2010 Red Sox Thread

[NFBuck]

PROFESSIONAL sports is a business.

name another business where the owner is limited in what he can spend to ensure his competition has a fair shake.

none that I can think of.


hell look at college sports.

nobody tells OSU to quit using their revenue to build bigger nicer facilities to attract better recruits, and pay more money to get better.
We gotta make sure Kent St. can keep up.

Hell, we don't even want small schools to have a shot at a title in that sport.

I'm curious if you'd feel this way if you were a Pirates, Orioles, Indians, Brewers, Royals fan...like I said, this argument you make is almost inherent in Red Sox/Yankees fans. Most others see what a terrible system MLB has in place...but not you guys. Works great for you I guess. Just go grab the next $20M outfielder.

 

[Nutriaitch]

I'm curious if you'd feel this way if you were a Pirates, Orioles, Indians, Brewers, Royals fan...like I said, this argument you make is almost inherent in Red Sox/Yankees fans. Most others see what a terrible system MLB has in place...but not you guys. Works great for you I guess. Just go grab the next $20M outfielder.

Actually, I'm a baseball fan.
Watch Red Sox most, but the players that drew me to them are no longer there, so its not a strong bond.

Now, I mostly follow players.

Watch Seattle games to see Ichiro and King Felix.
Cards to see Pujols hit.
San Fran for the freak.
Wherever Lee ends up.
Halladay, etc.

The system works better than most are willing to admit.
But it fashionable to bash baseball.

 

[WolverineMike]

haters gonna hate. oh well. Red Sox win two world series in the last 90 years and they are the devil. Take it up with NY

 

[3074326]

The system works better than most are willing to admit.
But it fashionable to bash baseball.

How does it work better than most are willing to admit? The only way a non-big market team wins is if they hit on a few big prospects and win before they leave. It's the only way. These teams rarely have sustained success.

I used to love baseball. I hate what it's become. I'm not bashing it because it's "fashionable." That's just something to say to try to discredit the validity of what someone else is saying without even making a point. You know why people are bashing it? Because it's a joke. There's a reason it's losing popularity.

Look at the Red Sox and Yankees' rosters and tell me what the fuck is right with that? Alex Rodriguez, Derek Jeter and CC Sabathia's salaries alone are more than 9 entire rosters.

If you want to add Texiera's contract to that trio, those four players' contracts would be more than 17 MLB teams. Ridiculous.

Hell of a system. Working great. No cap needed.

 

[WolverineMike]

I'm just glad I watch the game for the game. salaries don't change that they have to go out there day in and day out and play. I enjoy it, that's what's important to me. And yeah, the Sox didn't even make the playoffs, and I still watched the playoffs and WS. And it was strange, those guys still went out and played baseball.

 

[Nutriaitch]

Look at the Red Sox and Yankees' rosters and tell me what the [censored] is right with that?

it works if you look at the end results of the season instead of names on the backs of the players.

what good did having Jeter, ARod, and Sbathia do for New York last year?
none. didn't win their division. didn't win a title.

what good did having Jeter, ARod, Posada, Rivera, Giambi, Randy Johnson, etc from '04-'08?

none.
3 teams with payrolls well below them won.



but people want to look at the payroll and say "it ain't fair"
if it was as simple as out bidding the rest of the league, the Yanks would have won their 100th consecutive title last year, and the Red Sox would have at least made the playoffs.

But it doesn't work like that.

Nobody complains when the Colts have Manning, Harrison, and Wayne on the same team.
Or when the Patriots went out and added Randy Moss a couple years ago.

Nobody bitches when an NBA team goes out and gets a couple All-Stars like Garnett and Ray Allen to buy a championship.

Nobody gripes when USC signs multiple 5star backs to add to the other 9 they already have on their roster.


But if a pro baseball team does it? "oh no no no! that ain't fair. it's not right. we need to change the rules."

People always fall back on "nobody else can compete."
but look at the facts.

# of teams to win titles in my lifetime

Baseball = 19 (64% of the league)
Football = 15 (47 % of the league)
Basketball = 9 (30% of the league)

Baseball is the only sport where more than half of the league has claimed a championship.
But baseball is the sport where no body else can compete?
really?

math must work different in the south than it does everywhere else.

 

[Nutriaitch]

Cliff Lee signing with Philly only adds to happiness in Boston this offseason.

 

[WolverineMike]

LMFAO at NY......

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

LMFAO at NY......

Laugh all you want:

1923 ? 1927 ? 1928 ? 1932
1936 ? 1937 ? 1938 ? 1939
1941 ? 1943 ? 1947 ? 1949
1950 ? 1951 ? 1952 ? 1953
1956 ? 1958 ? 1961 ? 1962
1977 ? 1978 ? 1996 ? 1998
1999 ? 2000 ? 2009

to

2007 ? 2004 ? 1918 ? 1916
1915 ? 1912 ? 1903

 

[3074326]

it works if you look at the end results of the season instead of names on the backs of the players.

what good did having Jeter, ARod, and Sbathia do for New York last year?
none. didn't win their division. didn't win a title.

what good did having Jeter, ARod, Posada, Rivera, Giambi, Randy Johnson, etc from '04-'08?

The point is that only a handful of teams compete for the top free agents. The league would be so much better if all teams had at least a chance at signing a big-name player once in a while.

And you're really downplaying the success the Yankees have had. They missed the playoffs once since 1995. They won the World Series five times in that span, twice this decade. The Red Sox have won the World Series twice since 2004. Since 1995, the Diamondbacks and Marlins are the only two teams to win a title without a massive payroll.

Nobody complains when the Colts have Manning, Harrison, and Wayne on the same team.
Or when the Patriots went out and added Randy Moss a couple years ago.

Nobody bitches when an NBA team goes out and gets a couple All-Stars like Garnett and Ray Allen to buy a championship.

Nobody gripes when USC signs multiple 5star backs to add to the other 9 they already have on their roster.

None of this is relevant. It doesn't have anything to do with the Yankees, etc. buying their players. The Colts have to keep these guys under the cap, and they did. Good job, nothing to complain about there and that's why nobody is complaining. And Randy Moss had a bad year and was traded for what, a fourth round pick? How is that even remotely the same thing?

The Celtics gutted their entire team to put together what they have now. It was a big risk and it paid off. They're under the cap. They didn't go out and give their team 7-year $150 million deals.

USC, Ohio State, LSU, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Michigan (until RR), Florida State, Miami, Penn State, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia... all these teams (and more that I didn't mention) sign a bunch of really good kids. That, and the schools have to convince these kids to go to school there. How is that the same?

Unless we're talking about USC literally buying players. Then that's a good comparison. And guess what? People hate USC for it. Just like the Yankees and Red Sox.

But if a pro baseball team does it? "oh no no no! that ain't fair. it's not right. we need to change the rules."

They just need to put a cap in place so other teams can compete for free agents.

People always fall back on "nobody else can compete."
but look at the facts.

# of teams to win titles in my lifetime

Baseball = 19 (64% of the league)
Football = 15 (47 % of the league)
Basketball = 9 (30% of the league)

Baseball is the only sport where more than half of the league has claimed a championship.
But baseball is the sport where no body else can compete?
really?

math must work different in the south than it does everywhere else.

We've said that other teams compete. You keep telling us the same stuff. We know other teams have won. But teams not in New York, Boston, southern California and Philadelphia go through routine team blow-ups because their top players leave for big markets. What is so hard to understand about that? Remember when the Indians were competitive? I do. Then they had to trade their players because they knew that would be better than letting them walk for nothing in return.

MLB could be so much better. Free agency is broken in baseball. If you disagree, fine, but you're once again proving NFBuck's point about the fans of these big market teams being the only supporters of the current system.

 

[WolverineMike]

Laugh all you want:

1923 ? 1927 ? 1928 ? 1932
1936 ? 1937 ? 1938 ? 1939
1941 ? 1943 ? 1947 ? 1949
1950 ? 1951 ? 1952 ? 1953
1956 ? 1958 ? 1961 ? 1962
1977 ? 1978 ? 1996 ? 1998
1999 ? 2000 ? 2009

to

2007 ? 2004 ? 1918 ? 1916
1915 ? 1912 ? 1903

i'm told round these parts that i'm not suppose to care about historical championships and records, remember? So yeah, I'm still laughing at NY.

 

[Nutriaitch]

The point is that only a handful of teams compete for the top free agents. The league would be so much better if all teams had at least a chance at signing a big-name player once in a while.

so is the ultimate goal to sign a big name player, or to win the World Series?

do you think Giants fans are complaining that all they did was win a title when what they really wanted was to sign Roy Halladay instead?

And you're really downplaying the success the Yankees have had. They missed the playoffs once since 1995. They won the World Series five times in that span, twice this decade. The Red Sox have won the World Series twice since 2004. Since 1995, the Diamondbacks and Marlins are the only two teams to win a title without a massive payroll.

the Red Sox have missed the postseason as many times as they have won the WS since '04.

5 teams in the last 10 years had a payroll that ranked outside the top 10 in MLB. 6 if you count SF ranking right at 10th last year.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

# of teams to win titles in my lifetime

Baseball = 19 (64% of the league)
Football = 15 (47 % of the league)
Basketball = 9 (30% of the league)

Baseball is the only sport where more than half of the league has claimed a championship.
But baseball is the sport where no body else can compete?
really?

math must work different in the south than it does everywhere else.

that's a pretty convenient little time table, isn't it? the way the money is spent has completely changed "during your lifetime."

Included in your bogus percentages are the Pirates, Royals, Orioles, and Blue Jays. Do you think those teams will ever sniff the playoffs again...let alone a WS?

Then you have the teams that numbers refers to as getting lucky before their prospects leave....As, Reds, Marlins, and DBacks.

Who is left? Dodgers, Phillies, Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals. Hmmmmmm.

 

[OSUsushichic]

Every once in a while a team wins with home-grown talent. Then the talent goes to New York or Boston. It's not even a question of "if."

Boston has a lot of homegrown talent as well -- Lester, Buchholz, Papelbon, Bard, Youk, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Lowrie...

Kalish is going to be a good one as well.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

and that homegrown talent doesn't leave for NY or Boston at the first chance they get, because they're already there getting paid.

what team would Jeter be on if he started with the Pirates. still the Pirates?