|
|
#101
05-20-2006, 12:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, but these guys are also professionals that have been playing baseball, most of them since they were 5. To compare them to you or me is a bit silly [/ QUOTE ] I'm a professional. Not a professional baseball player but a professional none the less. The guys running Enron were professionals too. There are incompent and self centered professionals in every walk of life. The ones that are concerned with the big picture are generally the really successful ones. Baseball is no different than any other profession. Good teamwork and working as a unit which in essence is "good chemistry" is what succeeds in the long haul. 
|
|
#102
05-20-2006, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
Baseball is basically a series of individual events [/ QUOTE ] Maybe to the casual observer? But when some guy during his contract year gets more concerned with his numbers he often may play less than good "team" and situational baseball. Like was said before all of these guys are professionals and have been playing since they were 5. All major league baseball players have some baseball talent or they wouldn't be there. So who succeeds? The team with the jittery manager and a teamful of guys worried about their next contract or getting sent down? Or the happy and loose team who melds as a unit? I go with the happy and loose team approach all day long!
|
|
#103
05-20-2006, 12:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Baseball is basically a series of individual events [/ QUOTE ] Maybe to the casual observer? But when some guy during his contract year gets more concerned with his numbers he often may play less than good "team" and situational baseball. Like was said before all of these guys are professionals and have been playing since they were 5. All major league baseball players have some baseball talent or they wouldn't be there. So who succeeds? The team with the jittery manager and a teamful of guys worried about their next contract or getting sent down? Or the happy and loose team who melds as a unit? I go with the happy and loose team approach all day long! [/ QUOTE ] I'd rather take the team with a good front office that puts together a good club.
|
|
#104
05-20-2006, 12:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, but these guys are also professionals that have been playing baseball, most of them since they were 5. To compare them to you or me is a bit silly. I think it's a bit of a chicken and egg argument. Does good chemistry foster winning, or does winning foster good chemistry? In 2002, some of the Braves guys were talking up how they've had the best clubhouse since the 1995 season. The result? A first round exit in the playoffs. Look at the 1986 Mets. That was far from a very good clubhouse, yet they made an improbably comeback to win the WS as well. Yeah, it matters, but it's so overblown. [/ QUOTE ] you may be right...some people overrate it...but often times a good teamate can lead directly to team wins. here is another example. a good coach may make a recommendation to a player, helping him fix his swing or throwing motion or whatever. these improvements lead directly to incremental runs and wins. a possible example is derek jeters defense in 2004...it was greatly improved over previous years. some say arod helped him out. there are many anectodal stories like this, where one teamate affects the performance of another through coaching or help or whatever. this help is an intangible. and it matters.
|
|
#106
05-20-2006, 01:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
of course a-rod helped jeter's defense. if you had superman and eight bums on the field, he'll help out their defense too. that's not "intangible." Jeter didn't become better, he became less of a liability because he had less to do.
|
|
#107
05-20-2006, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Baseball is basically a series of individual events [/ QUOTE ] Maybe to the casual observer? But when some guy during his contract year gets more concerned with his numbers he often may play less than good "team" and situational baseball. Like was said before all of these guys are professionals and have been playing since they were 5. All major league baseball players have some baseball talent or they wouldn't be there. So who succeeds? The team with the jittery manager and a teamful of guys worried about their next contract or getting sent down? Or the happy and loose team who melds as a unit? I go with the happy and loose team approach all day long! [/ QUOTE ] Holy crap, talk about twisting my words. Yes, all of these guys have talent, which means all of them are just as talented as each other, and the team that's happier wins. Wow. I've got no words for how you're either ignorantly or maliciously tying my words into a clusterfuck of idiocy, but I'm going to try to convey it anyhow. You, of course, know that baseball teams aren't equally talented. They're nowhere close to equally talented. And this is the first time I've ever heard someone postulate that a player in a contract year performs *worse* You're just making this up as you go along, aren't you?
|
|
#109
05-20-2006, 02:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Let me ask you a question: 1) Do you play baseball? I am pretty sure the answer to this is 'no'. That said, I actually DO play baseball. [/ QUOTE ] Playing slow-pitch softball every Thursday night doesn't count. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I agree you idiot.
|
|
#110
05-20-2006, 02:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Albert Pujols
I didn't know having a secure contract was an "intangible".
Anyone wanna take Pavano off the Yankees hands? He may not be able to pitch, but i'm sure with his contract secure he will provide great clubhouse presence.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
