will tell how history remembers these players. I believe ARod will be far more appreciated after he hangs them up, as people tend to take his talent for granted right now. Oh yeah, big game from Jaret Wright last night. Who knew? Also, Joe Torre must hate Scott Proctor, he is pitching way too much. Also, he's Scott Proctor. How do all you A-Rod consignetti classify his home run tonight? Up 4-1 in the 7th, 3 run shot... I would classify that as "putting away the game" (unlike last night's HR ), although with Boston's offense and our middle relief, anything is still possible. FWIW, it's a 7-4 game now, so that HR is the difference in the game. I'm still not sold that he's entirely a clutch player, but Borat has correctly pointed out he is not entirely unclutch. EDIT: A-Rod's HR turned out to be the game-winner, the Sox made it close late (it's bad news bears if your best middle reliever is Scott freakin' Proctor). So add one to the list, Borat. Borat, I realize now your arguments were more to illustrate A-Rod's production and not Jeter's lack thereof. Your post was just a little too anti-Jeter for my taste (nothing personal, of course). And you're 100% right: Jeter gets the benefit of the doubt cause he has 4 rings. But he deserves the benefit of the doubt, because they don't win any of those WS without him (well, maybe the SD series, but that's it). A-Rod just needs 1 good WS to get the monkey off his back. Nothing he does now in May or June or even September will matter until he produces on the biggest stage and wins a ring.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on May 24, 2006 14:43:17 GMT -5
Rockaway As the Yanks comebacks off of the Mets and Texas illustrated, there is no such thing as "putting the game away". Especially when your middle relievers are Scott Proctor and Kyle Farnsworth and you're facing a pretty good Red Sox offense. Jeter is a really good player, especially offensively, but he is an overrated defensive shortstop and had the distinct benefit of playing for some loaded Yankee teams. While there is no doubt in my mind that his contributions were extremely helpful to the Yanks run between 96 and 2000, do you really believe that if Jeter was drafted by the Mariners or Athletics and A-Rod or Miguel Tejada were drafted by the Yankees, we'd be talking about how terrific a player Derek Jeter is? I don't. Derek Jeter would be in the Edgar Renteria/Michael Young class of SS, a really good player on a bad team, and we'd be talking about Tejada or A-Rod as one of the greatest players in the history of the sport based on a combination of defensive prowess (A-Rod should be at SS for the Yanks), offensive domination, and, of course, World Championships. I have no way of proving this theory of course, but I suppose time will tell how history remembers these players. I believe ARod will be far more appreciated after he hangs them up, as people tend to take his talent for granted right now. Oh yeah, big game from Jaret Wright last night. Who knew? Also, Joe Torre must hate Scott Proctor, he is pitching way too much. Also, he's Scott Proctor. I would classify that as "putting away the game" (unlike last night's HR ), although with Boston's offense and our middle relief, anything is still possible. FWIW, it's a 7-4 game now, so that HR is the difference in the game. I'm still not sold that he's entirely a clutch player, but Borat has correctly pointed out he is not entirely unclutch. EDIT: A-Rod's HR turned out to be the game-winner, the Sox made it close late (it's bad news bears if your best middle reliever is Scott freakin' Proctor). So add one to the list, Borat. Borat, I realize now your arguments were more to illustrate A-Rod's production and not Jeter's lack thereof. Your post was just a little too anti-Jeter for my taste (nothing personal, of course). And you're 100% right: Jeter gets the benefit of the doubt cause he has 4 rings. But he deserves the benefit of the doubt, because they don't win any of those WS without him (well, maybe the SD series, but that's it). A-Rod just needs 1 good WS to get the monkey off his back. Nothing he does now in May or June or even September will matter until he produces on the biggest stage and wins a ring. I already wrote that with Boston's lineup and our middle relief, there's no such thing as "putting away the game." You're just essentially repeating what I said. I'll give you that Jeter is a bit overrated defensively (esp. in terms of range), but it's also hard to quantify his leadership and intangibles, which he has a decided edge over every other SS you mentioned. I don't think you can definitively say had you swapped Tejada or A-Rod in for Jeter, the Yanks would have won all those WS from' 96 on. It's possible, but not 100%. Plus, those early Yankee WS teams were not entirely loaded on offense; they were solid, but they pale in comparison to the lineup we threw out there the last 2 years and the beginning of this year. What they had was an absurd number of clutch hitters (O'Neill, Brosius, Bernie in his prime) who didn't necessarily put up big power numbers, but got hits when it counted. I will agree with you 100% that A-Rod will be viewed in a much more positive light when his playing career is over. He's kind of like the Kobe of MLB right now; if he puts up numbers, he's supposed to, since he's the highest paid/most talented player in the game. And if he doesn't, he's labeled a huge failure. The guy is someday going to put Bond's in 3rd on the all time HR list (can't wait till that happens), and I'm really hoping the Yanks help him get over the hump this year and put to rest this "unclutch" image of him.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by hoyarooter on May 24, 2006 17:38:53 GMT -5
I have nothing against ARod - except that he's a Yankee. Therefore, I hope all of his home runs come in games where the Yankees are either 8 runs ahead or 8 runs behind, and that he hits into a double play every time he comes up with the bases loaded and less than two out.
By the way, Borat, are Captain Tremendous and Captain America the same player? ;D
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 24, 2006 18:27:18 GMT -5
My point is that there is no such thing as a "garbage" run. Baseball is not a game that allows you to bleed the clock, take a knee, etc. You need to retire the other team 27 times, and before that happens, anything is possible - 9 run comebacks, 4 run comebacks vs closers, etc.
As far as leadership and intangibles go...we disagree there. I refuse to believe there is something about Derek Jeter that inspires his teammates to greatness and wills them to victory. The reason you can't measure them, in my opinion, is that they don't exist. How exactly can you say he is any better or worse at an unmeasurable trait than Tejada or A-Rod? Tejada's 2002 A's won 20 straight. A-Rod's 2000 Mariners won more games than the Yankees behind his monster season. I'll just take El Duque/Clemens/Andy P over Garcia/Sele/Halama.
As for the Yankees being a bunch of gritty clutch hitters...the statistics would disagree with you. They usually hit 200+ home runs , and their OPS+ rates are comparable - they built a team around on base percentage before the advent of moneyball. Not to mention their pitching staff being outstanding - their run differential was consistently near the top of the league.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on May 24, 2006 21:21:53 GMT -5
I know there's no such thing as a garbage run. I don't have the stats to prove it (do they even exist), but I'm pretty sure 6 run leads are harder to overcome than 3 run leads. Obviously NOTHING is for certain.
That's the whole point of the leadership/intangibles argument... you can't measure it. We agree there. But we just simply disagree on how important it is to a team's success. I'm just in the camp that feels team chemistry plays an integral part in determining whether a team is just good or it becomes great.
Became curious about your OPS/HR/run differential stats... just to check you on that.
1996: 162 HRs, 871-787 runs, .796 OPS 1997: 161 HRs, 891-688 runs, .798 OPS 1998: 207 HRs, 965-656 runs, .822 OPS 1999: 193 HRs, 900-731 runs, .817 OPS 2000: 205 HRs, 871-814 runs, .804 OPS 2001: 203 HRs, 804-713 runs, .769 OPS 2002: 223 HRs, 897-697 runs, .809 OPS 2003: 230 HRs, 877-716 runs, .809 OPS 2004: 242 HRs, 897-808 runs, .811 OPS 2005: 229 HRs, 886-789 runs, .805 OPS
While the difference is minimal, the OPS number did hit their peak during the WC years, proving at least those teams were somewhat more clutch than the recent teams (more runs scored, less HRs, minimally higher OPS = having to string together more hits to score runs). The current teams are far more reliant on the HR, and pitching has been average at best the past 2 years since A-Rod's arrival, they still gave up less runs in the past two seasons than the 2000 team that ended up winning it all.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on May 26, 2006 9:17:14 GMT -5
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 26, 2006 11:04:32 GMT -5
Jeter hasn't won anything since Brosius or O'Neill. Perhaps their "intangibles" are what led the Yankees to greatness. Or it could have been the outstanding hitting and pitching, especially relief pitching, that the Yanks possessed.
The Yankees haven't won the World Series since 2000. Derek Jeter has been the Captain on all 5 of those teams. I don't know why his "leadership" hasn't been questioned at all - after all, his squad, that he is the Captain of, lost an 0-3 lead. People say his team let him down, but couldn't one also say that his team raised him up earlier? Everyone freaked out when Derek Jeter dislocated his shoulder on opening day in 2003. Said he couldnt be replaced. But the Yankees went 18-3 without him, best start in club history, which was very important as they narrowly secured home field in the playoffs that season. All this without his intangibles! How does one explain that?
A-Rod joined the team in 2004. They have won the division both years he has been here. He has hit really well in one postseason, terribly in the other one. And he has been the scapegoat for the Yankees failures for plenty of fans, including supposed Royals farmhand RDF, despite being a better player than DJ in both seasons and 1 postseason. Not to mention playing third base to satisfy the "Captain" and his ego. (Derek Jeter's leadership should be questioned every day that Alex Rodriguez is made to play out of position while Captain allows balls to poke through the middle. No one talks about this.)
In 2002, the Yankees lost to an Angels team that was just raking the ball. Those Angels went on to win the World Series, where they hit 310 as a team. For some reason, people said David Eckstein and Tim Salmon and Darin Erstad's intangibles were most responsible, which boggled the mind considering Troy Glaus' postseason and K-Rod's dominance. Yet they soon replaced Tim Salmon with Vladimir Guerrero, let Eckstein walk, and moved Erstad to first to install Steve Finley in CF, and haven't won since, despite making the playoffs in 2004 and 2005. In LA, they don't blame the Angels demise on Vlad, and he had 1 hit in the ALCS last year. They realize he is a great player, and wouldn't be anywhere without him and don't say "well, if we had Salmon and Eckstein back, we'd be all set, who needs MVPs when you have guys like that?". It's rubbish.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 26, 2006 11:28:00 GMT -5
Huh. I always though Jeter was overrated, but I just assumed that was a natural result of my hating the Yankees in the past.
I find that I live a much more serene life now that I don't really care one way or the other -- win or lose -- what happens in The Bronx.
I'm like the old lady at Renee Russo's fiance's condo in Major League. The Cleveland Indians? I didn't know they still had a team.
(begging the question, "then why are you posting in this thread, Boz?" -- to which I say, "it's Friday and I'm bored; sod off!")
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on May 26, 2006 12:43:46 GMT -5
I know there's no such thing as a garbage run. I don't have the stats to prove it (do they even exist), but I'm pretty sure 6 run leads are harder to overcome than 3 run leads. Obviously NOTHING is for certain. That's the whole point of the leadership/intangibles argument... you can't measure it. We agree there. But we just simply disagree on how important it is to a team's success. I'm just in the camp that feels team chemistry plays an integral part in determining whether a team is just good or it becomes great. Became curious about your OPS/HR/run differential stats... just to check you on that. 1996: 162 HRs, 871-787 runs, .796 OPS 1997: 161 HRs, 891-688 runs, .798 OPS 1998: 207 HRs, 965-656 runs, .822 OPS 1999: 193 HRs, 900-731 runs, .817 OPS 2000: 205 HRs, 871-814 runs, .804 OPS 2001: 203 HRs, 804-713 runs, .769 OPS 2002: 223 HRs, 897-697 runs, .809 OPS 2003: 230 HRs, 877-716 runs, .809 OPS 2004: 242 HRs, 897-808 runs, .811 OPS 2005: 229 HRs, 886-789 runs, .805 OPS While the difference is minimal, the OPS number did hit their peak during the WC years, proving at least those teams were somewhat more clutch than the recent teams (more runs scored, less HRs, minimally higher OPS = having to string together more hits to score runs). The current teams are far more reliant on the HR, and pitching has been average at best the past 2 years since A-Rod's arrival, they still gave up less runs in the past two seasons than the 2000 team that ended up winning it all. Rockaway, I don't mean to be a jerk, but your "proof" of clutch hitting is quite possibly the shoddiest math in the history of time. I know you were trying to be quick, but honestly, that math proves absolutely zero. Zip. Zilch. I want to hit on your two points with "Chemistry/Leadership" and "Clutch Hitting." 1) "Clutch Hitting." There is absolutely clutch hitting. Oh, it is almost impossible to define completely, for as you said, there are no throwaway runs, and the first hit of a rally is just as important as the last hit of a rally. In 1998, the Padres made the World Series and part of that was that Wally Joyner batted about .400 with RISP. He was clutch all freaking season -- performing well above his averages with runners in scoring position. However, Wally Joyner was the same person the next year, yet didn't hit like this in clutch situations (or the year before). Reality is, it doesn't seem like hitting or pitching in "the clutch" is a differentiated, repeatable skill -- in other words, if it is a characteristic of a major league ballplayer, it is one that almost all of them have. So yeah, you can say the Yankees or Jeter or whomever were more clutch one year, but I have a hard time attributing to a characteristic of Jeter and luck, or a hot streak or whatever. if it was something Jeter could actually control, why would he turn it off? 2. "Chemistry/Leadership." There's less teamwork in baseball than any other team sport, and really less need for comradery. Still, Chemistry and Leadership could certainly play a role, especially in keeping pampered millionaires focused and working hard. However, I think it is pretty clear that different people respond to different stimuli at different points in their lives. Knowing what kind of leadership to add or knowing what teammates will play well together is all but unknowable these days, so what's the point? And again, I find it hard to believe this is a repeatable skill. Players like Jordan, Brady, Jeter have lost plenty; it seems to me they are leaders because they win, not the other way around. What, Jeter's leadership can't overcome A-Rod's unclutchness?
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on May 26, 2006 15:00:36 GMT -5
SF, the numbers weren't merely to prove a point that Jeter is X times more clutch than A-Rod or a better leader, but instead to double-check Borat's claim that the Yanks hit 200 HRs every year prior to A-Rod's arrival (which they did not) and whether or not the Yanks avg. OPS has been consistent over the past 10 years. Obviously, you can't take anything concrete from those numbers.
I'm sure the guys at Elias have the answers, as for myself, I don't have the time to look up every box score for the past 2.5 seasons. All I know is, from the games I've watched (and keep in mind, aside from one summer at home the past 3 years (where I'm privied to having the YES network), the only Yankee games I (as well as many other fans across the country) catch are on Fox/ESPN whenever they're playing someone important (Mets, Angels, Bosox, White Sox, etc.). As far as I can see, on average, I am far more comfortable with Jeter at the plate than A-Rod. Now, this is NOT meant to say "I think A-Rod is unclutch," because as I've already said multiple times on this thread, I agree with Borat's assertion that A-Rod has been getting a raw deal by the media. But I do take issue with the "A-Rod is certainly clutch, but Jeter is not and should be equally lambasted by the media" argument, especially when the guy has proven time and time again both by statistics and what I've seen with my own eyes the past 2, 3, 5, 10 years. Sure, he isn't the greatest defensive shortstop, but if you want to find a REAL scapegoat, I am telling you to look elsewhere.
Agree with your point about chemistry and leadership, SF, and most certainly, leaders are individuals who win, not the other way around. You think anyone is going to view athletes like Bonds, Griffey, or even NBA counterparts like Malone, Barkley, Ewing, etc. as true leaders? It's the same reason why a lot of people in the other thread are hating on Nash. You can bet a lot of them will drop their arguments that he's overrated and is just taking advantage of the system he's in if the Suns do go on to win the title. That is why Jeter can be considered a leader and A-Rod cannot... yet. And I disagree completely with the "oh well Jeter's been the designated captain for the past 5 years, he should take the blame for 0 WS titles." Just because you wear a C on your chest doesn't mean crap; it's your actions that determine whether or not you're really a leader.
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 26, 2006 18:01:33 GMT -5
A few things:
1 - you pointed out that i was wrong about the 200 HR thing. i think i said they usually hit 200+ home runs. they did so in 98, and 2000 and hit 193 in 1999. 1996 was the anomaly. I'll amend it to they hit around 200 home runs every year if it'll help you sleep at night. if you want to say an OPS statistical variance of .08 between 96 and 2000 is significant, tell me now, i'll stop talking baseball with you.
2 - i probably caught 130+ yankee games each of the past 4 seasons via cable, internet at work, at games, etc. i ordered the direct tv package my senior year of college to watch the 2001 season. just saying, i watch plenty, i am not basing this all on analyzing stats.
3 - no one is saying jeter isn't "clutch". i've said all along that he is a great, if overrated, player. however, he is nowhere near as good a baseball player as alex rodriguez, regardless of the amount of rings he sports or amount of times you have seen him come through when it counts. furthermore, i pointed out that in their 2 years in new york together, A-Rod is the better playoff performer. however, jeter's past successes made many overlook his terrible 2004 ALCS...which i find ridiculous. you agree with me that blaming A-Rod is ridiculous. i think singling out jeter would be, too. however, when people who find it necessary to call out A-Rod for games 5 through 7...i point out that jeter sucked for games 1 through 7. and then they start talking about his 4 world series rings. which has no bearing on anything. and i ask if they'd rather have brosius at 3rd than A-Rod. and they take 10 seconds before saying A-Rod. so i bang my head against the wall.
4 - Derek Jeter is not the greatest shortstop. We agree there. Know who is the greatest shortstop in the past decade? The Yankees 3rd baseman. Ha ha. But seriously, that no one questions the fact that the superior shortstop is playing out of position doesn't strike you as contrary to the virtues of a leader? Would Jeter be less of a leader at 2nd? or CF? He costs his team runs by playing SS. why is this not an issue? b.c he won 4 rings? does that mean bernie williams should play CF until he decides he doesn't want to anymore? should bernie DH ahead of giambi b/c he was "clutch" once upon a time?
5 - "Agree with your point about chemistry and leadership, SF, and most certainly, leaders are individuals who win, not the other way around."
This is ridiculous. I can't believe you typed this. Especially your list of Malone, Ewing, Barkley - to be 100% clear, anyone in the NBA that played between 91 and 98, save for Michael Jordan and Hakeem Olajuwon, was not a leader? WHAT?! So, Ewing was a leader in college, and then ceased being one in the pros? He lose his intangibles?
To take it a few steps further, you mentioned Griffey and Bonds...are you serious? The Yankees, and mind you, I am a HUGE Yankee fan, spend more money than just about every team, every year. Money doesn't guarantee anything, but if gives you a pretty good shot at making the playoffs if spent wisely. You think if Derek Jeter and Griffey swapped careers, and Jeter played in Seattle or Cincinnati from 96 on, he'd have won a title? That's absurd, Jeter would never have seen October. I'm dumbfounded, seriously. As far Bonds...steroids or not, Barry Bonds went 8 for 17 in the 2002 World Series for a 471 batting average. He hit 4 home runs, 2 2Bs and walked 13 times in 7 games [almost 2x per game]. He got on base at a 700 clip, and slugged 1.294. Therefore...he almost OPS'd 2.000. let that sink in. HE ALMOST OPSD 2.000!!! what more did you want from him? What else could he have done to lead his team to victory? Would some intangible greatness have willed his bullpen to not let blow a lead in the 8th inning of game 6? or cause his teammates to score more that one run in game 7? or to prevent the Angels from batting 310 as a team?! maybe if Derek Jeter was in the ballpark they'd have won. he could have sprinkled some of his leadership dust on bonds, and, voila, bonds would be like cinderella. honestly, what more could barry bonds, who i think is the biggest jerkoff in sports, have done?
To take it one step further, not a single player on the Red Sox between 1918 and 2004 was a good leader? Ted Williams couldn't will his team to victory with his clutchness, but Manny Ramirez is a good leader? mickey mantle, a leader, would show up drunk to the ballpark and carl yastremzki was a bum? what are you talking about? what about DON F'ING MATTINGLY?! not a leader? he never won anything. just meaningless MVP trophies, like A-Rod, i suppose.
How about Trent Dilfer? Leader. Peyton Manning and Dan Marino? Jerks.
6 - "It's the same reason why a lot of people in the other thread are hating on Nash. You can bet a lot of them will drop their arguments that he's overrated and is just taking advantage of the system he's in if the Suns do go on to win the title. "
I think Steve Nash is one of the best point guards in the league, and i know he can't play a lick of defense. That said, anyone who thinks he stinks now and changes his mind 2 weeks from now to say he has proved his greatness is a moron, and you can post this there if you'd like. to win a title, he'll have "exploited the suns" system, as people who diss him claim he does, the entire time. he'll have "exploited" it all the way to a title. he isn't going to do anything differently between now and then. he'll be the same player. with jewelry.
7 - "And I disagree completely with the "oh well Jeter's been the designated captain for the past 5 years, he should take the blame for 0 WS titles."
if you are going to give a guy hero status for his being "indispensable" to the team's success from 1996 to 2000, it would only seem fair that you hold him accountable for team's failures since then. either you win or lose as a team, or great players lift you up sometimes and let you down other times...which one is it?
8 - "Just because you wear a C on your chest doesn't mean crap; it's your actions that determine whether or not you're really a leader."
what? what does that mean? joe morgan, is that you? why not change positions for the good of the team? should a captain do that? or should he refuse to budge b/c he has a huge ego from millions of people telling him that his intangibles are 2nd to none?
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on May 26, 2006 23:48:47 GMT -5
A few things: 1 - you pointed out that i was wrong about the 200 HR thing. i think i said they usually hit 200+ home runs. they did so in 98, and 2000 and hit 193 in 1999. I'll amend it to they hit around 200 home runs every year if it'll help you sleep at night. if you want to say an OPS statistical variance of .08 between 96 and 2000 is significant, tell me now, i'll stop talking baseball with you. 2 - i probably caught 130+ yankee games each of the past 4 seasons via cable, internet at work, at games, etc. i ordered the direct tv package my senior year of college to watch the 2001 season. just saying, i watch plenty, i am not basing this all on analyzing stats. 3 - no one is saying jeter isn't "clutch". i've said all along that he is a great, if overrated, player. however, he is nowhere near as good a baseball player as alex rodriguez, regardless of the amount of rings he sports or amount of times you have seen him come through when it counts. furthermore, i pointed out that in their 2 years in new york together, A-Rod is the better playoff performer. however, jeter's past successes made many overlook his terrible 2004 ALCS...which i find ridiculous. you agree with me that blaming A-Rod is ridiculous. i think singling out jeter would be, too. however, when people who find it necessary to call out A-Rod for games 5 through 7...i point out that jeter sucked for games 1 through 7. and then they start talking about his 4 world series rings. which has no bearing on anything. and i ask if they'd rather have brosius at 3rd than A-Rod. and they take 10 seconds before saying A-Rod. so i bang my head against the wall. 4 - Derek Jeter is not the greatest shortstop. We agree there. Know who is the greatest shortstop in the past decade? The Yankees 3rd baseman. Ha ha. But seriously, that no one questions the fact that the superior shortstop is playing out of position doesn't strike you as contrary to the virtues of a leader? Would Jeter be less of a leader at 2nd? or CF? He costs his team runs by playing SS. why is this not an issue? b.c he won 4 rings? does that mean bernie williams should play CF until he decides he doesn't want to anymore? should bernie DH ahead of giambi b/c he was "clutch" once upon a time? 5 - "Agree with your point about chemistry and leadership, SF, and most certainly, leaders are individuals who win, not the other way around." This is ridiculous. I can't believe you typed this. Especially your list of Malone, Ewing, Barkley - to be 100% clear, anyone in the NBA that played between 91 and 98, save for Hakeem Olajuwon, was not a leader? WHAT?! So, Ewing was a leader in college, and then ceased being one in the pros? He lose his intangibles? How about Trent Dilfer? Leader. Peyton Manning and Dan Marino? Jerks. To take it a few steps further, you mentioned Griffey and Bonds...are you serious? The Yankees, and mind you, I am a HUGE Yankee fan, spend more money than just about every team, every year. Money doesn't guarantee anything, but if gives you a pretty good shot at making the playoffs if spent wisely. You think if Derek Jeter and Griffey swapped careers, and Jeter played in Seattle or Cincinnati from 96 on, he'd have won a title? That's absurd, Jeter would never have seen October. I'm dumbfounded, seriously. As far Bonds...steroids or not, Barry Bonds went 8 for 17 in the 2002 World Series for a 471 batting average. He hit 4 home runs, 2 2Bs and walked 13 times in 7 games [almost 2x per game]. He got on base at a 700 clip, and slugged 1.294. Therefore...he almost OPS'd 2.000. let that sink in. HE ALMOST OPSD 2.000!!! what more did you want from him? What else could he have done to lead his team to victory? Would some intangible greatness have willed his bullpen to not let blow a lead in the 8th inning of game 6? or cause his teammates to score more that one run in game 7? or to prevent the Angels from batting 310 as a team?! maybe if Derek Jeter was in the ballpark they'd have won. he could have sprinkled some of his leadership dust on bonds, and, voila, bonds would be like cinderella. honestly, what more could barry bonds, who i think is the biggest jerkoff in sports, have done? To take it one step further, not a single player on the Red Sox between 1918 and 2004 was a good leader? Ted Williams couldn't will his team to victory with his clutchness, but Manny Ramirez is a good leader? mickey mantle, a leader, would show up drunk to the ballpark and carl yastremzki was a bum? what are you talking about? what about DON F'ING MATTINGLY?! not a leader? he never won anything. just meaningless MVP trophies, like A-Rod, i suppose. 6 - "It's the same reason why a lot of people in the other thread are hating on Nash. You can bet a lot of them will drop their arguments that he's overrated and is just taking advantage of the system he's in if the Suns do go on to win the title. " I think Steve Nash is one of the best point guards in the league, and i know he can't play a lick of defense. That said, anyone who thinks he stinks now and changes his mind 2 weeks from now to say he has proved his greatness is a moron, and you can post this there if you'd like. to win a title, he'll have "exploited the suns" system, as people who diss him claim he does, the entire time. he'll have "exploited" it all the way to a title. he isn't going to do anything differently between now and then. he'll be the same player. with jewelry. 7 - "And I disagree completely with the "oh well Jeter's been the designated captain for the past 5 years, he should take the blame for 0 WS titles." if you are going to give a guy hero status for his being "indispensable" to the team's success from 1996 to 2000, it would only seem fair that you hold him accountable for team's failures since then. either you win or lose as a team, or great players lift you up sometimes and let you down other times...which one is it? 8 - "Just because you wear a C on your chest doesn't mean crap; it's your actions that determine whether or not you're really a leader." what? what does that mean? joe morgan, is that you? why not change positions for the good of the team? should a captain do that? or should he refuse to budge b/c he has a huge ego from millions of people telling him that his intangibles are 2nd to none? I think we are basically arguing the same main points (that A-Rod isn't unclutch, that Jeter is clutch, Nash, etc.), so there's really no need to continue this debate. Just a few minor points before we move on (and figure out how to not lose to the f*^&ing Royals). The first point was that I was just having issues with your point that the early Yankee WS teams that Jeter played on were "loaded." They were good offensively, but not LOADED (as 160ish HRs would suggest), and certainly wouldn't stack up to the teams post Matsui/A-Rod/Giambi offensively. I never once questioned whether or not you watched the games. So don't act all offended as if I did. You talk about Jeter's "unwilligness" to switch positions for the sake of A-Rod, this generation's greatest hitter. No one twisted A-Rod's arm and told him he had to come to New York and play 3B or else. He knew what he was getting himself into. And I don't recall Jeter ever once coming out to the media and saying something to the effect of "there's no way in hell I'm moving to 2B/3B for A-Rod if he comes." If he did, I don't remember it, and I apologize. Comaparing the situation to leaving Bernie in CF simply because once upon a time he was clutch and the whole Giambi/Bernie as DH is dumb, because while Bernie is obviously declining, Jeter is having a career season this year. Apples and oranges. Dilfer is an absolute anomaly, and you know it (I still have beef about that phantom holding call on Armstead that cost us a TD and any momentum we'd ever have in that game). Obviously the Ravens won the SB despite him, not because of him. The same can't be said for Jeter, and you know it. As for Peyton and Marino, they ARE jerks. Especially Peyton, who threw his own teammates under the bus after the Steelers loss in January after playing lousy himself. I don't consider him a leader, even if he happens to call a ziilion audibles at the line of scrimmage and can analyze any of thousands of defensive alignments and prepare his teammates to best succeed against them. He's still the epitome of unclutch. What more could Barry Bonds have done? He could start by hitting better than .245 for his career in the postseason (and that's including the one absurd series you mentioned). In his 8 other postseason series, he has batted .216. There's a lot more he could have done, and he has no one to blame but himself for not having a ring on his finger. Again, great player (even if he had stayed off the roids), but certainly not a leader. If I'm not mistaken (maybe some BoSox fans can shed some light and correct me if I'm wrong), but I'm pretty sure Manny has had a better relationship with his teammates than Ted Williams ever did with his. Sure, Ted Williams is one of the greatest players to ever have played the game, but a great leader? That's debatable. And if Don Mattingly was such a great leader and such a valuable player, why has it taken so long for him to be inducted into the HOF? You'd think with his 1 MVP trophy, 9 Gold Golves and .307 lifetime BA would be enough. I'm obviously a Mattingly fan, but rings matter (and in my opinion, he does belong, but he's had to wait because he never won a title).
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on May 27, 2006 21:08:15 GMT -5
"The first point was that I was just having issues with your point that the early Yankee WS teams that Jeter played on were "loaded." They were good offensively, but not LOADED (as 160ish HRs would suggest), and certainly wouldn't stack up to the teams post Matsui/A-Rod/Giambi offensively."
160ish home runs = the first world series team. around 200 the rest of the way. his teams were loaded, as the OPS's would suggest. they were patient and they hit for power. and they could pitch.
"I never once questioned whether or not you watched the games. So don't act all offended as if I did."
i know that. as i stated, i just wanted to let you know that i don't just read box scores or put numbers in a computer. i observe as well. not offended there.
"You talk about Jeter's "unwilligness" to switch positions for the sake of A-Rod, this generation's greatest hitter. No one twisted A-Rod's arm and told him he had to come to New York and play 3B or else. He knew what he was getting himself into. And I don't recall Jeter ever once coming out to the media and saying something to the effect of "there's no way in hell I'm moving to 2B/3B for A-Rod if he comes." If he did, I don't remember it, and I apologize. Comaparing the situation to leaving Bernie in CF simply because once upon a time he was clutch and the whole Giambi/Bernie as DH is dumb, because while Bernie is obviously declining, Jeter is having a career season this year. Apples and oranges."
No one twisted A-Rod's arm? You think he wanted to step over to 3rd after being on track to going to the Hall of Fame as the greatest shortstop ever? Jeter never said it publicly b/c that would ruin his golden boy reputation. A-Rod was forced to change positions. He was not only the best hitting SS when he was in Seattle and Texas, he was one of the top fielding. He is head and shoulders a better fielding SS than Jeter, who is average at best. And he switched to 3rd, b/c Jeter would not move. As for comparing it to Bernie/Giambi at DH...that's fine. I also used the Bernie in CF example, which you sidestepped. What if he said he wanted to play CF and Damon should play RF? That'd be offensively seflsih. What if the Yankees acquire Torii Hunter this offseason and he plays LF next year b/c Johnny Damon was here and doesn't want to move? You wouldn't say Johnny Damon was being selfish? And yes, the difference between Jeter and A-Rod is that significant defensively.
"Dilfer is an absolute anomaly, and you know it (I still have beef about that phantom holding call on Armstead that cost us a TD and any momentum we'd ever have in that game). Obviously the Ravens won the SB despite him, not because of him. The same can't be said for Jeter, and you know it."
OK...what about Roethlisberger, who had one of his worst games as a pro in the Super Bowl? leader? Jake Delhomme? His 2nd half was unreal vs the Pats. His defense and special teams did him no favors. Leader or choker? And you're still saying the Yankees won the World Series b/c of Jeter...then why have they not been winning the last 5 years? Either it's a team effort and you win or lose that way, or he elevated his play then and hasn't the past few seasons. It's a team sport, and Jeter is a very good baseball player, but stop saying they won b/c of one person. it's ridiculous.
"As for Peyton and Marino, they ARE jerks. Especially Peyton, who threw his own teammates under the bus after the Steelers loss in January after playing lousy himself. I don't consider him a leader, even if he happens to call a ziilion audibles at the line of scrimmage and can analyze any of thousands of defensive alignments and prepare his teammates to best succeed against them. He's still the epitome of unclutch."
Tiki Barber called out his coaching staff after getting blown out by the Panthers. Leader? Will Eli Manning not be a "leader" until he wins a ring? I'm a Giants fan too, and I'd trade Eli for Peyton any day of the week, twice on Sunday
"What more could Barry Bonds have done? He could start by hitting better than .245 for his career in the postseason (and that's including the one absurd series you mentioned). In his 8 other postseason series, he has batted .216. There's a lot more he could have done, and he has no one ton blame but himself for not having a ring on his finger. Again, great player (even if he had stayed off the roids), but certainly not a leader."
Just to be clear...if Robb Nenn closes out the Angels in game 6, Barry Bonds is a leader. Because he didn't, he is not. That's ridiculous. Incredibly ridiculous.
And I thought stats were overrated. Mickey Mantle, career 257 hitter in the postseason. Leader or not? Here some ALCS averages for you:
227 batting, 298 on base, 380 slugging
Know whose ALCS averages those are? Reggie Jackson. Mr. October. His teammates got him to the World Series a bunch of times. He delivered there. Barry Bonds teammates got him to the World Series once...he had arguably the greatest World Series of all time. But no, not a leader b/c he struggled in the NLDS a few times. If anything, Bonds 2002 World Series and Reggie Jackson's struggles in the ALCS should reinforce that baseball is a team game and that one player, no matter how great, cannot do it alone. Teammates have to pick up the slack when others are slumping. Reggie's teammates did quite a bit. Bonds' teammates did not.
"If I'm not mistaken (maybe some BoSox fans can shed some light and correct me if I'm wrong), but I'm pretty sure Manny has had a better relationship with his teammates than Ted Williams ever did with his. Sure, Ted Williams is one of the greatest players to ever have played the game, but a great leader? That's debatable."
Ted Williams had some clubhouse issues early in his career, but he was quite popular with his teammates. The media hated him, but who cares what the think? Also, he gave up some of his prime to serve in the war. He was certainly a leader.
As for Manny...a guy who demands a trade just about every season b/c he is unhappy in Boston, has a good relationship with his teammates? Until they won the World Series, he was the bane of Boston's existence with his antics. Now it's all "manny being manny". A ring or multiple rings does not mean you are a leader. That guy is still a twit.
"And if Don Mattingly was such a great leader and such a valuable player, why has it taken so long for him to be inducted into the HOF? You'd think with his 1 MVP trophy, 9 Gold Golves and .307 lifetime BA would be enough. I'm obviously a Mattingly fan, but rings matter (and in my opinion, he does belong, but he's had to wait because he never won a title)."
Mattingly's leadership is holding him back from the HoF? What are you talking about? He is one of the most well respected players of his era. Writers love him, and his leadership has never been questioned. On what planet is 1 MVP and a 307 average hall of fame credentials? Mattingly had a few great seasons and hurt his back. He is one of my favorite players of all time, but he is a borderline HOF candidate. Leadership has nothing to do with anything...if it did Darin Erstad would be headed to Cooperstown. The incompetence of the Yankee ownership prevented him from reaching the postseason until 1995...where he batted 400+ in a losing cause vs Seattle. Most Yankees of the championship era cite Mattingly as the player they admire most. Bernie, Jeter, Andy, Jorge, Mariano, the whole lot. so check that "Mattingly isn't a leader b/c he doesn't have a ring." Asinine. Completely asinine.
Also, what about Ewing? You said he wasn't a leader b/c he never won at the pro level. [you also said that no one who played when the bulls were on their run could be considered a leader...aside from Hakeem. even david robinson...who apparently only became a leader in 1999 when tim Duncan helped him win a title]. What did Ewing lose b/t GTown and New York that made him less of a leader?
I can't talk about this anymore. Aside from rooting for the Yankees and Giants, we aren't really seeing eye to eye on anything.
|
|
Hank Scorpio
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
You're gonna die now!
Posts: 573
|
Post by Hank Scorpio on Jun 5, 2006 11:52:28 GMT -5
4 game set begins tonight...not sure how to call it. Pitching matchups favor Yanks given the AA guy going tomorrow, as well as RJ's resurgence and the Sox bullpen woes. But the Sox can still score in droves, and we're pretty banged up. [On a side note, why does Torre insist on playing Terrence Long and throwing Scott Erickson out of the pen? They stink!]
Yanks take 3 of 4. That's my call, and I'm stickin to it.
|
|
Bahstin
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 624
|
Post by Bahstin on Jun 5, 2006 12:10:38 GMT -5
The way things have been going lately, the Sox will win the first two convincingly, only to loose the last two in close ones.
Both teams are pretty banged up, but given the extent of the Yankees injuries (from NY Daily News):
Yankee woes keep growing yesterday with Derek Jeter's thumb injury: Derek Jeter: bruised thumb (day-to-day) Alex Rodriguez: stomach flu (day-to-day) Jason Giambi: stomach flu (day-to-day) Mariano Rivera: back spasms (expected to return tonight) Jorge Posada: torn left hamstring tendon (can play) Gary Sheffield: torn left wrist tendon (DL) Hideki Matsui: broken left wrist (DL) Shawn Chacon: bruised leg (made rehab start yesterday)
I expect the Sox to come out with at least 2 wins.
|
|