Article: Who to Root for in the 2024 World Series: A Comprehensive Analysis

[Maddie Landis]

Assessing the ethical conundrum of which team Red Sox fans should adopt in the 2024 World Series.

You should cheer for the Dodgers, duh.

Although the Yankees are spearheaded by lovable homegrown players like Giancarlo Stanton, Gerrit Cole, Alex Verdugo, Juan Soto, Jose Trevino, Carlos Rodón, Anthony Rizzo, Jazz Chisholm Jr., Aaron Judge and Anthony Volpe, cheering for the Yankees as a Red Sox fan is morally reprehensible.

Sure, some other Boston sports teams have beef with LA, but the Red Sox don’t hold any ill will toward the Dodgers. In 2013, the Dodgers generously took on the albatross contracts of Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford, Adrián González, and Nick Punto. In the 2018 World Series, the Dodgers were gracious enough to sit there quietly while the Red Sox stomped them, 4-1. In 1916, they did the exact same thing. The Dodgers feature several beloved former Red Sox. This one's obvious.

BLEED BLUE! GO DODGERS!

View full article

[Bellhorn04]

Thanks for this, Maddie.

I agree of course.  I don't have to be a Dodgers fan to root for them hard here!

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Obviously rooting hard for Mookie, Kike and the D's...

... except if you're an unrealistic Red Sox fan, channel your logic to cheer on batters to absolutely destroy LA relievers on any night on a national stage that they try to win a World Series game using an OPENER.

I still want the Yanks' bullpen to blow that game, but Boston fans have to hope the Dodgers don't win because of an opener -- lest our owners feel more justified to never again pay market prices for quality starting pitching.

[Bellhorn04]

45 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Obviously rooting hard for Mookie, Kike and the D's...

... except if you're an unrealistic Red Sox fan, channel your logic to cheer on batters to absolutely destroy LA relievers on any night on a national stage that they try to win a World Series game using an OPENER.

I still want the Yanks' bullpen to blow that game, but Boston fans have to hope the Dodgers don't win because of an opener -- lest our owners feel more justified to never again pay market prices for quality starting pitching.

Actually 5 Gloves, the reasons the Dodgers have been able to survive the insane injuries to their rotation is because they also have plenty of expensive and/or well-bred talent in their bullpen and of course their offense.  Just look at the Game 6 clincher vs. the Mets.  Give up 5 runs?  Not a problem when you score 10!   

[notin]

If an armed brigade of aliens came to Earth and challenged the Yankees to best of seven series with the human race at stake, meaning if Yankees won, the aliens go home dejected.  But if the aliens won, they would destroy our cities, pillage our resources, torture and enslave all survivors, and have their way with our women, I would still struggle to root for the Yankees…

[mvp 78]

With the Sox being pretty bad for the past 3 years, it's hard to really care if the Yanks win or not this year. It's not like the Sox have put up much of a fight. If they have to win one, let them win when the Sox are down in the dumps. 

[Bellhorn04]

I derive actual pain from the Yankees winning and pleasure from them losing.  It's as simple as that. 

[notin]

2 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Obviously rooting hard for Mookie, Kike and the D's...

... except if you're an unrealistic Red Sox fan, channel your logic to cheer on batters to absolutely destroy LA relievers on any night on a national stage that they try to win a World Series game using an OPENER.

I still want the Yanks' bullpen to blow that game, but Boston fans have to hope the Dodgers don't win because of an opener -- lest our owners feel more justified to never again pay market prices for quality starting pitching.

When was the last time the Sox paid market price for quality starting pitching that panned out?

[moonslav59]

I can never root for the Yanks, but I hate the Dodgers.

I won't watch any games- just the highlights. 

I could care less if Betts or Dugo get a ring.

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, notin said:

When was the last time the Sox paid market price for quality starting pitching that panned out?

Michael Wacha (you probably don't mean a price that small)

Chris Sale (original contract they took on from CWS)

Rick Porcello?

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

I can never root for the Yanks, but I hate the Dodgers.

I won't watch any games- just the highlights. 

I could care less if Betts or Dugo get a ring.

same here. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, notin said:

When was the last time the Sox paid market price for quality starting pitching that panned out?

Probably Wacha -- who Bloom paid market price at the time. But once he proved he was quality, they looked elsewhere.

And let's get something straight: I have never rooted for the Yankees in my life, and never will.

But I'm rooting for the Dodgers' opener game to fail because I believe it's in the best interests of being a Boston fan; remember, I don't want LA to lose that game, just for one of their relievers to suck (maybe walk the park), so I don't have to live through it when the Sox are finally back in the postseason and try the same plan.

[Maxbialystock]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

I can never root for the Yanks, but I hate the Dodgers.

I won't watch any games- just the highlights. 

I could care less if Betts or Dugo get a ring.

I like the Dodgers because of Branch Rickey,  Johnny Podres in the 1955 WS (when the beat the Yankees and Podres won 3 games),  and the fact that the Dodgers played in the 19th century and their name comes from "trolley-dodgers," which is pretty cool.  Shame on me, but I also think Yankees is a great baseball name.  Red Sox--meh.  

Plus I thought the move to the West Coast, especially when they persuaded the Giants to move at the same time, was the right move, the smart move, and good for MLB.  

I'm fine with you hating them because we all have our reasons for likes and dislikes.  

I certainly don't like the Yankees, but on the other hand I do like another Dodgers-Yankees World Series, which to me is traditional and good for baseball. In the John Henry era, which Sox fans are now unwisely inclined to disparage, the Sox have won 4 WS to the Yankees 1 and the Dodgers 1.  

[moonslav59]

35 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Michael Wacha (you probably don't mean a price that small)

Chris Sale (original contract they took on from CWS)

Rick Porcello?

I'd say Nate's contract was okay, and about on the same level as Porcello's.

Wacha's was good. Hill ws okay, for the cost.

Even Paxton's 21 GS for $10M was okay.

The last big contract for a pitcher, that we gave out?

Hmmmm. (The Beckett extension was not great.) Pedro's extension, over 2 decades ago?

[dgalehouse]

I will watch all of the games, but without any rooting interest.  The Yankees have always been the arch enemy , but I have no love at all for the Dodgers organization either. Both teams have plenty of star power and it figures to be a good series , but I don't care who wins. I only hope that the whole thing inspires John Henry to come out of hiding and tell Breslow to do what it takes to get back on top. 

[mvp 78]

29 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

I will watch all of the games, but without any rooting interest.  The Yankees have always been the arch enemy , but I have no love at all for the Dodgers organization either. Both teams have plenty of star power and it figures to be a good series , but I don't care who wins. I only hope that the whole thing inspires John Henry to come out of hiding and tell Breslow to do what it takes to get back on top. 

I will watch none of the games as I have no rooting interest. 

[Maddie Landis]

6 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Actually 5 Gloves, the reasons the Dodgers have been able to survive the insane injuries to their rotation is because they also have plenty of expensive and/or well-bred talent in their bullpen and of course their offense.  Just look at the Game 6 clincher vs. the Mets.  Give up 5 runs?  Not a problem when you score 10!   

The Dodgers' depth is also insane. They have a lot of defensive versatility with interchangeable players. 

[Bellhorn04]

Possible sub-title for this series: Lucrative Lumber

AAVs

Ohtani 46 mill

Judge 40 

Soto 31 (last year of arbitration)

Betts 30

Freeman 27

Stanton 22 (25 - 3 subsidized by Marlins)

Total 196 mill - avg 33 per 

Nutty! (Sorry moon.😁)

 

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Possible sub-title for this series: Lucrative Lumber

AAVs

Ohtani 46 mill

Judge 40 

Soto 31 (last year of arbitration)

Betts 30

Freeman 27

Stanton 22 (25 - 3 subsidized by Marlins)

Total 196 mill - avg 33 per 

Nutty! (Sorry moon.😁)

 

No peanut allergies, here.

[notin]

21 hours ago, Maxbialystock said:

I like the Dodgers because of Branch Rickey,  Johnny Podres in the 1955 WS (when the beat the Yankees and Podres won 3 games),  and the fact that the Dodgers played in the 19th century and their name comes from "trolley-dodgers," which is pretty cool.  Shame on me, but I also think Yankees is a great baseball name.  Red Sox--meh.  

Plus I thought the move to the West Coast, especially when they persuaded the Giants to move at the same time, was the right move, the smart move, and good for MLB.  

I'm fine with you hating them because we all have our reasons for likes and dislikes.  

I certainly don't like the Yankees, but on the other hand I do like another Dodgers-Yankees World Series, which to me is traditional and good for baseball. In the John Henry era, which Sox fans are now unwisely inclined to disparage, the Sox have won 4 WS to the Yankees 1 and the Dodgers 1.  

For a while, the Dodgers played under the name Brooklyn Robins.   And the Yankees were originally the Baltimore Orioles.  Which begs the question - why is it when they’re named after birds do MLB teams always choose the most docile ones?  In other sports, you get Hawks, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks - birds of prey.  But in MLB, you get Cardinals, Blue Jays, Orioles, and at one point, Robins.  Plenty of other MLB teams have monikers based on predators and other creatures that can strike fear - Tigers, Diamondbacks, Marlins, and Cubs (once they grow up, which apparently takes 108 years).  But with birds, just some routine garden avians one sets out bird feeders for.  I’m surprised the Guardians didn’t choose “Wrens” or “Parakeets” instead of their new statue-themed moniker.

 

(Apparently the NHL does this, too, as the only bird named teams are the Ducks and Penguins.  The Blackhawks are named for an indigenous tribe and therefore don’t count.)

[Bellhorn04]

9 minutes ago, notin said:

For a while, the Dodgers played under the name Brooklyn Robins.   And the Yankees were originally the Baltimore Orioles.  Which begs the question - why is it when they’re named after birds do MLB teams always choose the most docile ones?  In other sports, you get Hawks, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks - birds of prey.  But in MLB, you get Cardinals, Blue Jays, Orioles, and at one point, Robins.  Plenty of other MLB teams have monikers based on predators and other creatures that can strike fear - Tigers, Diamondbacks, Marlins, and Cubs (once they grow up, which apparently takes 108 years).  But with birds, just some routine garden avians one sets out bird feeders for.  I’m surprised the Guardians didn’t choose “Wrens” or “Parakeets” instead of their new statue-themed moniker.

It all lines up with George Carlin's classic baseball vs. football bit.

[mvp 78]

12 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It all lines up with George Carlin's classic baseball vs. football bit.

In baseball, you have bases. In football, you have foots!

Classic!!!

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, notin said:

For a while, the Dodgers played under the name Brooklyn Robins.   And the Yankees were originally the Baltimore Orioles.  Which begs the question - why is it when they’re named after birds do MLB teams always choose the most docile ones?  In other sports, you get Hawks, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks - birds of prey.  But in MLB, you get Cardinals, Blue Jays, Orioles, and at one point, Robins.  Plenty of other MLB teams have monikers based on predators and other creatures that can strike fear - Tigers, Diamondbacks, Marlins, and Cubs (once they grow up, which apparently takes 108 years).  But with birds, just some routine garden avians one sets out bird feeders for.  I’m surprised the Guardians didn’t choose “Wrens” or “Parakeets” instead of their new statue-themed moniker.

 

(Apparently the NHL does this, too, as the only bird named teams are the Ducks and Penguins.  The Blackhawks are named for an indigenous tribe and therefore don’t count.)

I once saw a Blue Jay go wing to wing with a Hawk on the ground next to a pine tree, while a group of Jays cheered from the branches. The foes rolled around for a few minutes, each getting two points for reversals, then flew their own ways.

 The Mockingbird might seem disrespectful, but when he sings, we get to hear a whole concert.

[notin]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

In baseball, you have bases. In football, you have foots!

Classic!!!

In baseball, you have a seventh inning stretch.  In football, you have a two minute warning..,

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, notin said:

In baseball, you have a seventh inning stretch.  In football, you have a two minute warning..,

In baseball, the object is to go home. In football it to get to the END ZONE!

[Maxbialystock]

On 10/24/2024 at 11:45 AM, notin said:

For a while, the Dodgers played under the name Brooklyn Robins.   And the Yankees were originally the Baltimore Orioles.  Which begs the question - why is it when they’re named after birds do MLB teams always choose the most docile ones?  In other sports, you get Hawks, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks - birds of prey.  But in MLB, you get Cardinals, Blue Jays, Orioles, and at one point, Robins.  Plenty of other MLB teams have monikers based on predators and other creatures that can strike fear - Tigers, Diamondbacks, Marlins, and Cubs (once they grow up, which apparently takes 108 years).  But with birds, just some routine garden avians one sets out bird feeders for.  I’m surprised the Guardians didn’t choose “Wrens” or “Parakeets” instead of their new statue-themed moniker.

 

(Apparently the NHL does this, too, as the only bird named teams are the Ducks and Penguins.  The Blackhawks are named for an indigenous tribe and therefore don’t count.)

Excellent stuff.  Thanks.  Brooklyn freaking robins???!!!!!  

 

[moonslav59]

31 minutes ago, Maxbialystock said:

Excellent stuff.  Thanks.  Brooklyn freaking robins???!!!!!  

 

Fragile little birdies.