Why the JD Drew hate?

[ORS]

Yes, because it is commonly known that law offices are the only places where people concern themselves with accuracy when it comes to baseball discussion. Hear that Yeszir, you'll need to add a Biddleman, Schumer, and Taft to the name of the board to make this a place where we can talk about baseball and be concerned with accuracy.

[Dipre]

Yes' date=' because it is commonly known that law offices are the only places where people concern themselves with accuracy when it comes to baseball discussion. Hear that Yeszir, you'll need to add a Biddleman, Schumer, and Taft to the name of the board to make this a place where we can talk about baseball and be concerned with accuracy.[/quote']

 

X2.

[YeAuldBroade]

Oh Warren I told you it would get ugly if you dared defile the "Drew". I agree with you Warren, btw.. but I'm not telling these guys that.

[Dipre]

Oh Warren I told you it would get ugly if you dared defile the "Drew". I agree with you Warren' date=' btw.. but I'm not telling these guys that.[/quote']

 

I'd forgive you 'cause you don't hate South Park or Family Guy..

[YeAuldBroade]

LOL... Well Warren's a friend of mine and a really good guy, he's just not a big fan of the Drewster. I have no idea his opinion on SP or FG.

[ORS]

It has nothing to do with Drew. It has everything to do with lazy, ignorant lack of appreciation for a productive player. The name is immaterial. Players who contribute to the winning of the team deserve appreciation.

 

I admit, right now, Drew isn't contributing. Criticisms of his play right now are warranted. They should also be accompanied by and understanding that he has been a worthwhile contributor in the past and further understanding that he's likely to continue that this year. If he doesn't, have at him, but prior to the beginning of this season, he didn't deserve to be treated like an anchor holding this team back.

[YeAuldBroade]

It has nothing to do with Drew. It has everything to do with lazy, ignorant lack of appreciation for a productive player. The name is immaterial. Players who contribute to the winning of the team deserve appreciation.

 

I admit, right now, Drew isn't contributing. Criticisms of his play right now are warranted. They should also be accompanied by and understanding that he has been a worthwhile contributor in the past and further understanding that he's likely to continue that this year. If he doesn't, have at him, but prior to the beginning of this season, he didn't deserve to be treated like an anchor holding this team back.

That first paragraph was a bit inflammatory and I completely disagree with you. You have too much emotion rolled up in a player your don't know personally and who doesn't even know you're alive. " lazy, ignorant lack of appreciation for a productive player" I can't even comment on that nonsensical statement without a string of colorful metaphors that would probably get me permanently banned.

 

Step back and take a deep breath ORS. He's just a ballplayer that you mean nothing to and that a great many true Red Sox fans don't like. If he was such a jewel he wouldn't need to be defended by you diehards so often. His contribution to the team is strongly debatable, if it wasn't it wouldn't constantly be debated.

 

On one of the other boards I post to, one of the posters has repeatedly said that he'd probably like Drew a lot more if it wasn't for his cheering squad. And there are times I understand exactly what he means.

[Gom]

Except those statistics are usually trumped by other statistics and the conjecture is which are the more relevant statistics.

YeAuldBroade, you're my hero. FINALLY!

[Dipre]

YeAuldBroade' date=' you're my hero. FINALLY![/quote']

 

Yeah but she actually understands the stats she's talking about.

[Spudboy]

[a700hitter]

Step back and take a deep breath ORS. He's just a ballplayer that you mean nothing to and that a great many true Red Sox fans don't like. If he was such a jewel he wouldn't need to be defended by you diehards so often. His contribution to the team is strongly debatable' date=' if it wasn't it wouldn't constantly be debated.[/quote']^ This. I don't understand when posters take criticisms of a player so personally like their family has been insulted. I have had dinner and drinks with a few players throughout the years including Hall of Famers Tom Seaver. They seem like very nice people, but they almost never spend any time with fans unless it involves business. I have seen them go to some extraordinary lengths to avoid fans. They perform a very public job. They are subject to criticism by the fans, without whom there would be no game. It's as simple as that.

[ORS]

That first paragraph was a bit inflammatory and I completely disagree with you. You have too much emotion rolled up in a player your don't know personally and who doesn't even know you're alive. " lazy, ignorant lack of appreciation for a productive player" I can't even comment on that nonsensical statement without a string of colorful metaphors that would probably get me permanently banned.

 

Step back and take a deep breath ORS. He's just a ballplayer that you mean nothing to and that a great many true Red Sox fans don't like. If he was such a jewel he wouldn't need to be defended by you diehards so often. His contribution to the team is strongly debatable, if it wasn't it wouldn't constantly be debated.

 

On one of the other boards I post to, one of the posters has repeatedly said that he'd probably like Drew a lot more if it wasn't for his cheering squad. And there are times I understand exactly what he means.

You clearly stuggled with what I posted, so I'll try again.

 

I don't give one s*** about JD Drew. I don't care if he doesn't know my name or ever will.

 

Remove the assumption that I'm only defending him because of his name. My point still stands. JD Drew has become a baseball litmus test. What's your PH?

[YeAuldBroade]

You clearly stuggled with what I posted, so I'll try again.

 

I don't give one s*** about JD Drew. I don't care if he doesn't know my name or ever will.

 

Remove the assumption that I'm only defending him because of his name. My point still stands. JD Drew has become a baseball litmus test. What's your PH?

And I think you now need to step back and take several deep breaths.

 

BTW.. I think I understood your post just fine and I think everyone else did too.

[Dipre]

^ This. I don't understand when posters take criticisms of a player so personally like their family has been insulted. I have had dinner and drinks with a few players throughout the years including Hall of Famers Tom Seaver. They seem like very nice people' date=' but they almost never spend any time with fans unless it involves business. I have seen them go to some extraordinary lengths to avoid fans. They perform a very public job. They are subject to criticism by the fans, without whom there would be no game. It's as simple as that.[/quote']

 

It's not about Drew. It's not about Beltre. It's not about Lester. It's not about Papelbon (who you defend like your mother by the way, think about it for a second.) It's about production and what a player brings/can bring to the team.

[ORS]

And I think you now need to step back and take several deep breaths.

 

BTW.. I think I understood your post just fine and I think everyone else did too.

I'm perfectly calm. Don't go down trite internet road of, "You disagree with me, so you must be irrationally upset".

 

Clearly you didn't. I was very explicit in stating that it wasn't about the name, and you proceeded to portray it as though I were pining for a connection with him. If you meant something different, I'd suggest rephrasing.

[a700hitter]

It's not about Drew. It's not about Beltre. It's not about Lester. It's not about Papelbon (who you defend like your mother by the way' date=' think about it for a second.) It's about production and what a player brings/can bring to the team.[/quote']Papelbon is the best closer that the Red Sox have had since 1964. That's a looong time. I've lived through lots of Heathcliffe Slocumbs. People who think that Papelbon can be allowed to walk and replaced with Bard just don't understand how good Papelbon has been. He's probably a class a jerk. I don't take criticisms of him personally. I just don't want to go back to the pre-Papelbon days.

[Dipre]

Papelbon is the best closer that the Red Sox have had since 1964. That's a looong time. I've lived through lots of Heathcliffe Slocumbs. People who think that Papelbon can be allowed to walk and replaced with Bard just don't understand how good Papelbon has been. He's probably a class a jerk. I don't take criticisms of him personally. I just don't want to go back to the pre-Papelbon days.

 

Well i lived through the days of "Oh noez, Trot is injured again" and then "Oh noez, Willy Mo can't catch the ball". While certainly not the most durable guy, he's a productive player who's above average on every aspect of the game but consistently gets criticized because of his contract, which IMO, is just plain ridiculous.

[rhet]

:thumbsup:

[ORS]

Papelbon is the best closer that the Red Sox have had since 1964. That's a looong time. I've lived through lots of Heathcliffe Slocumbs. People who think that Papelbon can be allowed to walk and replaced with Bard just don't understand how good Papelbon has been. He's probably a class a jerk. I don't take criticisms of him personally. I just don't want to go back to the pre-Papelbon days.

The current acceptance of Papelbon walking has a lot to do with the current Papelbon resembling closers from the pre-Papelbon days. If there was a confidence level that the Papelbon of two years ago is who we'd get moving forward, then I'd agree they keep with little attention to cost. The reality is that there's been some transition in his performance, and that is shaking the confidence level.

 

It's not that there's not appreciaton for how good he has been. It's that there's concern that the guy who was that good isn't what we'd be getting.

[YeAuldBroade]

I'm perfectly calm. Don't go down trite internet road of, "You disagree with me, so you must be irrationally upset".

 

Clearly you didn't. I was very explicit in stating that it wasn't about the name, and you proceeded to portray it as though I were pining for a connection with him. If you meant something different, I'd suggest rephrasing.

Dipre is disagreeing with me but I'm not suggesting he's angry or irrational, because he's obviously not. It's not an internet thing, it's just you. Your anger is palpable and it's not necessary.

[a700hitter]

Well i lived through the days of "Oh noez' date=' Trot is injured again" and then "Oh noez, Willy Mo can't catch the ball". While certainly not the most durable guy, he's a productive player who's above average on every aspect of the game but consistently gets criticized because of his contract, which IMO, is just plain ridiculous.[/quote']Ridiculous or not. People can vent and criticize. It doesn't have to be fair. Being a fan is emotional, not intellectual. Fans who criticize players don't deserve to be insulted personally.

[Dipre]

Ridiculous or not. People can vent and criticize. It doesn't have to be fair. Being a fan is emotional' date=' not intellectual. Fans who criticize players don't deserve to be insulted personally.[/quote']

 

Then here i step out. I simply said it was conjecture. Not an insult, but an appreciation of the actual assesment. Carry on folks.

[a700hitter]

The current acceptance of Papelbon walking has a lot to do with the current Papelbon resembling closers from the pre-Papelbon days. If there was a confidence level that the Papelbon of two years ago is who we'd get moving forward, then I'd agree they keep with little attention to cost. The reality is that there's been some transition in his performance, and that is shaking the confidence level.

 

It's not that there's not appreciaton for how good he has been. It's that there's concern that the guy who was that good isn't what we'd be getting.

You don't remember as much of the pre-Papelbon days as I do. He set the bar very high. The fact that he is not performing at that ungodly level doesn't mean that he is still not an extraordinary level. He is still better than anyone that I can remember in his prime.

[YeAuldBroade]

Then here i step out. I simply said it was conjecture. Not an insult' date=' but an appreciation of the actual assesment. Carry on folks.[/quote']

I don't think he was saying you insulted anyone but in this conversation others did chime in with insults. I think he was referencing those that make it personal, not what you said.

 

At least that's my take on it.

[ORS]

Dipre is disagreeing with me but I'm not suggesting he's angry or irrational' date=' because he's obviously not. It's not an internet thing, it's just you. Your anger is palpable and it's not necessary.[/quote']

My demeanor is words on a computer screen to you. Any anger you find there is placed by you.

[a700hitter]

Then here i step out. I simply said it was conjecture. Not an insult' date=' but an appreciation of the actual assesment. Carry on folks.[/quote']People shouldn't be demeaned for their opinions, especially when their fandom is largely emotional. Characterizing an opinion as ridiculous is personally insulting,...but we have all done it. Sometimes it just rubs someone the wrong way.

[ORS]

You don't remember as much of the pre-Papelbon days as I do. He set the bar very high. The fact that he is not performing at that ungodly level doesn't mean that he is still not an extraordinary level. He is still better than anyone that I can remember in his prime.

Now? Not really. The 2004 Keith Foulke was better than, or at least as good as, the current Papelbon. He's walking the world. He can't keep it up.

[a700hitter]

Now? Not really. The 2004 Keith Foulke was better than' date=' or at least as good as, the current Papelbon. He's walking the world. He can't keep it up.[/quote']2004 Post season Keith Foulke, but not much beyond that. He was completely unconscious for about 20+ innings, but other than that, he never compared to 2009 or current Papelbon. That's my opinion, and let's not forget that it took years and a ton of $ to get someone as good as Foulke.

[Gom]

Yeah but she actually understands the stats she's talking about.

 

We're still waiting for you to do the same.

[TedWilliams101]

Seriously? Papelbon is as good as Foulke ever was. He had 1 good year with the Sox, that's it. 2008 Papelbon had a 2.34 ERA and 41 saves, 2009 had 1.85 ERA and 38 saves. So according to you, the "transition" Papelbon managed to have a ridiculous year, better than Foulke, but it's all gloom and doom for the future?

 

Papelbon Career: 1.85 ERA, 154 saves, 4.22 SO/BB

Postseason: 1.00 ERA, 7 saves, 2.88 SO/BB in 7 series.

 

Sure his walks have been a little worrying, but the guy is still one of the top closers in the game.