Jump to content

Who’s your favorite enemy?


Philip

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

Angels still have the worst record in the AL.  Just proving that baseball is the ultimate team sport.

Are there other sports remotely comparable to baseball in that sense?  Are there superstar football players who basically never played in the postseason? The 1930 Yankees had seven Hall of Famers in their primes, including Ruth and Gehrig, and finished 16 games out of first.  The Cubs of Banks, Santo, Billy Williams, didn't just not make the postseason, most of the time they didn't even contend.  I love it when a complete underdog takes down a $200M team, like in 2012, but sometimes you get the feeling everything is just kind of random.

Oh, and as for the original question I don't like any Yanks or Red Sox until they've retired or gone to other organizations.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Are there other sports remotely comparable to baseball in that sense?  Are there superstar football players who basically never played in the postseason? The 1930 Yankees had seven Hall of Famers in their primes, including Ruth and Gehrig, and finished 16 games out of first.  The Cubs of Banks, Santo, Billy Williams, didn't just not make the postseason, most of the time they didn't even contend.  I love it when a complete underdog takes down a $200M team, like in 2012, but sometimes you get the feeling everything is just kind of random.

Oh, and as for the original question I don't like any Yanks or Red Sox until they've retired or gone to other organizations.

Baseball is the truest team sport. The best pitcher whoever lived can only pitch, The best hitter ever only comes to plate once in nine, the best centerfielder ever can only play one position. And it’s not just the nine on the field, it’s the organization being able to plug-in other capable replacements when the inevitable injury happens.
That is why I am happy with Mike, and reluctant to complain about his moves. He’s doing his best to remake every aspect of the organization, and that is really a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Philip said:

Baseball is the truest team sport. The best pitcher whoever lived can only pitch, The best hitter ever only comes to plate once in nine, the best centerfielder ever can only play one position. And it’s not just the nine on the field, it’s the organization being able to plug-in other capable replacements when the inevitable injury happens.
That is why I am happy with Mike, and reluctant to complain about his moves. He’s doing his best to remake every aspect of the organization, and that is really a big deal.

I agree with everything you wrote, after your first sentence.

I could make a strong case, about football being a true team sport. The Qb depends on his OL to give the WRs time to get down the field, especially his guys on his blind side.

The intended target needs the other targets to act well and draw some defenders their way. Running backs depend on guys blocking and opening up holes for yardage.

You can talk defense schemes and its all teamwork there too.

3rd and long, and you depend on your nickel or dime package to defend against the pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Are there other sports remotely comparable to baseball in that sense?  Are there superstar football players who basically never played in the postseason? The 1930 Yankees had seven Hall of Famers in their primes, including Ruth and Gehrig, and finished 16 games out of first.  The Cubs of Banks, Santo, Billy Williams, didn't just not make the postseason, most of the time they didn't even contend.  I love it when a complete underdog takes down a $200M team, like in 2012, but sometimes you get the feeling everything is just kind of random.

Oh, and as for the original question I don't like any Yanks or Red Sox until they've retired or gone to other organizations.

Barry Sanders played in two playoff games, both in 1991.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I agree with everything you wrote, after your first sentence.

I could make a strong case, about football being a true team sport. The Qb depends on his OL to give the WRs time to get down the field, especially his guys on his blind side.

The intended target needs the other targets to act well and draw some defenders their way. Running backs depend on guys blocking and opening up holes for yardage.

You can talk defense schemes and its all teamwork there too.

3rd and long, and you depend on your nickel or dime package to defend against the pass.

Yes that is completely true, and in many ways George carlin is right when he compared the football to the military, but a great quarterback adapts to the limitations of his team. He has terrible wide receivers, so he runs, and vice versa. If he has a bad defensive line, he works on being very fast, and so on. The point is that he can- to an extent- compensate for the weaknesses of his team, But in baseball the only way to upgrade leftfield is to get another left fielder.

Edited by Philip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Philip said:

Baseball is the truest team sport. The best pitcher whoever lived can only pitch, The best hitter ever only comes to plate once in nine, the best centerfielder ever can only play one position. And it’s not just the nine on the field, it’s the organization being able to plug-in other capable replacements when the inevitable injury happens.
That is why I am happy with Mike, and reluctant to complain about his moves. He’s doing his best to remake every aspect of the organization, and that is really a big deal.

It's a blessing and a curse.  It's hard to sell people on getting really invested in big players and big personalities and watching all the time when even the best players don't guarantee your team is any good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

It's a blessing and a curse.  It's hard to sell people on getting really invested in big players and big personalities and watching all the time when even the best players don't guarantee your team is any good.

I really think baseball is more about the team than about the individual players. The individual players all come and go, but the team remains the same.

I miss Manny and Nate Mclouth and Caleb But the team is the team and I watch the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sorry, don't know how what I looked up said different.

 

No problem. I know he got tired of never winning anything. I was at his his last game. Meaningless game in Baltimore to end the 98 season. Of course nobody knew it at the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Philip said:

Yes that is completely true, and in many ways George carlin is right when he compared the football to the military, but a great quarterback adapts to the limitations of his team. He has terrible wide receivers, so he runs, and vice versa. If he has a bad defensive line, he works on being very fast, and so on. The point is that he can- to an extent- compensate for the weaknesses of his team, But in baseball the only way to upgrade leftfield is to get another left fielder.

is your RB is weak, then you replace him, if your kicker cant kick worth a crap, then you replace him.

Bradshaw was a decent but not great QB, he had fantastic people around him, and they won 5 SBs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Redskins Rick said:

is your RB is weak, then you replace him, if your kicker cant kick worth a crap, then you replace him.

Bradshaw was a decent but not great QB, he had fantastic people around him, and they won 5 SBs.

 

Yeah, I don't really get the point of their argument. All of the team sports are extensively influenced by the team. Even in basketball, which I think is regarded as the most superstar-centric of them all, Jordan won nothing until he got better teammates, same with LeBron. The NFL is incredibly team reliant. I don't get why we have to try and elevate baseball as somehow different. In fact, I think the starting pitcher probably has the most influence of any individual in sports over the outcome of a single game, the only problem is you can't use him every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • Most supposedly obvious mistakes are not really. They're choices based on a bunch of different information, including things fans don't generally know like who's available today, who's nursing a whatever that makes him semi-unavailable, who spent the night on the can after bad crab cake... Hyde has to manage the clubhouse and personalities, and getting the bench guys some kind of playing time, and getting through 162 games, and on and on. 95% of "obvious mistakes" are going to have a plausible reason why they were made that doesn't involve the manager being stupid or spacing out. And every manager has any number of decisions that some subset of fans will decry as an obvious mistake, so the baseline for whatever manager we're talking about isn't zero mistakes, it's the number that a typical MLB manager supposedly makes. I'll give you a big wad of cash if you can find me a fanbase in any sport that thinks their manager is brilliant all the time. The best you're going to get is "eh, at least he hasn't screwed anything up in a week or two."
    • I'm certain that Texas is embarrassed to have the 2023 Wildcard banner right next to the 2023 World Series Champion banner.
    • In terms on banners: 1. World Series 2. American League 3. AL East So, if we don't at least win the AL, winning the division is extremely important. Nobody wants a stupid Wild Card banner. In fact, everyone should find those embarrassing to display.
    • His swing looks a little long.  Probably why he had so many K’s but good power at Norfolk.   I see lots of K’s in the short term but hopefully he runs into a few.  
    • I’ve just been looking at payroll construction for other teams with payrolls higher than the Orioles but not upper tier.  There are 6 teams between $128 - 172 mm that I consider in this comp group.  Those are nos. 11-16 in total payroll.  There’s a fairly big leap to no. 10 ($208 mm) and I doubt that’s realistic for the O’s unless Rubinstein just feels like heavily subsidizing his ballclub, which I doubt.   Anyway, what stands out to me about these six clubs is that none of them have more than two players making in excess of $20 mm this year.  Here’s how they break down: STL ($172 mm): Arenado $35 mm, Goldschmidt $26 mm, 2 between $15-20 mm, 4 between $10-15 mm. BOS ($168 mm): Devers $29.5 mm, Story $22.5 mm, 3 at $15-20 mm. LAA ($151 mm): Rendon $38.6 mm, Trout $37.1 mm, 2 between $10-15 mm. SDP ($145 mm): Bogaerts $25.5 mm, Musgrove $20 mm, 2 between $15-20 mm, 3 between $10-15 mm.  (Manny’s contract is heavily backloaded.) AZD ($143 mm): Montgomery $25 mm, 6 between $10-15 mm. COL($128 mm): Bryant $28 mm, 5 between $10–15 mm. So when you think about 2029,  it would be very difficult to pay all four of Burnes, Adley, Gunnar and Bradish at FA prices.   At that point you’ve also potentially got Grayson, Westburg and Cowser in Arb 3, and maybe Holliday, Kjerstad and Mayo in Arb 1 or 2.    Bottom line, we won’t be able to sign all these guys long term, and choices will have to be made.  Starting with Burnes this winter.   I wonder how he’d feel about a front loaded deal with opt outs.   
    • https://www.mlb.com/orioles/video/yennier-cano-in-play-out-s-to-vladimir-guerrero-jr-js6cw3?partnerId=web_video-playback-page_video-share   This was a great play! 1.085 OPS over the past 28 days for Ramon.
    • I think that over the long term there is absolutely a better chance of winning if you get to skip the first round of playoffs. It's simple probability. If you have a 60% chance at winning any given post-season series, you have a .6^3 = 22% chance of winning three straight series, and a 13% chance of winning four straight series. Of course in any single post-season or series there's a reasonable chance that the wildcard wins and the division winner loses. But over 10, 20, 30 years you will almost certainly see an advantage from skipping the wildcard series. It's like asking if you'd rather be a .320 hitter or a .270 hitter? Obviously .320, even though next week the .270 hitter might get more hits.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...