Main Reason for WS Championship?

[User Name]

UN? Mojo.

[sk7326]

The problem with citing clutch hitting is that Papi was AWFUL in the ALCS ... he hit the grand slam, but there were tons of important at-bats which he squandered. Were those other ABs not important? Did he not give full effort then?

 

I think it is sufficient to say Ortiz had 2 amazing playoff rounds around a dud just because baseball works like that. He figured things out because he is good. The hitters who came through were all good - and you can't keep good down for too long.

[jung]

and they never missed an opportunity it seems to work at it collectively and figure pitchers out....if there is anything they should patent it is the scouting and team communication process they seem to have arrived at entirely as something of an exclusive to this bunch at this point.

[Thunder]

UN? Mojo.

 

I'll vouch for BTR here. That comeback vs Seattle was the turning point in the season.

[User Name]

I'll vouch for BTR here. That comeback vs Seattle was the turning point in the season.

 

ALDS and WS clincher? This guy.

 

There was no "turning point" for the season. The Sox f***ed s*** up from day one.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I don't know, that trip out to SF and LA felt like the turning point to me, since they were stumbling before that.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't know, that trip out to SF and LA felt like the turning point to me, since they were stumbling before that.

 

Or maybe that was when they turned on the burners for the home stretch.

[jung]

I don't know, that trip out to SF and LA felt like the turning point to me, since they were stumbling before that.

 

I guess you must mean immediately before that but it is hard to say that a team that never lost more than three games at any time was truly stumbling. They were 14-9 starting with the Tampa series and working up through SD before they hit LA and SF. I would hardly call that stumbling. If I cut out the AL teams they faced before going to LA and SF, their record is even better. They won something like 8 out of 10 just before hitting the road. They lost two in a row and two in a row again between June 16 and June 23. That is about as close to a stumble as they got for that period.

[sk7326]

and they never missed an opportunity it seems to work at it collectively and figure pitchers out....if there is anything they should patent it is the scouting and team communication process they seem to have arrived at entirely as something of an exclusive to this bunch at this point.

 

I'm not sure. The 2004, 2007 vintages were good in this area. Hell, the team this offense evoked most were the 1998-2000 Yankees (and Baltimore of life before I was born I suppose). You see a lot of pitches and figure things out. I don't know if it's exclusive, but it is very flattering company.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

ALDS and WS clincher? This guy.

 

There was no "turning point" for the season. The Sox f***ed s*** up from day one.

 

You're our closer, but it can't be done without starting pitching.

 

*wipes dust off my shoulders* *looks at YOTN, Forsyth, and BTR*

[User Name]

You're our closer

 

And like Koji, i give zero f***s.

[BornToRun]

And like Koji, i give zero f***s.

I think you're more of a Papelbon type as closer. You've given far too many f***s to be labeled as the Koji of Talksox.

[User Name]

I think you're more of a Papelbon type as closer. You've given far too many f***s to be labeled as the Koji of Talksox.

 

Papelbon didn't give any f***s either, back when he was awesome.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I guess you must mean immediately before that but it is hard to say that a team that never lost more than three games at any time was truly stumbling. They were 14-9 starting with the Tampa series and working up through SD before they hit LA and SF. I would hardly call that stumbling. If I cut out the AL teams they faced before going to LA and SF, their record is even better. They won something like 8 out of 10 just before hitting the road. They lost two in a row and two in a row again between June 16 and June 23. That is about as close to a stumble as they got for that period.

Well they did lose 7 out of 10 to KC, Toronto and the Yankees before that trip.

[jung]

I'm not sure. The 2004, 2007 vintages were good in this area. Hell, the team this offense evoked most were the 1998-2000 Yankees (and Baltimore of life before I was born I suppose). You see a lot of pitches and figure things out. I don't know if it's exclusive, but it is very flattering company.

 

 

I think it is pretty exclusive for this day and age. It is so hard to get enough "under contract" players that are willing to work together this way. "Come on man, time to look at tape of pitcher xyz". "Nay can't do it buddy. Gillette is here with the new razor blade contract".....like that. Heck these guys are making so much coin that at some point I would bet they begin to want to spend more time with their families than in days past.

 

2004 and 2007 teams had more raw talent as Ortiz himself said and I think depended far less on an actual process that encompassed the entire team. Those guys may have had individual processes that were very successful but I really don't think we have seen this sort of thing for a couple of decades...not this deeply embedded in the entire team. I absolutely think the Weaver Baltimore teams functioned this way.....probably out of fear of the original "little ball of hate". Unfortunately I am old enough to have watched them. 1998-2000 Spanks...could probably buy that one....maybe. They were lucky enough to have guys under contract that you could tell, liked each other and were a very well blended team of good athletes...O'neill, Jeter, Williams, Knoblauch, Spencer, Brosius...God I hated some of those guys but grudgingly had to admit they blended into a hell of a team, another whole greater than sum of parts team. The similarity between the 2013 Sox and the Spanks of this era is that they had a bunch of guys as we did that had much to prove to themselves and to baseball generally. They really had a chip on their collective shoulders.

 

Weaver's teams did it but even at that time, in their era they were acknowledged for their overall "team" mentality. They did it more as a consequence of playing for the little dictator and the fact that the little dictator had Brooks Robinson who really at that time was a baseball version of what Larry Bird later was for the Celtics. Brooks was past his prime as a hitter but not by much and was without question the team leader and a consummate team player. Brooks would do almost nothing offensively for the bulk of a game and then just when you thought you had gotten past him and the Orioles he would just break your heart in one single at bat.....sound familiar? or he would make some ridiculous play in the field that just completely took the legs out from under a rally and just like that the O's were walking back to the dugout for their ups and your guys were standing there going "what the f*** just happened"...."Did he actually do that....from 3rd base????"

[Palodios]

Papelbon didn't give any f***s either, back when he was awesome.

 

Remember when we used to hear the P word after almost every game? Koji sure quieted that crowd the second half of the season.

[User Name]

Remember when we used to hear the P word after almost every game? Koji sure quieted that crowd the second half of the season.

 

....to the point where some people stopped posting when they couldn't bitch about not having an overpaid closer pitching the back-end of games for us.

[Thunder]

Well they did lose 7 out of 10 to KC, Toronto and the Yankees before that trip.

 

I remember sitting on the beach in Cape Cod reading threads talking about the Sox missing the playoffs after that stretch. I wanna go back in time and smack you all upside the head.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Remember when we used to hear the P word after almost every game? Koji sure quieted that crowd the second half of the season.

 

They'll be on vacation for a long time now.

 

Especially that Papelbon has had one of his worst seasons in 2013.

[jung]

I think that it was important to us as fans that the Sox did so well on that West Coast swing but not because they had done poorly before it and I just think it was games to them, game that they had to win, series that they had to win just like any other series. But for us, I think we considered it a watershed kind of event considering how poorly previous Sox teams had done on those West Coast swings. It was another of those occasions where many of us would have said "the 2012 Sox would not have done that on a bet nor did or would the 2011 Sox for that matter". So I think it was important for us always looking for differences between this team and the 2011 and 2012 teams. Don't think it was nearly as meaningful to them as players or coaches.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Papelbon didn't give any f***s either, back when he was awesome.

 

No, you're totally the Papelbon of mojo. Just as good, but with way more drama than necessary!

[User Name]

No, you're totally the Papelbon of mojo. Just as good, but with way more drama than necessary!

 

You know me too well. Kinda scary.

[seabeachfred]

I think that it was important to us as fans that the Sox did so well on that West Coast swing but not because they had done poorly before it and I just think it was games to them, game that they had to win, series that they had to win just like any other series. But for us, I think we considered it a watershed kind of event considering how poorly previous Sox teams had done on those West Coast swings. It was another of those occasions where many of us would have said "the 2012 Sox would not have done that on a bet nor did or would the 2011 Sox for that matter". So I think it was important for us always looking for differences between this team and the 2011 and 2012 teams. Don't think it was nearly as meaningful to them as players or coaches.

 

Jung, I think a lot of it was due to the fact that players on this year's team were a balls ahead, take no prisoners, no job too hard to handle type of team. They were not built on rationalizations, excuses and reasons for a less than full effort. Out here in Southern California, all summer it was one mealy mouth utterance after another from Gonzales, Crawford, and before he got heavied out of action, Josh Beckett. Too many Sunday night games, Thursday night games before traveling, trooping up to the GM's office to complain about this and that. You heard nothing of that happening this year with this year's team. No wonder Mattingly wanted an extension so he would be in control for a few more seasons because as a lame duck these guys only have to unite with a couple of other complainers to make his job a living hell.

 

I'm reminded of a quote that I once made up myself that contrasts our 2013 WS Champions as compared to those sad sack excuse makers now residing out here in La la country-------DEFEAT HAS ALL KINDS OF EXCUSES, RATIONALIZATIONS AND REASONS ATTACHED TO IT BUT VICTORY DOESN'T BECAUSE VICTORY SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.

[jung]

Have you guys heard anything about Tom Verduchi's "Bonus at Bat" idea which would have a manager able to pick a batter once in a game and have him get a Bonus AB. In theory Farrell could have Ortiz bat twice in a row with a pinch runner running for Ortiz if he got a hit his first time up.

 

Now guys like Tom Caron saying that he likes the idea for both leagues with the AL giving up the DH.

 

I think both the original Verduchi idea and Caron's added comments are ridiculous. Just makes me want to throw up.

 

Yes the game needs some offense, mainly in the NL though.

 

The real issue for the new Commish is the length of games. I seriously doubt we need gimmicks to make that happen and I do not want the DH abandoned. It simply makes too much sense. If anything we need the NL to adopt it.

[sk7326]

Have you guys heard anything about Tom Verduchi's "Bonus at Bat" idea which would have a manager able to pick a batter once in a game and have him get a Bonus AB. In theory Farrell could have Ortiz bat twice in a row with a pinch runner running for Ortiz if he got a hit his first time up.

 

Now guys like Tom Caron saying that he likes the idea for both leagues with the AL giving up the DH.

 

I think both the original Verduchi idea and Caron's added comments are ridiculous. Just makes me want to throw up.

 

Yes the game needs some offense, mainly in the NL though.

 

The real issue for the new Commish is the length of games. I seriously doubt we need gimmicks to make that happen and I do not want the DH abandoned. It simply makes too much sense. If anything we need the NL to adopt it.

 

The NL should just adopt the DH. More strategy when you have more competent players. Also, NL baseball fans are the only fans in all of sports who are vehemently defending the need for an incompetent player to perform among the best players in the world.

[iortiz]

Easy... We were a lot more balanced than last couple of years..

[Bellhorn04]

Easy... We were a lot more balanced than last couple of years..

 

And the manager was certainly a lot more balanced than the last one.

[Thunder]

The NL should just adopt the DH. More strategy when you have more competent players. Also, NL baseball fans are the only fans in all of sports who are vehemently defending the need for an incompetent player to perform among the best players in the world.

NL getting the DH is the more realistic outcome here. The Bonus at bat would ruin the excitement and suspense of the game.

[redsoxrules]

Have you guys heard anything about Tom Verduchi's "Bonus at Bat" idea which would have a manager able to pick a batter once in a game and have him get a Bonus AB. In theory Farrell could have Ortiz bat twice in a row with a pinch runner running for Ortiz if he got a hit his first time up.

 

Now guys like Tom Caron saying that he likes the idea for both leagues with the AL giving up the DH.

 

I think both the original Verduchi idea and Caron's added comments are ridiculous. Just makes me want to throw up.

 

Yes the game needs some offense, mainly in the NL though.

 

The real issue for the new Commish is the length of games. I seriously doubt we need gimmicks to make that happen and I do not want the DH abandoned. It simply makes too much sense. If anything we need the NL to adopt it.

 

Bonus at Bat? WTF? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard and will never happen.

[rjortiz]

Bonus at Bat? WTF? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard and will never happen.

 

For real.