A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:

     

    Ellsbury.  Popular.  Yes.  Never more popular than Big Papi.  Period.  As always, any valid point you raise about Jacoby is completely blown with your hilariously weird fixation on  erasing any positive notions about him.

     




     

    Only in Softlaw's fevered imagination (where everyone but him thought the guy was the next Williams) is the popularity of Ortiz vs. Ellsbury even a question.

    Ells has always had a significant following, but has also always had more than his fair share of skeptics. His OBP not being as high as a leadoff batter's ought to be was a recurring theme in the early years, and his defense used to be quite controversial...and, well, then 2010 happened. Winning two rings in Boston puts him in a pretty exclusive group, but to portray him as always having been wildly popular among Red Sox fans - much less in Papi territory - is just ignorant. Considering that the Red Sox teams of Ellsbury's era have included not only Ortiz but the likes of Pedroia, Lester, Youk, Schilling, Papelbon, Varitek, Lowell, A-Gon (at least in his early honeymoon period), and then this season's colorful cast of characters, I think it's not a huge stretch to say that in any given year he barely would have cracked the top five most popular players on the team.

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    But Jim Rice was brooding and stand-offish.  Chose not to engage with the media


    Interesting, I never saw Rice that way and that's exactly how I see Ellsbury. 

    Since race has been injected by you and Mooncrat, I'm in a forum that' doesn't have clue about the reality of the issue. That would include you, though you more inclined to understand the reality of human subjectivity and the myth that is those who claim to be "above it all". 

    We disagree, as I think it's absurd to pretend that Ortiz was more popular than Ellsbury. But I'm delighted that all has now changed. I'm delighted the Yankees didn't buy Ortiz last winter, and decided to buy Ellsbury this winter. Not for reasons that have anything to do with "game changed" and "exciting to watch", but for reasons that have to do with team leadership and individual production impact on the team. 

    And for the poster who says Ortiz has only been scrutinized on contract issues over the years. Patently false. As Space points out, there was a mob that included Mooncrat and other from this Board that wanted Ortiz released a few years ago when Buster Olney "reported" that a meeting was about to take place where a decision was about to be made on whether to DFA Ortiz or not. 

    The point os this isn't about "how" or "why", it's about how absurd the factual reality of the difference in career earnings in one great performer and one not great performer who have played nearly 7 years of MLB for the same team. 

    My point has been made. I'm somewhat troubled by this reality, regardless of the obvous "how" and "why". It makes my point that I am one of the few who is somewhat troubled by this disparity. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Jim Rice was infamously brooding and standoffish. This has been well documented and is the reason it took him 15 years to get in the Hall. He basically had to wait for everyone who. covered him to retire. Ellsbury has not once had a problem with the media. He is a quiet guy but always polite. Show one example of Ellsbury being a problem with the press?

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    You, of all people, come through and underscore my point. Ellsbury isn't "quite", he's "standoffish". And he has his folded up paper to read to the press after his brooding time off is not "polite".

    [/QUOTE]

    Do you want to sober up and translate this in the morning? It sounds like you type this having a mini stroke. You literally having nothing backing your claim.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Jim Rice was infamously brooding and standoffish. This has been well documented and is the reason it took him 15 years to get in the Hall. He basically had to wait for everyone who. covered him to retire. Ellsbury has not once had a problem with the media. He is a quiet guy but always polite. Show one example of Ellsbury being a problem with the press?


    You, of all people, come through and underscore my point. Ellsbury isn't "quite", he's "standoffish". And he has his folded up paper to read to the press after his brooding time off is not "polite".

    I know Jim Rice and he's confident and guarded because of years of abuse from the Boston press and culture. 

    [/QUOTE]


    You claiming to "know" Jimmy Rice is so far beyond laughable.  The guy wouldn't hire you to wash his car.  

    Yet again, the stiff one has degenerated into a puddle after his horrific 2013 season.  I'm not sure he can help himself?  Whether it be a chemical imbalance, or simply the more likely immaturity inherent in the meak of mind, it doesn't really matter.  What is clear, is that this Yankee troll can't help irrationally lashing out at Red Sox fans.  The more we become the clear #1 team og the 2000's, the more he lashes out........   Like the spoiled little boy he constantly proves himself to be.

     

    the delicious irony, is watching a guy who loves to call liberals on their racially demagoguery, out race-bait the farthest of the far far left.  

     

    Why do I constantly underestimate this guy?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to solareclipse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Jim Rice was infamously brooding and standoffish. This has been well documented and is the reason it took him 15 years to get in the Hall. He basically had to wait for everyone who. covered him to retire. Ellsbury has not once had a problem with the media. He is a quiet guy but always polite. Show one example of Ellsbury being a problem with the press?


    You, of all people, come through and underscore my point. Ellsbury isn't "quite", he's "standoffish". And he has his folded up paper to read to the press after his brooding time off is not "polite".

    I know Jim Rice and he's confident and guarded because of years of abuse from the Boston press and culture. 

    [/QUOTE]


    You claiming to "know" Jimmy Rice is so far beyond laughable.  The guy wouldn't hire you to wash his car.  

    Yet again, the stiff one has degenerated into a puddle after his horrific 2013 season.  I'm not sure he can help himself?  Whether it be a chemical imbalance, or simply the more likely immaturity inherent in the meak of mind, it doesn't really matter.  What is clear, is that this Yankee troll can't help irrationally lashing out at Red Sox fans.  The more we become the clear #1 team og the 2000's, the more he lashes out........   Like the spoiled little boy he constantly proves himself to be.

     

    the delicious irony, is watching a guy who loves to call liberals on their racially demagoguery, out race-bait the farthest of the far far left.  

     

    Why do I constantly underestimate this guy?

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm still trying to figure out what "Ellsbury isn't quite" means.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

    But Jim Rice was brooding and stand-offish.  Chose not to engage with the media


    Interesting, I never saw Rice that way and that's exactly how I see Ellsbury. 

    Since race has been injected by you and Mooncrat, I'm in a forum that' doesn't have clue about the reality of the issue. That would include you, though you more inclined to understand the reality of human subjectivity and the myth that is those who claim to be "above it all". 

    We disagree, as I think it's absurd to pretend that Ortiz was more popular than Ellsbury. But I'm delighted that all has now changed. I'm delighted the Yankees didn't buy Ortiz last winter, and decided to buy Ellsbury this winter. Not for reasons that have anything to do with "game changed" and "exciting to watch", but for reasons that have to do with team leadership and individual production impact on the team. 

    And for the poster who says Ortiz has only been scrutinized on contract issues over the years. Patently false. As Space points out, there was a mob that included Mooncrat and other from this Board that wanted Ortiz released a few years ago when Buster Olney "reported" that a meeting was about to take place where a decision was about to be made on whether to DFA Ortiz or not. 

    The point os this isn't about "how" or "why", it's about how absurd the factual reality of the difference in career earnings in one great performer and one not great performer who have played nearly 7 years of MLB for the same team. 

    My point has been made. I'm somewhat troubled by this reality, regardless of the obvous "how" and "why". It makes my point that I am one of the few who is somewhat troubled by this disparity. 



    I am surprised that the earnings disparity troubles you.  As someone constantly harping on big labor this and bloated that, I would think you would comprehend the nature of free agency, timing, and all the factors that play into someone getting a ludicrous mega-deal.  Most people understand how it has come to be that a good but not great player who has a track record of injury can come to get a 157 million dollar pay day.  His race is not one of the factors in this.  Nor is Ortiz' race a factor in why he never got such a pay day.  

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    But Jim Rice was brooding and stand-offish.  Chose not to engage with the media


    Interesting, I never saw Rice that way and that's exactly how I see Ellsbury. 

    Since race has been injected by you and Mooncrat, I'm in a forum that' doesn't have clue about the reality of the issue. That would include you, though you more inclined to understand the reality of human subjectivity and the myth that is those who claim to be "above it all". 

    We disagree, as I think it's absurd to pretend that Ortiz was more popular than Ellsbury. But I'm delighted that all has now changed. I'm delighted the Yankees didn't buy Ortiz last winter, and decided to buy Ellsbury this winter. Not for reasons that have anything to do with "game changed" and "exciting to watch", but for reasons that have to do with team leadership and individual production impact on the team. 

    And for the poster who says Ortiz has only been scrutinized on contract issues over the years. Patently false. As Space points out, there was a mob that included Mooncrat and other from this Board that wanted Ortiz released a few years ago when Buster Olney "reported" that a meeting was about to take place where a decision was about to be made on whether to DFA Ortiz or not. 

    The point os this isn't about "how" or "why", it's about how absurd the factual reality of the difference in career earnings in one great performer and one not great performer who have played nearly 7 years of MLB for the same team. 

    My point has been made. I'm somewhat troubled by this reality, regardless of the obvous "how" and "why". It makes my point that I am one of the few who is somewhat troubled by this disparity. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am surprised that the earnings disparity troubles you.  As someone constantly harping on big labor this and bloated that, I would think you would comprehend the nature of free agency, timing, and all the factors that play into someone getting a ludicrous mega-deal.  Most people understand how it has come to be that a good but not great player who has a track record of injury can come to get a 157 million dollar pay day.  His race is not one of the factors in this.  Nor is Ortiz' race a factor in why he never got such a pay day.  

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Let's compare what Holt makes vs Ted Williams.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

     

    Space, you can't converse without grasping the issues raised in the thread. Mooncrat injected race, and now you keep aping on about race. I've repeated that the issue isn't about the "why" and "how" of the disparity, but the fact that the career earnings disparity it's somewhat troubling given the performance grand canyon bewteen the two players.

    The thread was designed to prove, and it does, that performance isn't remotely related to compensation in restricted markets. This thread was also designed to gauge why this issue isn't troubling to most readers, based on the issue of player popularity. It's done that.

    And while race is a factor, I didn't inject race into this thread.

    Space, since you have, your words are shallow and hollow. Advancing the notion that Rice wasn't popular because he was standoffish is a function of the Boston pride and prejudice of you and the Boston market. Trust me, you don't want to go there in your own intimate choices in life. I've read enough from you to know that Rice wasn't your favorite player. But, since you have advanced that, I want you to describe in detail why he was your favorite player. You better work hard on it;) Nice try. You might try the card, "I don't have favorites", it's a bad but better play.

    As for Ortiz, nothing has changed whatsoever since 1975, in that respect. Superficiality and PC image for dough and show is exposed in intimate personal lives. Boston is Boston, Space, just take a look and big or small sample those Boston crowds. 

     

     _______________________________________________

     

    Softy, please allow me to point you to a post, in this very thread, on the first page, that first "injected race" into the discussion, and see if you can tell me who the author of the post was:


    " kinow what's more popular in the Boston market, based on the market's prevailing "physical" likes and dislikes;)"

    Need a hint?  

     By the way, Jim Rice was indeed my favorite player.  What have you read from me that would lead you to believe otherwise?  That I stated the fact that he standoffish with the media?  That he brooded?  That was part of the reason I loved him.  He didn't have a "PC image for dough and show".  

    And, please, I am not scared.  Elucidate me on why "I dont want to go there in my own intimate choices in life"?  I am utterly fascinated.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    Ortiz has an outgoing personality and is a loveable guy. Rice and Ellsbury, not so much. It's really that simple as to why the fans favor Ortiz.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ortiz has an outgoing personality and is a loveable guy. Rice and Ellsbury, not so much. It's really that simple as to why the fans favor Ortiz.

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps the fact that he produced about 15 of the top 20 all-time post-season Red Sox moments, and led the club to 3 world championships too.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: A Somewhat Troubling Factoid...........

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

    " kinow what's more popular in the Boston market, based on the market's prevailing "physical" likes and dislikes;)"

    Need a hint?  


    That isn't injected race. "Physical likes and dislikes" is age, weight, and type of game, power vs speed. You can't help but be pejorative on the issue of race. 

     By the way, Jim Rice was indeed my favorite player.  What have you read from me that would lead you to believe otherwise?  That I stated the fact that he standoffish with the media?  That he brooded?  That was part of the reason I loved him.  He didn't have a "PC image for dough and show".  


    Weak, space, weak. I knew it. Other than the filters of the Boston media and your own filters, you'll need to do better than that. 

    And, please, I am not scared.  Elucidate me on why "I dont want to go there in my own intimate choices in life"?  I am utterly fascinated.


    Look around, Space, at the comments you never make and the intimate social relationships you always make. It's reflected on this Board, so I don't need to personally know. You are not the don't like "PC image for dough and show" that you want to pretend you are. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation in the way this narrative is taking place. 

    The first road to recovery is to understand your emotions, not repress them. The culture of today is no different than it ever was, Space. I suggest we take this discussion to the politics thread, don't you think;)

     



    Hahahaha.  You crack me up Softy.  I don't have the foggiest idea what you have just said to me, but it is cracking me up anyway.

     

Share