Zack Scott explaining the Mookie trade and a lot more (article from Over the Monster)

[moonslav59]

Just now, Duran Is The Man said:

the Dodgers, once again, two steps ahead of everyone else.

... and behind by 3 steps, at times: Bauer, Paxton, Buehler and others.

Was paying Yamamoto that much money really "2 steps ahead?"

We'll see...

 

[Duran Is The Man]

jezzus. really? look at their lineup. they just won a WS. and i'd be willing to bet they win a few more in the next 10 years.

[moonslav59]

31 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

jezzus. really? look at their lineup. they just won a WS. and i'd be willing to bet they win a few more in the next 10 years.

You think they only make good deals?

One ring with all that spending, unless you count 2020, is the model of efficiency and being 2 steps ahead of everyone?

Maybe 3 steps ahead on spending, but I do not think they are the model for good deals. 

Sure, you spend like that, some deals will work, and you'll probably win a ring, here and there. That does not put them ahead of all other teams, and not by 2 steps for sure.

DD has spent a lot, buy has a better success rate on his deals and has as many full season rings as LA.

Texas has spent large and has 1 ring, too.

The Astros have spent way more wisely and made the ALCS 7 years in a row with 2 recent rings.

The Dodgers are two steps ahead of these teams?

[Bellhorn04]

Not counting 2020 is BS, IMHO.  The Dodgers beat the best in the playoffs that year.

Everyone knew what the deal was and agreed to it.  MLB made the best of it in a pandemic.  If anyone thinks it would have been better to cancel the year completely, they're entitled to that opinion, of course. 

And the Dodgers have been killing it in the regular season - 12 straight years in the playoffs.  

4 pennants in the last 8 years.

How much success do you want?

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Not counting 2020 is BS, IMHO.  The Dodgers beat the best in the playoffs that year.

Everyone knew what the deal was and agreed to it.  MLB made the best of it in a pandemic.  If anyone thinks it would have been better to cancel the year completely, they're entitled to that opinion, of course. 

And the Dodgers have been killing it in the regular season - 12 straight years in the playoffs.  

4 pennants in the last 8 years.

How much success do you want?

Not counting 2020 was just copium prior to the Doyers winning the next one. 

[notin]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Not counting 2020 is BS, IMHO.  The Dodgers beat the best in the playoffs that year.

Everyone knew what the deal was and agreed to it.  MLB made the best of it in a pandemic.  If anyone thinks it would have been better to cancel the year completely, they're entitled to that opinion, of course. 

And the Dodgers have been killing it in the regular season - 12 straight years in the playoffs.  

4 pennants in the last 8 years.

How much success do you want?

Counting 2020 bears more relevance than clinging to those World Series titles from the Triassic Period like some fans of a certain team still do…

[Bellhorn04]

And moon, if you're going to play the 'tainted' card, what about 2017?  

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

And moon, if you're going to play the 'tainted' card, what about 2017?  

Or 2007. How was THAT a real WS? The Rockies are barely an MLB franchise! 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Not counting 2020 is BS, IMHO.  The Dodgers beat the best in the playoffs that year.

Everyone knew what the deal was and agreed to it.  MLB made the best of it in a pandemic.  If anyone thinks it would have been better to cancel the year completely, they're entitled to that opinion, of course. 

And the Dodgers have been killing it in the regular season - 12 straight years in the playoffs.  

4 pennants in the last 8 years.

How much success do you want?

My point was not that they have had little success, but only that they have not been "2 steps" ahead of everyone else, except maybe with spending.

They were smart enough to trade for Betts and then extend him. Fine. Count 2020 as equal to other seasons.

The Astros have 2 rings and had 7 straight ALCS appearances. Would you really say the Dodgers have been 2 steps ahead of them, or even one baby step ahead?

How far back do we go on this? If it's 2004, have they been ahead of us? SF? STL?

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

And moon, if you're going to play the 'tainted' card, what about 2017?  

Fair enough. Take it away and HOU still has more league championship appearances than everyone else, even the top 2 combined.

Again, this is about two steps ahead, not the Dodgers sucked.

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

My point was not that they have had little success, but only that they have not been "2 steps" ahead of everyone else, except maybe with spending.

They were smart enough to trade for Betts and then extend him. Fine. Count 2020 as equal to other seasons.

The Astros have 2 rings and had 7 straight ALCS appearances. Would you really say the Dodgers have been 2 steps ahead of them, or even one baby step ahead?

How far back do we go on this? If it's 2004, have they been ahead of us? SF? STL?

I'm certainly not arguing the Astros haven't also been successful.  

But the Dodgers have been roughly just as successful, and they seem well set up to keep it going a while.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm certainly not arguing the Astros haven't also been successful.  

But the Dodgers have been roughly just as successful, and they seem well set up to keep it going a while.

Okay, but my issue was only over the two steps ahead comment. 

I'll agree they have been at least 2 steps ahead of the Sox, since 2018, but not every team- not even one step with some.

They've had more regular season success than almost everyone, except maybe Houston, but the time frame chosen has a lot to do with any rankings by "steps."

They get the FAs they want. In that sense, they could be viewed as several steps ahead of everyone or all but a couple teams (not HOU.)

BTW, I do think 2020 counts, but it does not carry the exact same weight as a full season champ. If you take away Houston's ring during their cheat year, that opens up a can of worms on other teams that cheated, too.

Going by rings, only

BOS: 1 in 7 years. 4 in 21 years

LAD: 2 in 5 years. 2 in 36.

HOU: 2 in 8 years. 2 in forever. (7 straight ALCS in these 8 years)

NYY: 1 in 16 years. 5 in 29 years.

ATL: 1 in last 4 years, 1 in 29 years

TEX: 1 in 2 years. 1 in forever. 

 

PHI

[Duran Is The Man]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Okay, but my issue was only over the two steps ahead comment. 

I'll agree they have been at least 2 steps ahead of the Sox, since 2018, but not every team- not even one step with some.

They've had more regular season success than almost everyone, except maybe Houston, but the time frame chosen has a lot to do with any rankings by "steps."

They get the FAs they want. In that sense, they could be viewed as several steps ahead of everyone or all but a couple teams (not HOU.)

BTW, I do think 2020 counts, but it does not carry the exact same weight as a full season champ. If you take away Houston's ring during their cheat year, that opens up a can of worms on other teams that cheated, too.

Going by rings, only

BOS: 1 in 7 years. 4 in 21 years

LAD: 2 in 5 years. 2 in 36.

HOU: 2 in 8 years. 2 in forever. (7 straight ALCS in these 8 years)

NYY: 1 in 16 years. 5 in 29 years.

ATL: 1 in last 4 years, 1 in 29 years

TEX: 1 in 2 years. 1 in forever. 

 

PHI

wow....you convinced me. i guess we should just quit now, right?

[moonslav59]

43 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

wow....you convinced me. i guess we should just quit now, right?

Yes, that is clearly what I said and meant.

That's what I'm all about and always have been.

[Bellhorn04]

15 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

BTW, I do think 2020 counts, but it does not carry the exact same weight as a full season champ.

Here's what I say: if a Red Sox fan can HONESTLY say that if the Sox won it in 2020, they would not count it or would devalue it on some sort of scale like you, then sure, the same would apply to the Dodgers.

But I'm highly skeptical any Sox fan wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail for that being a totally legit ring. 

[notin]

25 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Here's what I say: if a Red Sox fan can HONESTLY say that if the Sox won it in 2020, they would not count it or would devalue it on some sort of scale like you, then sure, the same would apply to the Dodgers.

But I'm highly skeptical any Sox fan wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail for that being a totally legit ring. 

If the Red Sox won in 2020, in no way would that be legit.  The only way to win when Ryan Webber is your #3 starter is if the fix is if the whole season is fixed…

[Bellhorn04]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

If the Red Sox won in 2020, in no way would that be legit.  The only way to win when Ryan Webber is your #3 starter is if the fix is if the whole season is fixed…

C'mon man, we're in a hypothetical wonderland here, you can't get stuck on what actually happened.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

C'mon man, we're in a hypothetical wonderland here, you can't get stuck on what actually happened.

What actually happened in 2020 is that the LA Dodgers had to win more playoff games (13) than any other postseason team in history to earn their rings. 

How can it be any more legit.

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

What actually happened in 2020 is that the LA Dodgers had to win more playoff games (13) than any other postseason team in history to earn their rings. 

How can it be any more legit.

I agree.  

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Here's what I say: if a Red Sox fan can HONESTLY say that if the Sox won it in 2020, they would not count it or would devalue it on some sort of scale like you, then sure, the same would apply to the Dodgers.

But I'm highly skeptical any Sox fan wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail for that being a totally legit ring. 

I can honestly say, I'd argue it "counts" but not as much as a full season championship.

I have always highly valued the 162 game season as needed to vet out the best of the best.

[Bellhorn04]

15 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I can honestly say, I'd argue it "counts" but not as much as a full season championship.

I have always highly valued the 162 game season as needed to vet out the best of the best.

Really?  Even with all the sub-90 win teams in the WS the last few years?  It seems like you're talking about the way you think things should be, not the way they actually are now.

One of the reasons I say 2020 was totally legit was that the Dodgers and Rays were teams that had a lot of regular season success before and after that year.  They were arguably one of the most legit WS matchups of the last 10-20 years.  They didn't get in there by fluke.

Another point here is that 2020 was NOT the first short season...

 

 

[moonslav59]

14 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Really?  Even with all the sub-90 win teams in the WS the last few years?  It seems like you're talking about the way you think things should be, not the way they actually are now.

One of the reasons I say 2020 was totally legit was that the Dodgers and Rays were teams that had a lot of regular season success before and after that year.  They were arguably one of the most legit WS matchups of the last 10-20 years.  They didn't get in there by fluke.

Another point here is that 2020 was NOT the first short season...

 

 

Yes, I know abt other strike shortened seasons.

I can't forget the '72 season, where we finished 1/2 game out  to the Tigers due to unbalanced schedule, but that was a 155 games long.

1981 was almost 120 games (almost double 2020's length.)

I think '94 was about 105 games long. 

I would say those season champs were slightly tainted, but not by as much as 2020.

I'm t buying the part about them being really good before and after 2020. Sox fans should be well aware how teams can vary from one season to the next.

Again, I am saying the 2020 WS is legit, but I don't count it as equal to a 162 game season champ. The Dodgers did have to win a best of 3 (MIL), a best of 5 (SDP), a best of 7 (ATL) and best of 7 series (TBR) to be champs, and that is not easy. It counts- just not as much.

I can understand your position, and agree it is "legit," but can you really not understand why someone might think it has lesser value?

[Bellhorn04]

24 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I can understand your position, and agree it is "legit," but can you really not understand why someone might think it has lesser value?

To me "lesser value" is just another rabbit hole.  How much lesser value?  Do you count it as 73% of a ring?

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

To me "lesser value" is just another rabbit hole.  How much lesser value?  Do you count it as 73% of a ring?

LOL, now who is pie-charting something?

I'm not sure how much less I value it. I do think it takes 150+ games to get the proper teams identified for the baseball playoffs. 60 falls way short. I do think the Dodgers and Rays were good enough to make the playoffs in 2020, had it been 150+ games, but maybe their seed would have been different, and they'd have played different teams in the playoffs.

To me, the 2020 ring counts less than any other season in the modern era. By how much? I don't know or even care. If you put a gun to my head, maybe I'd say about 10-20% less, which isn't a lot.

Do you think the batting champs and HR leaders should be fully recognized, too?

[Bellhorn04]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

LOL, now who is pie-charting something?

I'm not sure how much less I value it. I do think it takes 150+ games to get the proper teams identified for the baseball playoffs. 60 falls way short. I do think the Dodgers and Rays were good enough to make the playoffs in 2020, had it been 150+ games, but maybe their seed would have been different, and they'd have played different teams in the playoffs.

To me, the 2020 ring counts less than any other season in the modern era. By how much? I don't know or even care. If you put a gun to my head, maybe I'd say about 10-20% less, which isn't a lot.

Do you think the batting champs and HR leaders should be fully recognized, too?

No, I think the 2020 regular season numbers obviously have issues.  That's not the point at all.  The real point is it's the postseason that decides who the champ is. 

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

No, I think the 2020 regular season numbers obviously have issues.  That's not the point at all.  The real point is it's the postseason that decides who the champ is. 

I said I think the ring is legit but not as valued as champs from 150+ seasons. What is wrong with that position? What's the beef? 

Isn't saying the ring is legit, the same position you hold?

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I said I think the ring is legit but not as valued as champs from 150+ seasons. What is wrong with that position? What's the beef? 

Isn't saying the ring is legit, the same position you hold?

moon, this started with you saying:

One ring with all that spending, unless you count 2020

Time to drop this, but I just want to say that if I didn't respect your baseball knowledge and IQ so much I would just ignore things like this instead of arguing them.  

 

[notin]

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

C'mon man, we're in a hypothetical wonderland here, you can't get stuck on what actually happened.

Are you saying winning the World Series with Ryan Weber s as toy number three starter doesn’t belong in fantasyland?

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

Are you saying winning the World Series with Ryan Weber s as toy number three starter doesn’t belong in fantasyland?

In Hypothetical Land, "Toy" Ryan Weber was the #5 starter/swingman on the 2020 champion Red Sox.

[notin]

31 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

To me "lesser value" is just another rabbit hole.  How much lesser value?  Do you count it as 73% of a ring?

I think he’s saying it’s like the Temple of Doom of rings.

Sure it’s part of a legitimate franchise and all.  But no one liked it except Short Round’s parents…