- 04:47 PM
- 11/07/09
Australia beat England, and Australia beat France.
posted by owlhouse at 04:27 PM on November 07
Yeah, a bit of a surprise result, as Melbourne were going so well.
Kevin might be mellowing in his old age.
posted by owlhouse at 04:22 PM on November 07
I notice that the Entertainment and Sports Plagiarizing Network has pulled the article and made the appropriate attributions.
Maybe they are just tired after all of that inter-office sex they have.
posted by THX-1138 at 03:13 PM on November 07
This is shaping up as my worst week EVAR, especially with Bent as captain.
posted by yerfatma at 01:55 PM on November 07
I'm not sure Pat Summit would make a good NBA coach. The successful college coach that makes the jump and is a successful NBA coach is rare. Lieberman might be the best candidate at the moment. She has pro coaching experience, and was successful as a pro coach. She can't be any worse than Michael Curry...
posted by MeatSaber at 01:31 PM on November 07
Weedy, 20 year old smokey is coming out of my lungs I laughed so hard!
posted by billsaysthis at 01:26 PM on November 07
Owlie I saw Muscat and Melbourne against CCM last night, thanks to a certain barking puppy, he is a tough customer but his team were nowhere to be found in the second half.
posted by billsaysthis at 01:25 PM on November 07
Thanks for posting this. I kept meaning to and forgetting. It will definitely be interesting to see if this works out. Hopefully being in the D-League will mean the players are more willing to work with any coach.
posted by yerfatma at 12:41 PM on November 07
It would be great if a qualified female coach got a shot at coaching an NBA team.
As long as they themselves had never been coached by Laimbeer and Mahorn (just kidding).
I can think of a handful of knuckleheads on various NBA teams right now that I'd love to put on one squad and let Pat Summit go straighten 'em out. I'm guessing she would know how to do that. I know I wouldn't want to mess with her.
When she gets that look in her eyes during a game, I have to turn my head away and cut off the TV before the producer calls for a closeup shot and I get caught staring and turn into ashes.
posted by beaverboard at 12:37 PM on November 07
ESPN plagiarized a post on one of its blogs, taking the full text of a ProFootballTalk item.
posted by rcade at 10:57 AM on November 07
Whoa. I don't understand the pile-on on kerrycindy.
There's nothing like a consensus opinion to change someone's mind.
posted by dfleming at 10:55 AM on November 07
After hearing that Lambert has been indefinitely suspended from the program, I am shocked UNM's head coach was not suspended as well. The coach later made a statement saying Lambert's actions crossed the line of fair play and sportsmanship. Really? No kidding. So why didn't you substitute her out before it got really ugly? What in the world were you waiting for? The kid clearly snapped for whatever reason, and you continued to play her anyway? I think if I was the BYU coach, my anger would have been directed toward the NM coaching staff for letting it continue when the referee clearly wasn't putting a stop to it. Instead of recognizing she was out of control and removing her, she was allowed to continue and has now probably played her last college soccer game. Does Lambert deserve this punishment? Absolutely. Could it have been avoided early on and perhaps saved a student-athlete from doing further damage to other players as well as her own athletic career? Absolutely.
posted by eccsport78 at 05:39 AM on November 07
She shouldn't be suspended, she should be arrested. That was assault. A neck could've been broken. There's a vast difference between good hard play and what happened there.
posted by bobfoot at 02:43 AM on November 07
There are probably 10 sports (not Yankees-specific) sites that were able to discuss the outcome of the series without turning it into a forum on baseball economics. Here's one. What's funny about that is that BBTF is reputed to be a collection of stathead number crunchers, and yet there's more of the kind of emotional response and camaraderie there than you are apparently hoping for here when you describe intelligent sports communities. Yeesh.
did you even look at that silly site? It's just a collection of one liners...no discussion or debate on a single item. If you want to say "congrat's Yankees!" and think that's somehow interesting, please go back to that site.
The Yankees have had this enormous financial advantage for several years. Why is this the first time they've won?
Beyond justgary's reply, I'd like to add that the Yankee's money keeps them as contenders every year. They don't have to keep going through the rebuilding years that small market teams do when they can't afford to resign their top players. Because Steinbrenner can't sign every top player, other teams do have a chance, and collectively the league has denied the Yankees from winning the WS the past few years. That doesn't really diminish the fact that the Yankees had a huge advantage each of those years.
posted by dviking at 12:14 AM on November 07
I definitely thought of ZZ number two in MeatSaber's link. Especially since he's fresh in my head with his ridiculous promo for Adidas with Leo Messi.
posted by boredom_08 at 12:02 AM on November 07
At least Lions fans can say, "There's no Matt Millen."
Very, very true.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:50 PM on November 06
This column on ESPN pretty much sums up my feelings on Manuel.
And at some point, isn't it the players' responsibility to perform (and cover third on the Damon steal)? Jimmy Rollins, Shane Victorino, Ryan Howard (10 strikeouts!) and Raul Ibanez are all at, or below, the Mendoza Line. They need to get going because Chase Utley can't do it alone. And even Utley, as productive as he's been (another home run and an RBI double Sunday), will need to break out against a pitcher not named Sabathia. He is 4-for-6 with three homers and a double against CC but 0-for-9 against everyone else.
posted by justgary at 11:25 PM on November 06
If we had gotten a game 7, the decision to start Cole Hamels over Cliff Lee was huge.
We had an interesting discussion, but I don't think there was ever a thought to pitch Lee. Did I miss where Manuel even suggested it was possible? And as I said in the other thread, Lee gave up 5 in 7 on full rest. I'm not sure how you could even expect that level of performance on 2 days.
Another thing I've been meaning to bring up was Manuel's decision to let Pedro Martinez face Hideki Matsui in the third inning. At that point, Matsui had homered in the second inning and was 8-for-18 with four doubles, two homers and four RBIs against Martinez in postseason play. I think he had gotten a hit in every at-bat versus Martinez in this series.
But that was already a part of my award winning game analysis. I thought it was the worst move of the series. Pedro had nothing. Unforgivable to leave him in against Matsui.
I think this was a close series, but Manuel's managing blew the Phillies' chance and will hang around his neck like an albatross.
A play here, a play there, it could have gone the other way. But I don't think it was that close. I think the Yankees were clearly superior, and only held back by a lack of starting pitching depth; a problem they'll solve over the off season.
And I disagree about Manuel. He made mistakes, but when your closer is horrid and your cleanup hitter hits .174 there's only so much you can do. It's much easier to just pencil in Rivera to finish off every game.
posted by justgary at 11:18 PM on November 06
In exchange for Johan Santana, the Twins now have 2 minor leaguers, Phillip Humber (of the 9.00 ERA) and JJ Hardy? They could have had Clay Bucholz or Jon Lester if you believe the rumors around the time of the trade, do you think the GM is kicking himself now?
posted by Demophon at 11:18 PM on November 06
But I don't think that much analysis is necessary.
I thought this Series had a lot of great storylines that provoked discussion. If we had gotten a game 7, the decision to start Cole Hamels over Cliff Lee was huge. I was looking forward to Charlie Manuel caving in and proving why Lee wasn't meant to start on so little rest.
Another thing I've been meaning to bring up was Manuel's decision to let Pedro Martinez face Hideki Matsui in the third inning. At that point, Matsui had homered in the second inning and was 8-for-18 with four doubles, two homers and four RBIs against Martinez in postseason play. I think he had gotten a hit in every at-bat versus Martinez in this series.
I think this was a close series, but Manuel's managing blew the Phillies' chance and will hang around his neck like an albatross.
posted by rcade at 11:01 PM on November 06
This thread has no game analysis, no series analysis, really nothing much except for protracted attempts to diminish the accomplishments of the victors.
What I said in this thread:
But the phillies also have themselves to blame. Werth being picked off first. Not covering 3rd and allowing Damon to steal two bases. Victorino misjudging a flyball last night. Mistake after mistake. Not even including Pedro being allowed to face Matsui with an 85 mph fastball.
But they weren't going to win with 3 runs anyway. I thought it was a pretty pathetic performance by the Phillies outside of Lee and Utley. They deserved to lose.
Did you want deeper series analysis? Is that why you ignored what I wrote? Sure, nothing I wrote wasn't apparent to most fans, but it was far more detailed than anything on the first page of the forum you linked.
But I don't think that much analysis is necessary. The yankees won because they had the better team. I don't think it was that close. So why are the Yankees so much better? Well, for one, they have the money to sign better players, to have a deeper team. I find that topic interesting. Not only in the aspect of the Yankee WS victory, but in baseball as a whole. Will other teams spend more? Will the Yankees spend less?
You pointed to the BBTD forum, and I've read one page. I have no idea what I've suppose to take from that. If you enjoy it, great. Different forums appeal to different people.
I'm not denying chemistry is involved. I find it ludicrous to believe it has more to do than the talent of the team. That's just my opinion. You can disagree. You can bring it up. I'm not sure where the discussion goes from there, however. And when I quoted what you wrote about the Yankee team your responded sarcastically. I'm guessing you have a point that I'm missing, but it appears you simply wish to argue and play the martyr.
posted by justgary at 10:55 PM on November 06
You're right. I don't care.
Then buzz off. SportsFilter is for people who care about the discussions, not for people who just want to ensure that their "fan contingent" is properly represented.
posted by rcade at 10:54 PM on November 06
You, on the other hand, cared so much about how SportsFilter covers the series that you didn't post a single link or make a single comment about games until this discussion, when your main point seems to be that we're talking about the wrong things and making Yankees fans feel unwelcome.
You're right. I don't care. I was only seconding an observation that had already been made and putting my own spin in defense of that position. The thread was steered in one direction, and there appears to have been no Yankee-fan contingent to have steered it another way. How surprising given the graciousness with which their victories are met by the non-fans here.
posted by EnglishSpin at 10:46 PM on November 06
This thread has no game analysis, no series analysis, really nothing much except for protracted attempts to diminish the accomplishments of the victors. ... There are probably 10 sports (not Yankees-specific) sites that were able to discuss the outcome of the series without turning it into a forum on baseball economics.
That's a pretty amazing thing to say coming from someone who hasn't posted any game analysis yourself. There was plenty of specific game commentary in the links about the last five games. You ignored all of that, yet had the time to scour 10 other sites whose standards SportsFilter did not meet.
I love people who can go into a detailed analysis of why we suck but can't seem to find that Post link atop the page. SportsFilter is what people make of it. You're making it a place to sit on your hands and bitch about what other people are doing, which makes it less likely for them to go to the bother of contributing in the future. Thanks.
posted by rcade at 10:41 PM on November 06
Second, there's nothing bleak about the Rogers Hornsby quote. It's a beautiful testament to the greatness of baseball.
First comment in the 2007 Red Sox WS victory thread:
Time to start the countdown to pitchers and catchers.
posted by justgary at 10:32 PM on November 06
Yep, that's what I said, justgary. I said throw out all analysis and meaningful commentary on baseball and only discuss pies. I'm all about the pie.
In the Philly thread last year, pretty much everyone made a comment about who they were happy or unhappy for. Where's the analysis in that? That sounds like an emotional response. Your comment about being happy for Jamie Moyer but not Bret Meyer [sic], is that because of some analytical study you've done of their career salaries to production, or are you responding to them emotionally in some way? Please tell me what's open here. Inter-player chemistry is ridiculous, but fan-player chemistry is meaningful discussion? And these are somehow completely independent of each other?
There are probably 10 sports (not Yankees-specific) sites that were able to discuss the outcome of the series without turning it into a forum on baseball economics. Here's one. What's funny about that is that BBTF is reputed to be a collection of stathead number crunchers, and yet there's more of the kind of emotional response and camaraderie there than you are apparently hoping for here when you describe intelligent sports communities. Yeesh.
Make whatever you want of the site. This thread has no game analysis, no series analysis, really nothing much except for protracted attempts to diminish the accomplishments of the victors. I'm just repeating here what lil_brown_bat pointed out. If that's cool with you, have at it. I'm not too personally psyched for reading about sports that has the human element tucked away behind facts and analysis, but that's just my opinion - I'm not asking you to change anything and I'm already aware of where the door is.
posted by EnglishSpin at 10:32 PM on November 06
Maybe good team chemistry did have something to do with it. And why should Yankee fans be banished to another site to discuss it?
Nobody is banishing Yankees fans. Anyone could have posted a link about the time Joe Girardi took them cow tipping and bought them all TCBY afterwards and Joba Chamberlain laughed so hard that white chocolate mousse came out his nose, and if people think that's worth more than a $66 million payroll advantage they're free to make that case.
posted by rcade at 10:29 PM on November 06
Why can't the community discuss both?
They can. But if members would rather discuss the payroll advantage than the fact that CC takes players out to dinner, then you can either join in or ignore it.
The Yankees have had this enormous financial advantage for several years. Why is this the first time they've won?
It's been answered multiple times in this thread. Because they finally spent the money wisely. Signing an old Roger Clemens, bad. CC, good. Giambi as a first baseman, bad. Texiera, good. Why is the 2009 team better than 08? Because statistically they're better.
I don't think it's a mystery why the Yankees won. In fact, I'm not sure much in sports is clearer. If someone wants to believe it's because of Chemistry, have at it.
And why should Yankee fans be banished to another site to discuss it?
Don't read more into my comment than is there. I said that if Yankee fans want to ignore the payroll and talk about Chemistry, this site probable isn't for them. In other words, they probably aren't going to be happy.
posted by justgary at 10:27 PM on November 06
Last year you opened the thread with how much more exciting the Series was than you thought it would be at the end. This year, you opened with the bleak wait for next year. Then in your next comment, your first editorial on this Series, you said you hate it when the Yankees spend their money well. I don't even know if this is qualified praise -- it seems to be lacking an essential element.
If I had known you were going to climb so far up my ass I would've drunk some barium. Let me know if you find polyps.
First, my comment last year about the Phillies was because the game was resumed after being suspended for two days, and for that reason I expected the end to be anticlimactic. That's what I meant by it being more exciting than anticipated.
Second, there's nothing bleak about the Rogers Hornsby quote. It's a beautiful testament to the greatness of baseball.
Third, I've posted front-page links after every game in this World Series. In each one, I linked to the winning team's local media, linked to the MLB game story and dug up additional links to provide more context on the game. You, on the other hand, cared so much about how SportsFilter covers the series that you didn't post a single link or make a single comment about games until this discussion, when your main point seems to be that we're talking about the wrong things and making Yankees fans feel unwelcome.
Fourth, it's pretty amazing to be criticized for insufficient Yankees praise in a discussion where I said, "The Yankees are a terrific team and a worthy champion." What do I gotta do to make you people happy -- kiss Derek Jeter's intangibles?
Finally, you and any other Yankees fans feeling sorry for yourselves in triumph can buzz off. Yankees fans are as welcome on SportsFilter as any other fans when they talk about quantifiable subjects in an intelligent manner. But when they wallow in self-pity and expect the rest of the world to buy into their mythology like we're all a bunch of homers from the Bronx, they're going to catch some well-deserved hell.
If you don't like that, then all I can say is Yankee go home.
posted by rcade at 10:17 PM on November 06
Gosh weedy, thanks for the understanding. I must clear up one fact though. I am Kerry and Cindy is my wife. I post and she usually laughs at my posts and brow beats me when I make stupid social faux paus. I post most everywhere as kerrycindy as we are inseperable. I am now going to fade into the woodwork on Sports Filter for a while and study you people for cues on proper social interaction.
And owlhouse, my boy would like to wish you and your son goodtimes ahead, and I second those sentiments.
posted by kerrycindy at 10:15 PM on November 06
That an intelligent sports community should ignore what is measurable and real and instead discuss AJ throwing pies, well, again, seems comical.
Why can't the community discuss both? The Yankees have had this enormous financial advantage for several years. Why is this the first time they've won? Maybe good team chemistry did have something to do with it. And why should Yankee fans be banished to another site to discuss it?
The Payroll is certainly worthy of discussion but it shouldn't be the whole discussion.
posted by cjets at 10:04 PM on November 06
Whoa. I don't understand the pile-on on kerrycindy. She is coming from a good place here. It's just that it's a bad idea. That's all.
And context is everything.
And finanlly - this place is one of the most polite places on the whole internet. Seriously. It's a great example of a successful online community.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:47 PM on November 06
I'm so performance enhanced, I'm basically metahuman. I make the TV quit.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:37 PM on November 06
Wouldn't it be reasonably likely that Girardi has a few in celebration with his team?
He probably did have quite a few...poured on his head, sprayed in his face, drained down his back.
You don't see the guys drinking that much of the champagne. The bottles are usually wielded like super-soakers instead.
posted by grum@work at 09:35 PM on November 06
Here's the thread from the Phillies championship last year.
Here's the team payrolls for 2008. Certainly you can see why no one brought up payroll in that thread.
The chemistry of the team has been a storyline all year. Girardi drops a day of training to take the club out to play pool. CC takes everybody out to dinner. Nick Swisher is apparently told to crank up the music in the clubhouse. AJ starts throwing pies at guys, and the New York media starts losing their minds over whether or not that fits the "Yankee Way."
Honestly, if someone wants to have discussions on CC taking everyone out to dinner, and nick swisher playing music, and AJ throwing pies, this isn't the site for them. It never has been, and hopefully never will be. There are at least 10 yankee sites I know where you can romanticize the championship and talk about what a difference team chemistry made this year and completely ignore the payroll.
That an intelligent sports community should ignore what is measurable and real and instead discuss AJ throwing pies, well, again, seems comical.
posted by justgary at 09:29 PM on November 06
The idea that a championship team was also a group of guys that liked each other is a pointless set of laurels bestowed by fans after the fact because it's pleasant to imagine a team that way. None of us are privy to the 2009 Yankees' locker room, so why argue about it?
posted by yerfatma at 08:04 PM on November 06
The chemistry of the team has been a storyline all year. Girardi drops a day of training to take the club out to play pool. CC takes everybody out to dinner. Nick Swisher is apparently told to crank up the music in the clubhouse. AJ starts throwing pies at guys, and the New York media starts losing their minds over whether or not that fits the "Yankee Way."
As the Yankees were dropping the ALCS in 2004, everyone was commenting that they looked "tight." A-Rod looked "tight." They had relievers vomiting in the bullpen when they were leading the series 3-1. Now that the Yankees have won, the team's attitude is no longer subject to discussion? That they have been a visibly looser team this year than in recent years past is not a meaningful observation as it coincides with their success?
Sheesh. If you want to defend the Yankees on the merits, I'm eager to have that discussion. But if you're just going to slam people for not being unqualified enough in their praise, what's the point? You don't seem to be making any effort at all to see how this looks to fans of the other 29 teams.
posted by rcade at 05:57 PM on November 06
Why should it look different than any other team's championship to the other 29 teams that didn't win? Here's the thread from the Phillies championship last year.
Last year you opened the thread with how much more exciting the Series was than you thought it would be at the end. This year, you opened with the bleak wait for next year. Then in your next comment, your first editorial on this Series, you said you hate it when the Yankees spend their money well. I don't even know if this is qualified praise -- it seems to be lacking an essential element.
You can paint this any way you want. This thread isn't inviting to fans of the team that won the World Series in anything close to the way that it was for the Phillies. Like it or not, and it sure seems like the former, this is no place that any kind of NYY fan would want to go to discuss their team's victory.
posted by EnglishSpin at 08:46 PM on November 06
Okay, made it.
BC by 10 Montreal by 17 Calgary by 8 TiCats by 20
posted by rahilsuleman at 08:23 PM on November 06
so shouting down this observation as not worthy of discussion seems to me to be out of bounds.
I think the general sentiment here is that it's not worthy of discussion because it's a "Chicken or Egg" problem, regardless of single examples cited. You've provided one unhappy team that won*. Do you honestly think we can't find teams that are remembered as friendly that lost? Seems like that's the history of the Brooklyn Dodgers. And those lovable early Mets. The idea that a championship team was also a group of guys that liked each other is a pointless set of laurels bestowed by fans after the fact because it's pleasant to imagine a team that way. None of us are privy to the 2009 Yankees' locker room, so why argue about it?
* The 1986 Red Sox, while remembered as chokers, might be an even better example. They won 90+ games, got to the Series, all with a team where some of the players spent Spring Training breaking into teammates' motel rooms to take pictures of them cheating on their wives as blackmail ammunition.
posted by yerfatma at 08:04 PM on November 06
It's definitely a performance enhancer. As long as you're trying to sit and watch 12 straight hours of TV.
posted by yerfatma at 07:57 PM on November 06
Getting caught with a misdemeanor amount of weed shouldn't even be news, and it certainly shouldn't trigger any kind of testing or suspension for Lincecum.
Marijuana is a banned substance in MLB. MLB testing for drugs of abuse is done on a basis of reasonable cause. Maybe you're arguing that the policy shouldn't exist but given that it does this is pretty cut-and-dried reasonable cause to test. If it was a syringe and just a tiny amount of steroids, people would be going batshit. How is this different?
(On edit: of course I mean how is it different in the eyes of MLB's banned substance policy, not how is marijuana different than steroids. That's not really material here.)
posted by EnglishSpin at 07:54 PM on November 06
You could always compare Snyder to some kind of inoperable cyst.
As a San Diegan, I really wish we weren't the lock of the week.
posted by LionIndex at 06:50 PM on November 06
Now if they could only develop streak-resistant underwear, I could get behind that, sure.
Now why would anybody want to get behind someone with a tendency to streak his underwear? At least close behind, that is.
Didn't we have a discussion of flatulence in the huddle a while back?
posted by Howard_T at 06:44 PM on November 06
Anyone who is driving a Mercedes within 5 miles after crossing a state border has to understand that he has a big target on his back. Even a few MPH over the limit, and Mr. Smokey is requesting an immediate interview. I'm not condemning Lincecum for his choice of tobacco, but for his apparent lack of awareness of the habits of the Highway Patrol.
posted by Howard_T at 06:35 PM on November 06
OK, I'll be the first to try my hand.
Washington's nickname
So ugly on its face ist
Has to be racist
I know I spelled it "ist". It's called poetic license, and I got mine on line at a diploma mill.
posted by Howard_T at 06:26 PM on November 06
I'm waiting for the limerick edition. Or did I miss that one already?
posted by graymatters at 06:22 PM on November 06
This protest seems bogus to me. The only reason Chiefs fans are willing to sacrifice Larry Johnson is because his recent performance makes him expendable. If he was still gaining 1,700 yards a year, you'd be all too happy for him to be the team's all-time rushing leader. Newsflash: He was probably a jerk during his all-pro seasons too.
posted by rcade at 06:06 PM on November 06
Please recall for me where I used the word liar.
Here ya go: "I'm tired of your lying to yourselves about why the Yankees win and why their fans like them."
I'd love it if every thread announcing a championship was met with this kind of response. I'd really love it. It would put SportsFilter in the toilet in a month, and serve you right for being an apologist for this kind of thing.
Sheesh. If you want to defend the Yankees on the merits, I'm eager to have that discussion. But if you're just going to slam people for not being unqualified enough in their praise, what's the point? You don't seem to be making any effort at all to see how this looks to fans of the other 29 teams.
Getting back to the facts, an argument has been made that the Yankees win because their owner spends more to win, and if other teams weren't run by cheapskates the payroll disparity wouldn't be so huge.
To see whether that might be true, I put together an Excel spreadsheet with the net worth of each team according to Forbes (in millions), the team payrolls (in millions), and the percentage of net worth devoted to payrolls, by team.
Here they are, ranked from the biggest spender on down:
| Team | Net Worth (Millions) | Payroll (Million) | Pct. Spent |
| Detroit Tigers | $371 | $115 | 31.00% |
| Seattle Mariners | $426 | $98 | 23.00% |
| Houston Astros | $445 | $102 | 22.92% |
| Philadelphia Phillies | $496 | $113 | 22.78% |
| Milwaukee Brewers | $347 | $79 | 22.77% |
| Toronto Blue Jays | $353 | $80 | 22.66% |
| Kansas City Royals | $314 | $70 | 22.29% |
| Los Angeles Angels | $509 | $113 | 22.20% |
| Atlanta Braves | $446 | $96 | 21.52% |
| Chicago White Sox | $450 | $96 | 21.33% |
| Cincinnati Reds | $342 | $70 | 20.47% |
| Cleveland Indians | $399 | $81 | 20.30% |
| Colorado Rockies | $373 | $75 | 20.11% |
| Tampa Bay Rays | $320 | $63 | 19.69% |
| Oakland Athletics | $319 | $62 | 19.44% |
| Chicago Cubs | $700 | $135 | 19.29% |
| Arizona Diamondbacks | $390 | $73 | 18.72% |
| Minnesota Twins | $356 | $65 | 18.26% |
| St. Louis Cardinals | $486 | $88 | 18.11% |
| San Francisco Giants | $471 | $82 | 17.41% |
| Texas Rangers | $405 | $68 | 16.79% |
| Baltimore Orioles | $400 | $67 | 16.75% |
| Pittsburgh Pirates | $288 | $48 | 16.67% |
| New York Mets | $912 | $135 | 14.80% |
| Boston Red Sox | $833 | $122 | 14.65% |
| Washington Nationals | $406 | $59 | 14.53% |
| Los Angeles Dodgers | $722 | $100 | 13.85% |
| New York Yankees | $1,500 | $201 | 13.40% |
| Florida Marlins | $277 | $36 | 13.00% |
| San Diego Padres | $401 | $42 | 10.47% |
If every team's payroll was equal to 20% of its net worth, here's how the salaries would break down:
| Team | Net Worth (Millions) | Payroll (Millions) |
| New York Yankees | $1,500 | $300 |
| New York Mets | $912 | $182 |
| Boston Red Sox | $833 | $167 |
| Los Angeles Dodgers | $722 | $144 |
| Chicago Cubs | $700 | $140 |
| Los Angeles Angels | $509 | $102 |
| Philadelphia Phillies | $496 | $99 |
| St. Louis Cardinals | $486 | $97 |
| San Francisco Giants | $471 | $94 |
| Chicago White Sox | $450 | $90 |
| Atlanta Braves | $446 | $89 |
| Houston Astros | $445 | $89 |
| Seattle Mariners | $426 | $85 |
| Washington Nationals | $406 | $81 |
| Texas Rangers | $405 | $81 |
| San Diego Padres | $401 | $80 |
| Baltimore Orioles | $400 | $80 |
| Cleveland Indians | $399 | $80 |
| Arizona Diamondbacks | $390 | $78 |
| Colorado Rockies | $373 | $75 |
| Detroit Tigers | $371 | $74 |
| Minnesota Twins | $356 | $71 |
| Toronto Blue Jays | $353 | $71 |
| Milwaukee Brewers | $347 | $69 |
| Cincinnati Reds | $342 | $68 |
| Tampa Bay Rays | $320 | $64 |
| Oakland Athletics | $319 | $64 |
| Kansas City Royals | $314 | $63 |
| Pittsburgh Pirates | $288 | $58 |
| Florida Marlins | $277 | $55 |
posted by rcade at 05:57 PM on November 06
yours is clearly a popular point here
But not other places where smart people actually think about things?
a casual examination of the history of the Yankees should illustrate that "have fun doing it" is a meaningful distinction from other of their championship teams
So the run in the late 90s was all business? Paul O'Neill and Scott Brosius lobbied to change the team unis to bespoke Saville Row pinstripe suits? Also, throwing the word "casual" in there is a less-than-subtle "Fuck you" that would have been best left thought but unsaid.
posted by yerfatma at 07:36 AM on November 06
Addessing your second comment first, by "casual" I meant that you didn't have to have clubhouse access or be an avid reader of team exposes to know that the Yankees championship teams of the '70s didn't get along, didn't have good chemistry in the clubhouse. I know of Yankee fans that broke off from that team even though they were winning because they couldn't stand the zoo atmosphere. So I would think it's not out of line for a fan to recognize how much this team seems to get along, because there is an implied contrast to other championship teams. Whatever other subtext you've put into that statement wasn't intended.
On the first point, I don't know why I would raise other places of discussion in this forum, but this is the second thread on this site in which there appeared to me to be a majority dismissal of club chemistry as being worthy of discussion. So I guess I wouldn't be able to find a place where smart people think about it because it would have already been dismissed out of hand. I just gave an example of a winning club in the same franchise that didn't have good chemistry. The original comment that was responded to wasn't indicating anything more than that, despite the burden of the highest payroll and the constant weight of the heaviest of expectations and the egos that would presumably come with a club of superstars, the team seemed to have fun. This is an organization that has a reputation for being corporate and unfun and has been criticized roundly for it, so shouting down this observation as not worthy of discussion seems to me to be out of bounds.
posted by EnglishSpin at 05:39 PM on November 06
Which proves my point about Australians just talking a tough game.
Well, fatty, there's being tough on the ball, and then there's Kevin Muscat.
posted by owlhouse at 05:28 PM on November 06
How, after all this time, could I dare to still pick the Double E? 'Cause I'm still pickin' with my heart, not my head. Logically, after bein' burned in both previous meetings against the Lions, the Eskimos are valid underdogs. However, we got burned BAD the first meeting at Commonwealth. We got burned really BAD in the second (that whole Geroy last minute TD thang). But I've seen Ricky win a Grey Cup in the din of the dome in Vancouver. Eventhough they just haven't put it together consistently yet, they aren't that bad of a ball club. Besides, Edmonton went the eastern route to no avail last year. Let the Lions do that this time around. Edmonton by 8.
You know what? I hate to say it, but Andrus is gonna finally convince his squad to go out with some class. The Argo performance in Edmonton last week was embarrassing. They need to do "something" to salvage any sense of dignity. As such, they might just make a contest of this one. BAAA HHHAAAAHAAAHAAAA! Did you think I was serious? Even if they do put their best foot forward, the Alouette machine is too greased to get a grip on. Montreal by 21 ... and that'll be with the foot off the gas for the second half.
Holy coin toss, Batman! Can the Riders rebound from a stinker performance last week? Are the Stamps really peaking at the right time? The Riders are a better ball club than the Lions. And there's that whole tie to resolve from these two teams' last meeting. I mean it might not be that crazy to pick a draw this time around also. In the end, I think there can be only one ... and since they are LONG overdue, I'll have to think that the Riders are primed to actually win the Western Conference ... make the Stamps earn the right to play at home by having to play the semi. Sasquatchewan by 3 even if that FG comes in OT, it's still gonna be three.
Drumroll please .................................................. frankly, a Bomber win would just be wrong ... wrong for the league ... wrong karmically ... the TiCats deserve the home field ... and will surely get the Bomber monkey off their backs to end this season. Hamilton by 10.
oh ... one more thing ... LET'S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOO GREEN & GOOOOOOOOLD!!!!!!!!
posted by Spitztengle at 05:27 PM on November 06
tahoe, get outta my head...first thing I thought when I saw Z Z...that and this guy...
posted by MeatSaber at 05:17 PM on November 06
This is the same MLB that came down on John Rocker for things he said out of season and uniform? Don't think they might come down on Lince a bit?
posted by MeatSaber at 05:14 PM on November 06
But those two probably mate like Klingons.
I know what that's like.
posted by THX-1138 at 05:13 PM on November 06
Is anyone else surprised by how ESPN is covering this?
No, given that SportsCenter's coverage continues to make the ESPN Deportes team cringe.
Where's the ref? If you're going to play the hard-case centre-back, then you're either sneaky and get away with it, or blatant and go into the book. Blatant and getting away with it means the ref is AWOL.
posted by etagloh at 05:13 PM on November 06
Rashomon ... they make those little boilable noodle packs, right?
No, those are the little trading card monster things my 7 year old is so fond of.
posted by THX-1138 at 05:09 PM on November 06
Apology accepted, kerrycindy. People have said worse things about me in this place*!
Internet threads aren't really good places to pick up on subleties of communication, so it must be hard for you. My own son enjoys his interactions on the net, although he prefers non-sports forums. He was diagnosed at 6, but with patience and help at 14 he is improving in dealing with reading, processing and responding to emotions, in all parts of his life. He has even developed a wicked sense of humour.
Good luck with raising your boy.
*Something about me and Fidel Castro springs to mind.
posted by owlhouse at 05:05 PM on November 06
As the ones that make his ridiculous paychecks possible, we feel it IS our business. The current rushing leader for the organization is Priest Holmes. Priest was the epitome of hard work, humility, and kindness while he was here. We don't want to see him supplanted by an ungrateful brat with a chip on his shoulder, mommy issues and a rap sheet that is rapidly approaching felon status.
posted by Tinman at 05:04 PM on November 06
No, it's not hard. Just because it's beyond you doesn't mean that it's hard.
Oh come on. You've got a world-class pair of blinders. It's a chicken and egg thing: are the Yankees good because they're amazingly talented or are they amazingly talented because the Yankees can afford to pay the best wage? When the As or the Twins win, the reason's clear. When the Red Sox or Yankees do, it can either be inherent genius or it can be a bigger wallet. Same thing with kids at Harvard. Some are there because they're wicked smaht, some are there because they're wicked rich. Maybe the rich kids are smart as well, but you can't ever know they'd have made it without the dollars.
posted by yerfatma at 04:57 PM on November 06
Wasn't he carrying his California prescription with him?
posted by owlhouse at 04:55 PM on November 06
Which proves my point about Australians just talking a tough game.
posted by yerfatma at 04:54 PM on November 06
"That's not the kind of player I am."
Unfortunately Ms Lambert, it is. Heat of the moment retaliation is one thing, but what you did was premeditated, repetitive and vicious. If you did it on the street, you'd be in court.
If any one of my players behaved like that, they would never play for the club or association again.
posted by owlhouse at 04:50 PM on November 06
The elbow and the punch was a bit much but HOLY COW the hair pull. And MAN did she ever sell it like death too!
Dude, take another look at the hair pull. Her neck was stretched back which made it a more dangerous manuever than just a hair pull.
posted by BornIcon at 04:29 PM on November 06
In the context of the postings, it is a power stat. Justgary stated that ARod was performing better because he had a higher OPS than Jeter. The slugging factor in OPS is important for a cleanup hitter. It is far less important for a leadoff hitter.
Playoff OBP for Jeter = .383. Playoff OBP for ARod = .409
Breaking it down, only in the divisional series does Jeter have a better OBP (.417 / .364). In the league championship series it's not even close with ARod leading .462 to .347 (ARod has higher WS OBP but isn't a good comparison since Jeter's sample size is so much bigger).
If it's the job of a lead off hitter is too get on base, ARod would be a better leadoff hitter. No matter what math you want to use, Arod's a better hitter.
posted by justgary at 04:25 PM on November 06
Very much the point I was making graymatters.
posted by Tinman at 04:16 PM on November 06
The sample size is plenty large enough to hold validity, in fact it's probably several times larger than it really needs to be. All that is really needed is fairly equal representation from each team. If they told me that two players from each team were interviewed I'd be totally fine with the results.
Keep in mind that players on teams talk, and they all view films, so if a guy is a cheap shot artist, they get talked about. I doubt a guy could make the list to the level that Ward did without some validity to it. Guys on the bottom of the list might get there due to just one, or two hits, but you don't get top billing without some consistent level of dirty play. Twice as many listed Ward as they did the second place guy. That does send a message.
Unless someone can prove that they only talked to AFC defensive players, or all of the Bengal players and none of the Steelers, I think the survey hold water. Keep in mind that the league fined him twice last year, so it's not exactly virgin territory to be calling Ward a cheap shot.
posted by dviking at 04:15 PM on November 06
Who is MATH, and what is he doing wrong? I hope it isn't sexual. Oh well - they probably have pills for that.
posted by pullmyfinger at 04:05 PM on November 06
rcade:
I appreciate the fact that the Yankees have their fans, LBB, but I don't think it's fair to call people liars for acknowledging the elephant in the room.
Please recall for me where I used the word liar. If you can't do that, please explain to me what the hell you're talking about, and how the hell it has anything to do with what I said. Start with a reference to where anyone else used the word liar, other than you, in this entire thread.
It's hard to separate the excellence of the team from the unprecedented monetary disparity between the team's payroll and everyone else's.
No, it's not hard. Just because it's beyond you doesn't mean that it's hard.
I'd love it if every thread announcing a championship was met with this kind of response. I'd really love it. It would put SportsFilter in the toilet in a month, and serve you right for being an apologist for this kind of thing.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:00 PM on November 06
It is a little strange ESPN was so hot and heavy on this. Maybe it was all staged and the network got the tipoff beforehand -- "Hey, bring out the good cameras and we'll put on a show!"
Also ... it was kinda hot.
Rashomon ... they make those little boilable noodle packs, right?
posted by wfrazerjr at 03:59 PM on November 06
It's an herb. Next we'll be citing people for possession of Oregano.
Yeah, and coca leaves are just like basil leaves! Plants can't hurt us, can they?
posted by dfleming at 03:51 PM on November 06
Is anyone else surprised by how ESPN is covering this? It's strange to me they have an HD feed of a women's college soccer game when half the sports on TV still be struggling to get that together, then they single out one player and follow her around for a good minute or two, which is the amount of time Sportscenter devotes to big pro games. I realize she was nasty out there, but that kind of crap goes on in all sports at most every level. They make a point of showing she gets cracked first but then only show clips of her retaliating. Were there honestly no other incidents involving other players?
This wouldn't have made Sportscenter if it was a men's game and their treatment of it has a Rashomon-feel that suggests someone is a BYU grad. Steve Young probably paid for the cameras. Also, spare me the idea that what she did is worse than trying to gouge someone's eyes.
posted by yerfatma at 03:47 PM on November 06
Just thinking outloud. Girardi just won the WS. I assume celebrations abound. Never won myself, but I am assuming. Wouldn't it be reasonably likely that Girardi has a few in celebration with his team? I wouldn't expect him to be behind the wheel. I agree he did the right thing in helping the victim.
To quote the article:
"Police were in the area conducting a driving while intoxicated checkpoint on the parkway. Girardi had passed that checkpoint about 15 minutes earlier."
bperk is right, not everyone has to drink alcohol to celebrate. I, myself, haven't touched any alcoholic beverage in over 3.5 years. And no, I may not recovering or have any trauma that stops me. I am a born again Christian and don't feel the need to drink (and spare me the born-again/trauma joke that is inevitably jumping around in someone's head right now)
posted by crqri at 03:42 PM on November 06
Fuck this guy (on Dec. 2, of course)
posted by tahoemoj at 03:32 PM on November 06
OPS isn't a power stat. It's a combination of on base percentage and slugging
In the context of the postings, it is a power stat. Justgary stated that ARod was performing better because he had a higher OPS than Jeter. The slugging factor in OPS is important for a cleanup hitter. It is far less important for a leadoff hitter.
For example, Rod Carew had a rather unimpressive OPS of 822. That's not a bad number, but it hardly qualifys as a great OPS. His 328 BA and 393 OBP are most impressive. His job was not to be a cleanup hitter, but rather to be on base for cleanup hitters.
Example 2. Reggie Jackson's 846 OPS is also rather unimpressive. However, the fact that it's that high with a 262 BA and 356 OBP is very impressive. That 846 OPS drove in a lot of Jeter and Carew type hitters.
The reason that Jackson, with his low BA, and Carew, with his high BA have similar OPS is POWER.
posted by pullmyfinger at 03:31 PM on November 06
It's time for the NHL style enforcer to make an appearance in women's soccer. The game should be self-policed! Of course, Stu Grimson himself mmight hesitate to take on that kind of beast.
skulks off with trollish smirk
posted by tahoemoj at 03:28 PM on November 06
Fair enough. And in return, I freely admit to my bias. I just think you should be a little more open to the possibility that Ward is as dirty as these players say he is. I'd love to have a receiver who plays every down like he does and is as willing to block as he is, I'm just glad that his tactics are being recognized for what they are.
posted by tahoemoj at 03:21 PM on November 06
I hate that the discussion has focused on the Yankees cheating.
Not to get all semantical, but cheating does not always mean playing outside the rules. It can also mean avoiding an obstacle or result with skill, luck or something else. In video games, cheating is using codes to change the rules of the game to give the player an advantage. It's not breaking the rules; it's changing the rules. Where is Captain Kirk when you need him? The Yankees use their financial ability in the same way. They don't break the rules, but their finances allow them to make their own rules.
posted by graymatters at 03:20 PM on November 06
justgary, I think we're both saying the same thing. But can you honestly say last year's team was worse on paper than the Rays?
No. I agree with you. I just put the fact that the Yankees have failed in the past with high payrolls more to money spent badly and baseball being an unpredictable game than failing to strive under pressure. Not that the pressure isn't entered into the whole thing.
I don't buy the chemistry angle, I don't buy the 'their having more fun' this year bit. But does having Texiera make ARod better? Perhaps take some pressure off? Perhaps. But that still is a function of payroll.
See Point V of the Official DrJohnEvans SpoFi Platform.
Funny. I just saw that on your profile yesterday. I would add my signature.
The Yankees can outbid any team for any player they choose, but they also have the resources to keep any player they choose as well.
The Yankees also have an advantage in that for most players, they really only need to match another teams offer. I would think it's like being a designer and working for Apple. That has a lot of cache. To be a Yankee, for a lot of players, is another feather in their cap. We're talking about huge egos. I have little doubt that Texiera and Damon came to the Yankees partly because of who they were. I have little doubt that Clemens came to the Yankees thinking "I've the greatest pitcher ever, I want to be associated with the greatest sports franchise ever". That it didn't work out is a fact that I treasure.
And no, this isn't an advantage that I'm complaining about. They've earned it because of their history. But added to the payroll advantage it's huge. I don't think Texiera would have gone to anyone else for 10 million more. If it was close, he was going to be a Yankee.
I hate that the discussion has focused on the Yankees cheating. It's a red herring. Of course they didn't cheat. I don't know what the answer is. Salary floor? Salary cap? I don't see how anyone can be a Yankee fan or hater and not believe there's a problem with competition. And saying "they played within the rules and good for them for putting money back into the team" is completely missing the problem.
By far the fastest "move on" after the series that I can remember.
It's funny around here. Normally you see Braves and Red Sox caps. I assumed it was because people in New York were less inclined to move down south. But for the last couple of days I've seen more Yankee caps than I have in the last year. They're all so new and shiny.
Here's what the Yankees can't buy.
Joba then went straight to his favorite strip club. The one hater aspect I will admit to is that I'm very happy the Yankees won the WS in spite of Joba. I mean, I hate picking on the mentally challenged, but I'll make an exception for Joba.
posted by justgary at 03:06 PM on November 06
Yeah, so, I'm thinking "how bad could this be" and, holy cats, its really bad. Worst sportsmanship I've seen in any sport this year.
posted by Joey Michaels at 03:03 PM on November 06
Based on the fact that Tim was also caught with a pipe, I'd say he is an amatuer.
Disagree with that one. If it is good stuff, you rarely need to roll a whole one for just yourself. A nice glass pipe conserves the trees. Just not the best idea to drive around with.
posted by Debo270 at 02:59 PM on November 06
The British Columbia Lions by 6
The Montreal Allouettes by 11
The Saskatchewan Roughriders by 3
The Winnipeg Blue Bombers by 4
posted by Reever at 02:50 PM on November 06
WWE wouldn't hire her. She actually appears to have talent.
posted by Drood at 02:48 PM on November 06
B.C. by 4
Calgary by 3
Montreal by 17
Hamilton by 4
posted by JPR at 02:46 PM on November 06
Lambert suspended. I think she was just preparing for her career with WWE, but somebody forgot to tell her that it's not supposed to be that real.
posted by graymatters at 02:42 PM on November 06
Let's say that Nike does step in with a new contract. What are they going to do if one of the players refuses to wear Nike and insists on wearing Adidas? Or do you have to have the last name of Jordan to be allowed to flick your finger at the school?
posted by graymatters at 02:27 PM on November 06
Like it or not the guy is or was a role model for a lot of young people
Perfect time to sit little Johnny down and explain that just because a person can throw a ball 95 mph that doesn't make 'em a good role model. At the same time you can explain to little Johnny that marijuana should be legalized. Hopefully both lessons sink in.
posted by justgary at 02:23 PM on November 06
Chelsea transfer ban is suspended so they will be able to dole out 50 million pounds on cover for the African Nations Cup.
posted by billsaysthis at 02:19 PM on November 06
Cincy fans do not get a vote because Hines broke that guys jaw on a clean hit
That part was a joke tahoe
posted by Debo270 at 02:16 PM on November 06
Debo: Your expectations for what constitutes a valid survey seem awfully high to me, given that political polls (a subject of vastly more importance) are extrapolated from much smaller percentages of the groups involved.
While I would agree with you in the sense of a political poll, with 20% being enough of a sampling to get pretty reliable results, there are major differences. In a political poll, you choose person A,B,or C. Most people would know something about the person and you would get good results if the survey was done over a diverse section of the population. If the survey was done in one area, the results would be skewed/squewed. If you took an Obama/McCain poll before the election in "the hood" vs "the deep south" you would get very different results.
That being said, if SI had said we polled 9 random players from all 32 teams(9.25 if you do the math also making me think it is inaccurate) I would believe it but if i dont know the sample, I can't trust the results.
The steelers have not played Tampa Bay in a few years. I would wager if Tampa players were surveyed, more would pick players in their division they play 2 times a year. If 53 players from the Bengals were asked, 52 would say Hines Ward.
All i am saying is I would put more faith in the results if I knew what the sample group was.
posted by Debo270 at 02:15 PM on November 06
Cincy fans do not get a vote because Hines broke that guys jaw on a clean hit
I'm pretty sure this was a player poll. Seems pretty silly to me that you think this is somehow a Cincinnati based survey, and that's the only reason Ward gats called dirty. There's other wide receivers out there who play the game with tenacity and toughness, they don't get called dirty. As I said before, Ward leaves his feet and leads with his head, that's dirty. Players seem to feel that he hits from behind, that's dirty. Whether or not you agree, it seems to me that you're grasping at straws to invalidate this poll which, as I think I mentioned, was of players, and not just Bengal players.
posted by tahoemoj at 02:11 PM on November 06
Wowzers that was hardcore! The elbow and the punch was a bit much but HOLY COW the hair pull. And MAN did she ever sell it like death too!
posted by Drood at 02:08 PM on November 06
It's an herb. Next we'll be citing people for possession of Oregano.
posted by Drood at 02:05 PM on November 06
Seems amazingly petty move by Adidas. How many players have shoe lines named for their dads?
posted by billsaysthis at 02:04 PM on November 06
Be like Tim. Roll up better numbers. Earn your green a bit more
Based on the fact that Tim was also caught with a pipe, I'd say he is an amatuer. He was probably smoking good green through a dirty resin filled pipe. I guess he knows how to roll up numbers on the field, but doesn't recognize the value of them off the field. The smoke is better and you can eat the number when you see the flashing lights behind you. Come on Tim, you can set a better example than that.
posted by lab at 01:46 PM on November 06
The NFL did not suspend Santonio Holmes for the same thing last year. The team did for a game but that was in season.
posted by Debo270 at 01:37 PM on November 06
Getting caught with a misdemeanor amount of weed shouldn't even be news, and it certainly shouldn't trigger any kind of testing or suspension for Lincecum.
Not saying I agree with it. But I wouldn't be surprised if MLB does test him.
posted by goddam at 01:36 PM on November 06
I wouldn't test Lincecum, I'd test Zito.
To make sure he was getting at least a dip out of the same bag as Lince.
Be like Tim. Roll up better numbers. Earn your green a bit more.
posted by beaverboard at 01:33 PM on November 06
Rest assured Nike and UCF will have a contract very soon, Michael will make sure of this.
posted by tarheelfan7711 at 01:33 PM on November 06
You can still sorta claim Roy Williams
No thank you. Cincinnati can have him, he just wasn't what the 'Boys expected when we...er, they drafted him.
posted by BornIcon at 01:28 PM on November 06
SportsFilter: The Saturday Huddle
Twenty years at the top of his game - India's Sachin Tendulkar.