A Realistic View of 2024: Part II

[notin]

If players aren't going to take it seriously, it won't matter to the fans. It mattered to the players back in the day and it mattered to the fans. Why kill something that was cool?

 

Disagree.

 

Making it matter (WS home field) made it stupid. It mattered for what it was - the game’s biggest names all in one place. Not because of the outcome.

 

Look at the one play you highlight from those days. Tell me who won that game. What year was it? What was the score?

 

No one remembers, because no one cared…

[mvp 78]

Disagree.

 

Making it matter (WS home field) made it stupid. It mattered for what it was - the game’s biggest names all in one place. Not because of the outcome.

 

Look at the one play you highlight from those days. Tell me who won that game. What year was it? What was the score?

 

No one remembers, because no one cared…

 

That happened long before I was born. I can't be held accountable for remembering the details of those ones.

 

The 1987 game when the NL won in extras? The 1989 game when Bo and Boggs hit back to back jacks in the first? Pedro in 99? The embarrassment in 2002? You can hold me accountable for that era.

[Old Red]

Disagree.

 

Making it matter (WS home field) made it stupid. It mattered for what it was - the game’s biggest names all in one place. Not because of the outcome.

 

Look at the one play you highlight from those days. Tell me who won that game. What year was it? What was the score?

 

No one remembers, because no one cared…

Making the winner getting home field was stupid, and i don’t think it made it matter anymore. The Great players were the show, but the great players wanted to win also, which made the fans more interested too. I would have loved to see Mays, Aaron, Roberto, Gibby, Koufax, Juan all play at Fenway, but today I don’t think for me there is anyone that is must see. Even with the Red Sox my first game I wanted to see Yaz, but today there is no one to me that is must see.

[jad]

The All Star game was created to finance a pension fund for retired players.

 

Sure it’s a meaningless exhibition, and may it stay that way forever. Worst idea ever was to link it to WS home field.

 

Now it’s just pro players having fun. I’m fine watching that. And outside of the stupid WS home field idea, it was dumb for players to ever take this one game seriously, because want to win or not, it was still a meaningless exhibition back then…

 

Agree 100%. (And I'll bet Fosse does as well.)

[jad]

And they slowly started to kill baseball by introducing interleague play and letting the All Star Game end in a tie.

 

As many have had occasion to tell me, that's getting damn close to Get Off My Lawn territory.

 

Who was the Dodger dude who swore vehemently that he was going to devote his entire retirement to getting rid of inter-league play? (Yeah, I don't remember either. Actually I do, but his obscurity will long outlast his convictions).

Edited May 8, 2024 by jad

[mvp 78]

As many have had occasion to tell me, that's getting damn close to Get Off My Lawn territory.

 

Who was the Dodger dude who swore vehemently that he was going to devote his entire retirement to getting rid of inter-league play? (Yeah, I don't remember either. Actually I do, but his obscurity will long outlast his convictions).

 

It's NOT get off my lawn. I like the new players. I don't care about how they wear their uniform. I'm not bothered about their walkup music. I like when baseball is FUN! I just think it was better when the two leagues were separate and things like the All Star Game and World Series felt more special because you'd never see these players face off together otherwise.

[mvp 78]

Making the winner getting home field was stupid, and i don’t think it made it matter anymore. The Great players were the show, but the great players wanted to win also, which made the fans more interested too. I would have loved to see Mays, Aaron, Roberto, Gibby, Koufax, Juan all play at Fenway, but today I don’t think for me there is anyone that is must see. Even with the Red Sox my first game I wanted to see Yaz, but today there is no one to me that is must see.

 

^ this is get off my lawn territory.

[notin]

Making the winner getting home field was stupid, and i don’t think it made it matter anymore. The Great players were the show, but the great players wanted to win also, which made the fans more interested too. I would have loved to see Mays, Aaron, Roberto, Gibby, Koufax, Juan all play at Fenway, but today I don’t think for me there is anyone that is must see. Even with the Red Sox my first game I wanted to see Yaz, but today there is no one to me that is must see.

 

Of course it made the game matter more. Heck it affected voting. Fans would vote for the best players in their league then for mediocre talent in the other.

 

That they wanted to win the All Star game was always silly. It was always a meaningless exhibition. If the game gets too competitive, teams start holding out on bigger (re: more expensive) star players because, why risk injury?

 

Just because some players didn’t have an Off Switch didn’t make the game better. I enjoyed the fun. I enjoyed moments like Barry Bonds charging out to centerfield to carry off Torii Hunter after the latter robbed him of a home run. I enjoyed watching players clamor up the dugout steps to watch Aroldis Chapman throw 102 MPH or better on every pitch, and pitying the teammate at the plate.. I enjoyed watching ARod cede the shortstop position to Cal Ripken one last time. And Chan Ho Park straight up grooving Cal a fastball down the middle just because, well, respect.

 

Watching Rose slam Ray Fosse out of the league was a lowlight, not a highlight…

Edited May 8, 2024 by notin

[Old Red]

Of course it made the game matter more. Heck it affected voting. Fans would vote for the best players in their league then for mediocre talent in the other.

 

That they wanted to win the All Star game was always silly. It was always a meaningless exhibition. If the game gets too competitive, teams start holding out on bigger (re: more expensive) star players because, why risk injury?

 

Just because some players didn’t have an Off Switch didn’t make the game better. I enjoyed the fun. I enjoyed moments like Barry Bonds charging out to centerfield to carry off Torii Hunter after the latter robbed him of a home run. I enjoyed watching players clamor up the dugout steps to watch Aroldis Chapman throw 102 MPH or better on every pitch, and pitying the teammate at the plate.. I enjoyed watching ARod cede the shortstop position to Cal Ripken one last time. And Chan Ho Park just straight up grooving Cal a fastball down the middle just because, well, respect.

 

Watching Rose slam Ray Fosse out of the league was a lowlight, not a highlight…

Back in the day it was NOT a meaningless exhibition game to the players, or the leagues. I remember 1 year when I believe the AL president told the teams to hold the better pitches back from pitching in the weekend before the All Star Game, so they would be available to pitch in the All Star game. That’s how serious it was back in the day, and far from a meaningless exhibition game.

[dgalehouse]

Years ago the All Star Game was a big event. There was always a debate about which league was better. National League fans took pride in their winning streak. There were National League players and American League players. Free agency, interleague trades and interleague play changed all that. And the All Star game became less interesting. Today it is just a showcase for the top players in the game.

[Nick]

Interesting that there's not more conversation about our rookie right fielder Abreu.

 

Maybe with exception of power tool, he's right up there with Casas or close to it seems. And he plays much better defense and runs well.

 

Casas had April 2023 OPS of .585. Abreu has righted the slight slump at the beginning and now owns an OPS of .839.

 

I think he's going to be special. He looks like your blue collar Red Sox.

[Nick]

Request for Moon...

 

How about a thread on pitching? I think it deserves one.....

[Maxbialystock]

And they slowly started to kill baseball by introducing interleague play and letting the All Star Game end in a tie.

 

Ahem. All due respect, but the NFL and NBA have flourished with interleague play. I'm a big NCAA basketball fan, and the best teams thrive on going outside their conferences to play the best from the rest.

 

So, as someone else has already said, ain't it great that every so often Fenway fans can see the best of the rest--the National League--come to play in "our" park.

 

My memories of the All-Star game are very different from others on talksox. I believe the players--and Ted Williams is a great example--loved being in the All-Star game because it was in fact the best against the best, especially hitters vs pitchers. I could be wrong, but I think the risk of injury was and is minimal--especially when you consider that it's just 1 game, and not even a whole game (my guess is nobody plays more than 3 innings)--against, say, 150-160 nine-inning games for the rest of the season.

 

In my not so humble opinion, the MLB All-Star game remains the only major sport All-Star Game in which we see hitters and pitchers--and sometimes fielders and baserunners--give it their absolute best effort.

[notin]

Back in the day it was NOT a meaningless exhibition game to the players, or the leagues. I remember 1 year when I believe the AL president told the teams to hold the better pitches back from pitching in the weekend before the All Star Game, so they would be available to pitch in the All Star game. That’s how serious it was back in the day, and far from a meaningless exhibition game.

 

It was still a meaningless exhibition. What meaning did it have?

 

Really all you are doing is attaching significance to a league president’s concerns that viewership (re: revenue) might fall if the best players were not available…

[notin]

Years ago the All Star Game was a big event. There was always a debate about which league was better. National League fans took pride in their winning streak. There were National League players and American League players. Free agency, interleague trades and interleague play changed all that. And the All Star game became less interesting. Today it is just a showcase for the top players in the game.

 

 

Didn’t the NL winning streak occur long after free agency? And didn’t interleague trades start long before the All Star game?

[dgalehouse]

It was still a meaningless exhibition. What meaning did it have?

 

Really all you are doing is attaching significance to a league president’s concerns that viewership (re: revenue) might fall if the best players were not available…

 

It didn't count in the standings or pennant races , if that is what you are saying. But it mattered much more to the players and to the fans than it does today. If you can't see that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

[dgalehouse]

It was still a meaningless exhibition. What meaning did it have?

 

Really all you are doing is attaching significance to a league president’s concerns that viewership (re: revenue) might fall if the best players were not available…

 

You are dead wrong. The American League president wanted very much to win the game. That was the reason. It was not about viewership or revenue.

[Old Red]

It was still a meaningless exhibition. What meaning did it have?

 

Really all you are doing is attaching significance to a league president’s concerns that viewership (re: revenue) might fall if the best players were not available…

 

Did you pound your thumb again? The president of the league did not hold pitchers back, so they could pitch in the All Star Game, because of viewership, or revenue. How you come up with that is mind boggling. The players from both leagues wanted to win, and both leagues wanted to win. Did it count in any standings, or anything no, but bragging rights meant a lot to both the players, and the leagues.🙈🤭

[Old Red]

You are dead wrong. The American League president wanted very much to win the game. That was the reason. It was not about viewership or revenue.

 

100% correct.

[mvp 78]

Interesting that there's not more conversation about our rookie right fielder Abreu.

 

Maybe with exception of power tool, he's right up there with Casas or close to it seems. And he plays much better defense and runs well.

 

Casas had April 2023 OPS of .585. Abreu has righted the slight slump at the beginning and now owns an OPS of .839.

 

I think he's going to be special. He looks like your blue collar Red Sox.

 

I've heard comparisons to Trot Nixon.

[notin]

It didn't count in the standings or pennant races , if that is what you are saying. But it mattered much more to the players and to the fans than it does today. If you can't see that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

 

I have no idea how much it mattered to the players then nor do I know now. I’m also not sure how you know. What are you basing how much it matters to the players on now? I’ve never once heard a player get upset about going, but I’ve heard many express their excitement.

 

This perception change in the game is probably more on developments in society. I think a big part of the reason it mattered to fans in the 70s and 80s was that it occurred on a very special 3 day stretch when there are no other professional sports of any kind. And back before cable television, you either watched the All Star game or watched some s***** network show like “The Love Boat,” the very existence of which proves how low our entertainment threshold was back then. Now, people have numerous other entertainment options and only the diehards and a few others watch the All Star game.

 

I’m a fan, and I view the game the same way as I did when I was a kid. Was I included in your poll about our attitude on viewership?

[mvp 78]

I have no idea how much it mattered to the players then nor do I know now. I’m also not sure how you know. What are you basing how much it matters to the players on now? I’ve never once heard a player get upset about going, but I’ve heard many express their excitement.

 

This perception change in the game is probably more on developments in society. I think a big part of the reason it mattered to fans in the 70s and 80s was that it occurred on a very special 3 day stretch when there are no other professional sports of any kind. And back before cable television, you either watched the All Star game or watched some s***** network show like “The Love Boat,” the very existence of which proves how low our entertainment threshold was back then. Now, people have numerous other entertainment options and only the diehards and a few others watch the All Star game.

 

I’m a fan, and I view the game the same way as I did when I was a kid. Was I included in your poll about our attitude on viewership?

 

Not a big thinker, eh?

[moonslav59]

Request for Moon...

 

How about a thread on pitching? I think it deserves one.....

 

Maybe this post will satisfy the need:

 

Game Logs for our SP’ers/Openers up to May 7th

 

** 3 Bad starts in our first 36 Games Started

 

IP/ER/H+BB/K

5/2/5/2 Bello W

6/1/3/10 Pivetta L (left tied 0-0)

6/0/4/7 Crawford L (left with lead)

5/1/3/8 Whitlock W

6/0/3/10 Houck W

**5/4/6/6 Bello W

5/0/6/3 Pivetta W

4.2/1/5/5 Crawford W (first GS under 5 IP)

4.1/0/8/4 Whitlock L (second game under 5 IP) left with lead

6/0/6/7 Houck W

5.1/1/5/3 Bello L

5/0/6/6 Crawford L (left with the lead)

5/1/6/4 Whitlock L (left with the lead)

**5.1/4/12/2 Houck L

4/2/6/4 Criswell W (3rd game under 5 IP)

5.1/2/8/8 Bello W

5.2/0/2/6 Crawford L (left tied 0-0)

4/2/4/1 Whitlock L (4th game under 5 IP)

9/0/3/9 Houck W (shutout)

2/0/1/2 Bernardino L (opener, left with lead)

6/0/3/7 Bello W

6/1/10/6 Crawford W

3.1/1/4/1 Wink W

6/2/8/4 Houck L

5/0/3/3 Criswell W

**1.2/5/6/0 Anderson L

6/3/10/4 Crawford L

3/0/3/1 Wink W

6/3/8/5 Houck L

1/0/1/1 Bernardino L (opener/pen game)

4.1/1/6/5 Criswell W

6/2/7/6 Crawford L

 

Team Record is Starts by… (ERA as a SP'er ONLY 2.13 team)

4-0 Criswell (1.47)

4-1 Bello (3.04)

2-1 Winckowski (1.69)

4-3 Houck (1.99)

1-1 Pivetta (0.82)

3-5 Crawford (1.75)

1-3 Whitlock (1.96)

0-2 Bernardino (0.00) /Anderson (27.00)

 

OPS Against is an amazing .587 by SP'ers

.384 Bernardino (1 IP)

.520 Pivetta

.529 Houck

.553 Crawford (above team mark)

.605 Criswell (below team mark)

.616 Whitlock

.620 Winckowski

.646 Bello

1.708 Anderson

 

OPS Against as RP'er ONLY (.649 team) 10+ PAs

.434 Bernardino (45 PAs Against)

.447 Slaten (74 leads team)

.460 Jansen (amazingly, he leads all RP'ers with 8 BBs)

.465 Kelly (31)

.519 Anderson (58)

.560 Weissert (57) (There is no middle ground)

 

.747 Booser (36)

.811 Martin (52)

.852 Wink (67) has been better as a SP'er

.875 Joely (51, about 50 too many.)

1.039 Campbell (33) on IL

 

[notin]

You are dead wrong. The American League president wanted very much to win the game. That was the reason. It was not about viewership or revenue.

 

What year was that?

 

I’m guessing in the 1960s, when the American League faced a massive talent gap and most (all?) of the games big stars were in the National League. Don’t you think his goal was to prove the teams in his league were worth watching and going to see? The AL back then was the “watered down” league we keep hearing about, and this talent gap lead to one of the worst rule changes in sports history - the creation of the DH in the AL only…

[notin]

Not a big thinker, eh?

 

???

 

Going out of context on me?

[Old Red]

What year was that?

 

I’m guessing in the 1960s, when the American League faced a massive talent gap and most (all?) of the games big stars were in the National League. Don’t you think his goal was to prove the teams in his league were worth watching and going to see? The AL back then was the “watered down” league we keep hearing about, and this talent gap lead to one of the worst rule changes in sports history - the creation of the DH in the AL only…

 

🤭🙈🤮

[dgalehouse]

I have no idea how much it mattered to the players then nor do I know now. I’m also not sure how you know. What are you basing how much it matters to the players on now? I’ve never once heard a player get upset about going, but I’ve heard many express their excitement.

 

This perception change in the game is probably more on developments in society. I think a big part of the reason it mattered to fans in the 70s and 80s was that it occurred on a very special 3 day stretch when there are no other professional sports of any kind. And back before cable television, you either watched the All Star game or watched some s***** network show like “The Love Boat,” the very existence of which proves how low our entertainment threshold was back then. Now, people have numerous other entertainment options and only the diehards and a few others watch the All Star game.

 

I’m a fan, and I view the game the same way as I did when I was a kid. Was I included in your poll about our attitude on viewership?

 

Typical nonsensical reply from you. It really does not merit a response. The All Star Game was a big event. It no longer is. Fans can still enjoy watching it . But the game has absolutely lost the appeal it once had. That really is not debatable.

[notin]

Typical nonsensical reply from you. It really does not merit a response. The All Star Game was a big event. It no longer is. Fans can still enjoy watching it . But the game has absolutely lost the appeal it once had. That really is not debatable.

 

I think it lost appeal due to more entertainment options and a foolish experiment to attach postseason significance. But, bragging rights or not, it’s always been a meaningless exhibition. And the very history of the All Star game tells you that…

[Old Red]

I think it lost appeal due to more entertainment options and a foolish experiment to attach postseason significance. But, bragging rights or not, it’s always been a meaningless exhibition. And the very history of the All Star game tells you that…

 

The more you post the more you live up to your name(NNN).

Edited May 8, 2024 by Old Red

[Bellhorn04]

Typical nonsensical reply from you. It really does not merit a response. The All Star Game was a big event. It no longer is. Fans can still enjoy watching it . But the game has absolutely lost the appeal it once had. That really is not debatable.

 

I have no interest in it myself, but the Home Run Derby seems to be kind of a big deal now.