Wednesday, July 23, 2014

I'm Back

Sorry I haven't wrote in a bit, I have been super busy and away. But here's a recap of my opinions:

1. The Boston Celtics. I know this summer hasn't gone the way we wanted it to. No fireworks, no Love, no Melo, no Rondo trade but it is what it is. Wyc said you need 2 to tango and if no other team is willing to give Danny what he wants, why make a trade? The signing of Evan Turner is a great low risk signing. I have no idea where he is going to play as we have a very loaded back court with Rondo, Bradley, Smart, Thornton, and at SF we have Jeff Green, Gerald Wallace, and James Young. I guess we can tell Thronton and Wallace to sit way at the end of the bench and I have a feeling Young will not play a lot this year, so there could be room.

I think Turner got a raw deal here. He did average 17 points with the Sixers last year before traded. There is talent there he just didn't live up to the number 2 selection. Maybe I am a bit biased here because it seemed like Evan Turner played very well against the Celtics in the playoffs. But who knows, maybe he's just Jeff Green 2 and a cocktease in night in and night out.

2. The Red Sox...... Championship?

I know they lost last night but it seems as if things are coming together. They are 8.5 back... which is a lot. But are 8-2 in the last 10. I have zero clue if this is due to AJ Fuckface leaving, but it seems like it did something. I might still get rid of some pieces if you can in Peavy, Drew, Gomes, etc. But I'm starting to buy into this team.

Also Jon Lester.... The Sox are fucked with him. He is pricing himself out of the Sox every pitch he throws. The Sox obviously got too cute with negotiations and now are paying for it. Now the Sox will have to overpay him on years if they resign him. Also I am all for trading for Hammels if thats the case. Hammels is basically the same thing as Lester and he is on a contract that we would want Lester to have. If worse comes to worse a swap of Hammels for Lester isn't drastic.

5. Tony Dungy is an asshole. Supports Michael Vick and then talks about Michael Sam and how he wouldn't draft him because he's gay. Tony Dungy will get hardly any flack for this after a month. I don't get it. But the next time people refer to Dungy as the next Mother Theresa I will always think of this.

6. Also David Ortiz over Yaz, Williams and any Red Sox name you throw out there.

David Ortiz is obviously better then yaz that isn't a debate. And although Ted Williams was pretty damn good and lost 5 years tot he war, Ortiz is far better then him too. He has the hardware and has played in a era that has better talent and I know Ted Williams WS stats should be thrown out due to him not being healthy due to an elbow injury, Ortiz's October stats can't be matched and that's all that matters.

"But DP Yaz and Ted played the field too"
DP "Fuck off"


rob said...

Yeah Ortiz is better than Williams. Two Triple Crowns, last man to hit .400, best OBP ever, 2nd in SLG behind Ruth, but Ortiz is better. Because 450 HR hitters are rare these days.

Ortiz was also the ONLY reason the Sox won 3 World Series. Schilling and Foulke had little to do with the '04 WS, Beckett was along for the ride in '07, and Lester was a passenger on the 2013 run. Ortiz won them singlehandedly.

DP said...

Actually I would imagine that there will be a lot less 500 HR hitters now, then before.

And as much as I agree with you that the Sox had good teams during those championship year, we would not have won, or hell even got to the world series without the efforts of David Ortiz.

Ted Williams never played against your satchel paige's and most negro league stars, reliever specialists, etc. It's a cheap argument for sure, but it's still an argument to be made.. Williams was ahead of his time and for sure maybe the best pure hitter ever. But what David Ortiz has done and done in a Boston uniform is far more then what Ted Williams and Yaz has done.

DP said...

BTW the Red Sox had incredible teams when Williams played as well. I just heard Steve Buckley talk briefly on it yesterday and said those Sox teams were historically good

Anonymous said...

Maybe I missed part of what Dungey said but from what I heard I agreed with him. He said something to the effect he would not take Sam because of the circus around him. He never mentioned it was because he was gay.

A 7th round pick, that has only the slightest chance of making a team. He is going to be a huge distraction all summer and preseason. I would not want that in my locker room either. Its not because he is gay, if the media followed his every move becaus he gave all his money to charity and lives a deeply religious life still a no go. The distraction is not worth the talent.

DP said...

The Ortiz 162 game avg compared to the williams on baseball reference is pretty similar.

Ortiz:93 runs, 161 hits, 41 doubles, 35 HRs, 112 RBI .280 BA/ .373 OBP/ 536 SLG/ 909 OPS

Williams: 117 Runs, 178 Hits, 35 doubles, 35 HRs, 117 RBI, .332 BA/ .469 OBP/ 612 SLG/ 1.082 OPS

Statistically Williams is better, but when it comes to post season and hard ware and clutchness Ortiz has him blown away

DP said...

Tony Dungy also raises money for a anti gay organization Indiana Family Institute which is strongly against gays, gay marriage and gays adopting children.

I get the media circus argument, but teams should be able to deal with that. Nobody knows whether Michael Sam can play or not. He was the SEC defensive player of the year, yet he sucked at the combine. The Rams cuts will dictate whether he's worthy or not.

bosoxfaninatl said...

Dungy supported Vick coming back after prison. Talk about a media distraction.

rob said...

Dungy also likes Tebow, who is a media distraction.

Those numbers are similar DP? 50 points higher average, 100 higher OBP, 80 higher SLG, that's similar?

Williams was on good teams that lacked pitching. He only got one chance at postseason play and he was injured. There was no ALCS, no ALDS.

Don't go down the path of Williams not playing Negro League players. Williams played post-integration, and he didn't have pills or shots to improve his slugging percentage. Nor did he have DVDs to watch opposing pitchers. He also didn't get to face middle relievers on the Astros to pad his stats.

Williams dominated his era. When DiMaggio had his streak, Williams hit for a higher average during that stretch. As a hitter Williams is up there with Ruth, Mays, the absolute pinnacle of the sport.

You're saying Ortiz is better, which means Ortiz is up there with Ruth and Mays. Which he just isn't.

DP said...

I meant not necessarily in overall grand scheme of things, but strictly to Boston Red Sox history. Which by that David Ortiz was better then Ted Williams. He's done more for the organization, he's had incredible post season performances, and has always came up big when they needed him too.

An Astros reliever throwing 96-97 would probably be better then a majority of pitchers.

I guess there are 2 arguments here. 1. Overall. 2. Boston Red Sox history.

Williams is one if not the G.O.A.T, however, Red Sox History.... David Ortiz is more important.

bosoxfaninatl said...

i would be curious to find out if williams would have watched video if it was available to him. i bet he would have preferred to react to the pitch, without preconceived thoughts in his head.

Anonymous said...

As far as I'm concerned comparing William's numbers to Ortiz's means shit. Williams played in a segregated league with watered down talent. The same holds true for every MLB player in his era or earlier.

On to Tony Dungy one of the biggest douchebags in sports... Don't forget that this was the guy who turned the Terrell Owens / Nicollette Sheridan commercial into a racial issue. I hope he gets colon cancer and dies.

rob said...

DP, I could make a counter-argument to the importance of Williams. Williams personified the Red Sox for decades. He helped turn the team around at the beginning of the Yawkey era. You know how much people revered him in this town.

When the Sox were losers, Williams was the one positive they had.

So Ortiz takes PEDs, but it was Williams who had it easier? Comparing the difficulty and ease of different eras is a waste of time. All you can do is see how much Williams dominated the other hitters in baseball. Two Triple Crowns, 2 MVPs (he didn't win the MVP in either of his Triple Crown years), 2nd in MVP voting 4 times, top 5 in MVP voting 9 times, that's with 4 seasons lost to military service. Led the AL in OPS 10 times. 18 years with an OPS over 1.000.

Compare that to how Ortiz has dominated (or hasn't dominated) other hitters in baseball. No MVPs, top 5 in MVP voting 4 times, no batting titles, he led the AL in homeruns once, led it in OBP once, never led it in SLG, never led it in OPS, 4 seasons with an OPS over 1.000.

Ortiz's greatness is in his big playoff hits. In Ortiz's era, his offensive performance isn't extraordinary or dominant or unique. He basically has the same number of homeruns as Adam Dunn. Is Adam Dunn better than Ted Williams too?

Also, Ted Williams played in both segregated and integrated times. He did well both before and after integration.

How was MLB watered down when Williams played? There were 16 teams compared to 30. Baseball was the sport the top athletes chose to play. And the rosters were smaller.

So fewer teams, fewer players, a large pool of athletes, and that's watered down?

DP said...

There is a big difference between David Ortiz and Adam Dunn, we both know that.

Also, Ortiz's post season performance can not be brushed aside. thats a big focal point of Ortiz's importance to the Red Sox. Yes Ted Williams brought the racist Yawkees to the forefront. However, Ortiz has the hardware and was a very big part of that.