Youk Of The Nation

Just because there are idiots on the internet doesn't mean it is bad for communication. There are idiots everywhere, they're impossible to avoid.

Not that strong. Communication, like everything else, evolves. The internet may have initially played havoc with tone and intent, but on the whole, society has adjusted pretty well to that. Additionally, the internet has brought great boons to communication. It has allowed us to communicate with far more people than we ever would have as a civilization limited to phones or mail. Remember, the internet was originally conceived as a means for scientists and engineers around the world to share information.

You've moved from beating the dead horse to ordering a missile strike on it.

The baseball is entertaining to me, I don't need irrelevant chatter from the announcers. I am entertained by Castiglione and O'Brien, who mostly talk stats and records.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you meant to post this in a different thread.

The audio syncing isn't a problem here in 2015, where you can pause or rewind live TV shows. All I do is pause it and then hit play again until I have the two synced.

I must be in the extreme minority in that I don't really care about this. I don't particularly like baseball television announcers for any team. I prefer it on the radio, because the need for radio announcers to inform you of every pitch and movement eliminates a lot of the inane chatter that goes on to fill up the time. When I watch the Sox on TV, if at all possible I will mute the game and listen to the radio while watching the screen. That being said, I can understand, of course, that most Sox fans, and indeed baseball fans, like baseball on TV and I can understand that most Sox fans love the Orsillo/Remy team. So overall, I don't begrudge anyone their feelings on the matter. I just think there are a lot of things going on with the team on the field and in the offices. The pitching problems, the positional troubles that Hanley is having, the chaos that inevitably results from the transitioning of regimes in the Front Office mid-season, and the overall terrible state of on-field play are all things that are much more important to me than who is giving the play-by-play on TV. You could have Hawk Harrelson or Gilbert Gottfried doing the games, but when it comes down to it, the annoyance or excellence of the announcer has exactly zero impact on the performance of the team. It's not like they can hear the commentary while they're playing. (NOTE: To any Red Sox media personnel who might be reading this comment, please do not actually hire Gilbert Gottfried. That statement was intended as hyperbole.)

I feel like there is a really good pun somewhere in there between Chris Sale and Rick Porcello, whose last name contains the phonetic word "sell", but I am kind of busy with something else at the moment. If you could all just pretend I posted something extremely witty and entertaining and react accordingly, I would be very grateful.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hr8.shtml

Baseball Almanac. I have that, Retrosheet, and Baseball Reference in my favorites bar, they're excellent resources.

I mean, you can't really quantify "worst start". One guy gives up 6 walks and 5 runs in 1.2 innings, another guy doesn't walk anyone and gives up 8 hits and 6 runs in 1.2 innings. You can argue that giving up more runs is worse for your team, obviously, but objectively, which is the "worst start"? I'd say the worst start to any game ever is 2003, when Carl Pavano couldn't even get the first out in that game the Sox beat the Marlins 27 to I think 8 or 9?

12. It's been done twice. Oddly enough, it was the same two teams both times, the Tigers and White Sox

Okay, so it wasn't the worst start overall, it was just the first time that someone had walked 6 and hit 2. That's really, really specific. Other guys have given up way more runs with even less outs, so I wouldn't consider it the worst.

I could tell how awful it was, but I don't think it qualifies as "worst since the 1910's". I'm pretty sure there have been worse just in the short time since I've been a Red Sox fan.

Don't worry, I'm used to hearing that.

You don't like Porcello?! Holy s***, why didn't you say so earlier? I had no idea! Luckily you managed to inform us with a post during a time when no one had been discussing Rick Porcello or even the Red Sox pitching for the last half-hour. Normally I would consider it weird that you would go out of your way to remind us that you don't like someone, but since I've never heard your opinion on this, I'm glad you spoke up. Now if I could just get Ted's opinion of Sandoval's weight, Thunder's opinion of high-school baseball, or JE's opinion of literally anything, I'll finally be in the know!

I'm not sure what else there is to say that I didn't make clear with my first post. I can probably give you at least one person who is above him in every one of those stats who isn't in the HOF (Lance Parrish comes to mind). Posada was good, but so were hundreds of players over the course of history who didn't make the cut. As someone once said, it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good or the Hall of Above Average. By all means, he belongs in the Yankees HOF, the same way Varitek or Wakefield belong in the Red Sox HOF. But none of them belong in the Hall of Fame for baseball. Mariano, yeah. Jeter, yeah. Posada, Williams? No.

Okay, but my point remains, not for baseball.

I didn't say anything about any specific players, let alone Posada. You just had a three-consecutive-post argument with invisible, hypothetical Red Sox fans. Perhaps your impassioned and completely unprovoked defense of Posada is a sign that deep down, you know he's not really a "borderline" HOFer? Yeah, he's 10th in HR, 13th in RBI, 7th in OBP...for the Yankees. Not for baseball. In baseball, he's a slightly-above-average guy whose stats benefited from durability and longevity.

A Monument Park dedicated to players who haven't had their numbers retired by the Yankees would be significantly smaller. In less than a decade they're going to be forced to use three-digit numbers, or fractions.

Yeah, I saw that one. 1.2IP, 5ER, 6BB. That's awful, but we've seen much worse since even 2000, let alone the 1910s. Hell, while I was looking for the game, I was reminded of the stats from another game against Toronto in 2012, when Lester gave up 9H, 11ER, and 5BB in 4 innings.

Okay, so I have to ask out of curiosity. Which start was this? I checked the game logs for 2012 on Baseball Reference, and I can't find this game. There was only one game in all of 2012 where the Jays even scored a "humiliating" amount of runs against the Sox, and Bard didn't pitch in that game. Bard had a couple losses against Toronto in that season, but from what I can see on BR, none of them were even close to the worst start since the 1910s.

Bogaerts is leading the league in batting average with RISP, I'd rather have someone with that stat in the middle of the lineup.

Sounds perfect to me...

Considering the way things have gone this season, I wouldn't be surprised if this game ended up featuring dueling no-hitters until the 7th inning.