Rest for Regulars

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

    Rest for Regulars

    Is it just me or does it seem like every time a player gets on a hot batting streak, there's a tendency by management to feel a need to give the player a day or two of rest!  Then when they returrn to the lineup, they've lost their mo-jo and go into a batting slump.  I know it's a long season, but sitting a batter when he's hot seems to disrupt the rhythum of not only the player but the team as well.  Thoughts anyone........Smile

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars


    You don't want to overplay to the point of injury either.....

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to OKRedSoxFan's comment:

    Is it just me or does it seem like every time a player gets on a hot batting streak, there's a tendency by management to feel a need to give the player a day or two of rest!  Then when they returrn to the lineup, they've lost their mo-jo and go into a batting slump.  I know it's a long season, but sitting a batter when he's hot seems to disrupt the rhythum of not only the player but the team as well.  Thoughts anyone........Smile



    most of the hottest hitting players have been injured like Drew or Pedroia or currently dealing with injury like Victorino with hamstring problem.   

    Napoli havent rest for months, and still he got into a slump.  Papi injured his back which that is why he continue to stay into a slump.  IF he was healthy for the whole time, he wouldnt continue to be a slump.   Resting him is a good idea!!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars


    Tell them that when they sit out due to injury or sit out because they need a "scheduled day off"...they don't get paid for that game.

    You'd see fewer guys on the DL and fewer guys having "scheduled days off."

    Carl Yastrzemski played 161 games in 1967 and won the Triple Crown.

    Yaz played 157 games in 1968 and won the batting title.

    Yaz played all 162 games in 1969 and had 40HR and 111RBI.

    Yaz played 161 games in 1970 walked 128 times and had the highest BA of his career .329.

    These were his peak years.

    In fact Carl played over 125 games every year except 1981....that's right evEry year of his 23 year Hall Of Fame career.

    So don't tell me players NEED scheduled days off. Don't tell me players cannot play through nagging injuries ( you think Yaz never was hampered by sore back, sore legs or headache?).

    I feel lucky that I saw a man who exemplified the true baseball player and what he should be. Fans paid to see Yaz, and he did not disappoint them. When you went to Fenway, Yaz was in the lineup...if he was sitting on that day, you would feel cheated. Fans pay to see the best players play, if they can't motivate themselves with today's pay , they never will. Yaz did not make A-Rod money, he didn't even make J.D.Drew money, yet he played and he gave us his best effort.

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:


    Tell them that when they sit out due to injury or sit out because they need a "scheduled day off"...they don't get paid for that game.

    You'd see fewer guys on the DL and fewer guys having "scheduled days off."

    Carl Yastrzemski played 161 games in 1967 and won the Triple Crown.

    Yaz played 157 games in 1968 and won the batting title.

    Yaz played all 162 games in 1969 and had 40HR and 111RBI.

    Yaz played 161 games in 1970 walked 128 times and had the highest BA of his career .329.

    These were his peak years.

    In fact Carl played over 125 games every year except 1981....that's right evEry year of his 23 year Hall Of Fame career.

    So don't tell me players NEED scheduled days off. Don't tell me players cannot play through nagging injuries ( you think never was hampered by sore back, sore legs or headache?).

    I feel lucky that I saw a man who exemplified the true baseball and what he should be. Fans paid to see Yaz, and did not disappoint them. When you went to Fenway Yaz was in the lineup...if he was sitting on that day, you would feel cheated. Fans pay to see the best players play, if they can't motivate themselves with today's pay , they never will. Yaz did not make A-Rod money, he didn'y even make J.D.Drew money, yet he played and he gave us his best effort.

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells



    First of all, Yaz started playing at age of 21 where he average around 150 to 155 games a year in his first ten years with Boston except one year he only played 133 games.  Then in his last ten years or more with Boston, he went over 150 games only three times.   

    So therefore, once he got into the 30's he missed more games than in his first 10 years with Boston due to day offs.  Remember Napoli, Drew, Papi, Victorino, Gomes, among others are in the 30's too, and they are resting the same way Yaz did it when he was in the 30's.

    You cant compare players who are in young 20's to mid-20's to the players in the 30's.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenwellforpresident. Show greenwellforpresident's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:


    Tell them that when they sit out due to injury or sit out because they need a "scheduled day off"...they don't get paid for that game.

    You'd see fewer guys on the DL and fewer guys having "scheduled days off."

    Carl Yastrzemski played 161 games in 1967 and won the Triple Crown.

    Yaz played 157 games in 1968 and won the batting title.

    Yaz played all 162 games in 1969 and had 40HR and 111RBI.

    Yaz played 161 games in 1970 walked 128 times and had the highest BA of his career .329.

    These were his peak years.

    In fact Carl played over 125 games every year except 1981....that's right evEry year of his 23 year Hall Of Fame career.

    So don't tell me players NEED scheduled days off. Don't tell me players cannot play through nagging injuries ( you think never was hampered by sore back, sore legs or headache?).

    I feel lucky that I saw a man who exemplified the true baseball and what he should be. Fans paid to see Yaz, and did not disappoint them. When you went to Fenway Yaz was in the lineup...if he was sitting on that day, you would feel cheated. Fans pay to see the best players play, if they can't motivate themselves with today's pay , they never will. Yaz did not make A-Rod money, he didn'y even make J.D.Drew money, yet he played and he gave us his best effort.

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells




    Jim Rice played 163 games in 1978 and had a pretty decent year.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    Zillagod used to walk 6 miles in 12 feet of snow, barefoot, to and from school (It was uphill both ways), so maybe he doesn't tolerate millionnaire ballplayers who take a day off once in a while.  

     

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    Depends on the player.  Pedroia has missed one game to date.  But my quarrel is not with the lineup players.  It's with the pitchers, who all get paid salaries competitive with everyday players, so I think they should all be available to pitch every day.  Or use the starters every 4th or even 3d day instead of this every 5th day nonsense.  Relievers normally, usually go one inning, so they should all be available every single day even if the starters aren't. 

    I'm kidding, of course, but the fact is that, while players are physically capable of playing every day when not injured, days off make a lot of sense if only because they also give the bench players a chance to start now and then. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    Zillagod used to walk 6 miles in 12 feet of snow, barefoot, to and from school (It was uphill both ways), so maybe he doesn't tolerate millionnaire ballplayers who take a day off once in a while.  

     




    HAHA!!

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

     

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

     


    Tell them that when they sit out due to injury or sit out because they need a "scheduled day off"...they don't get paid for that game.

    You'd see fewer guys on the DL and fewer guys having "scheduled days off."

    Carl Yastrzemski played 161 games in 1967 and won the Triple Crown.

    Yaz played 157 games in 1968 and won the batting title.

    Yaz played all 162 games in 1969 and had 40HR and 111RBI.

    Yaz played 161 games in 1970 walked 128 times and had the highest BA of his career .329.

    These were his peak years.

    In fact Carl played over 125 games every year except 1981....that's right evEry year of his 23 year Hall Of Fame career.

    So don't tell me players NEED scheduled days off. Don't tell me players cannot play through nagging injuries ( you think never was hampered by sore back, sore legs or headache?).

    I feel lucky that I saw a man who exemplified the true baseball and what he should be. Fans paid to see Yaz, and did not disappoint them. When you went to Fenway Yaz was in the lineup...if he was sitting on that day, you would feel cheated. Fans pay to see the best players play, if they can't motivate themselves with today's pay , they never will. Yaz did not make A-Rod money, he didn'y even make J.D.Drew money, yet he played and he gave us his best effort.

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     

     



    First of all, Yaz started playing at age of 21 where he average around 150 to 155 games a year in his first ten years with Boston except one year he only played 133 games.  Then in his last ten years or more with Boston, he went over 150 games only three times.   

     

     

    So therefore, once he got into the 30's he missed more games than in his first 10 years with Boston due to day offs.  Remember Napoli, Drew, Papi, Victorino, Gomes, among others are in the 30's too, and they are resting the same way Yaz did it when he was in the 30's.

    You cant compare players who are in young 20's to mid-20's to the players in the 30's.  



    Today' players are pampered. They are paid extremely well. The training facilities and the medical staff have advanced quite a lot since the days when Yaz was in his prime ( 1966-75). I am not comparing Yaz the 22 year old to Napoli the decripit 31 year old, or Ortiz , who seems as if he has been over 35 for ten years. Carl Yastrzemski was 31 in 1971...one year after the 4 seasons I use as a reference. 1971 was not one of Carl's best years, but he still managed to play in 148 games....then he played:

     

    125 games at age 32

    152 games at age 33

    148 games at age 34

    149 games at age 35

    155 games at age 36

    150 games at age 37

    144 games at age 38

    147 games at age 39

    His last four seasons at age 40-44 he played, 105, 91, 131 , and 119 games.

    Yes , there was a drop off at age 40....but you'd expect that.

    I want to see any player in today's game play 155 games past age 35. Ortiz is a fr**kin' DH and he hasn't played over 155 games since 2005 ,,,and he was only 29 years old!!!

    Pedroia is the kind of guy that exemplifies the old time ballplayer. He wants to play everyday, he hustles everday and he elevates the lineup when he plays both with his offense and defense. Sometimes he hits a rough patch and goes into a slump, but his defense is always stellar...AND THIS IS THE SMALLEST MAN ON THE TEAM.

    Did you know that Carl Yastrzemski was the smallest player physically on the 1967 Red Sox?....when I was 9 years old and Yastrzemski was carrying the 1967 Red Sox on his shoulders to the postseason, I visualized this man as being a real big guy, especially since every time you switched on the T.V. or radio , he seemed to be putting the Sox ahead with a 3-run homer.

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    I think most healthy players under age 32-33 might need 2-3 scheduled gamedays off.

    It does seem like players are given days off during hot streaks a little too often, but I'm not complaining about the superb job Farrell has done.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    Zilla, buddy, the only thing you have proven is that Yaz was an exceptionally durable player. If you look at games played for others on his teams, they did not all match up to him. Yaz is only representative of Yaz, not of a certain era. Every era has had both durable and fragile players. Also, most players have played less games per season in their 30's. Look at the tail end of the great Ted Williams career. Look also at the great Joe Dimaggio. He played so hard that he retired after 13 seasons because his body had broken down so badly he felt he couldn't perform up to his own high standards.





    "Hold it fellows, that don't move me. Let's get real, real gone for a change."

    -Elvis Presley

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    ...and what about those pampered pitchers of the 1970s?  Wilbur Wood pitched a pathetic 376.2 innings in 1972....he only made 25 starts on 2 days rest! Lightweight, and very unmanly.

    Whereas an iron man like Ed Walsh pitched 464 innings in 1908.

    Photo of Ed Walsh 

    Now, back when men were real men and not mewling kittens like Ed Walsh (of course I wouldn't say that to THAT face!), Will White pitched 680 innings in 1879 - 75 starts, 75 complete games and he finished 1 other.

    Photo of Will White

    But many an old timer's eyebrow was raised at the 5 - FIVE - Cincinnati Red Stockings games that White was too poncy to start.  Players were MUCH less pampered in the olden, golden days of the early 1870s, and paid less too.

    And Carl Yastrzemski (5'11, 175) was a giant compared to the diminutive White (5'9", 175).

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    Wilbur Wood also once STARTED both games of a doubleheader!

    Many teams used a 4 man rotation before some agent got involved and the players association got their way.

    Most of the so-called "bench players" were just that. They were "reserves" in case someone got hurt real bad ( Tony Conigliaro). These guys mainly came into a game if the score was 12-1 in the 9th or they gave a catcher or shortstop the 2nd game of a doubleheader a rest....and they actually used to SCHEDULE doubleheaders back in those days!

    I use Carl Yaz as a prime example, but if you look at the careers aof Frank Robinson, Al Kaline, Pete Rose , Hank Aaron , Willie McCovey, Rico Petrocelli, Brooks Robinson and most every good player of the day and these guys weren't given "scheduled days off" , the term was unheard of. If a starter was healthy , he played.....and healthy had a whole different meaning...you played with bumps and bruises in September, if you were in a pennent race....because it was important to have your best players in every game, even if they were at 75% ,they were better than the subs.

    This was when baseball people owned teams, not corporate bigwigs. I'm sorry , but, John Henry can claim to be a baseball fan ( and I'm sure he is) , but he doesn't love his team and attend every game the way Mr. Yawkey did.( Henry has soccer teams, NASCAR and racehorses too) It is a real shame that the Sox couldn't win for Tom Yawkey as he really was a baseball owner in a era when you didn't buy your teams or shop for players on the Free Agent market.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from OKRedSoxFan. Show OKRedSoxFan's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars


    Great point and post Zilla............

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

     

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

     


    Tell them that when they sit out due to injury or sit out because they need a "scheduled day off"...they don't get paid for that game.

    You'd see fewer guys on the DL and fewer guys having "scheduled days off."

    Carl Yastrzemski played 161 games in 1967 and won the Triple Crown.

    Yaz played 157 games in 1968 and won the batting title.

    Yaz played all 162 games in 1969 and had 40HR and 111RBI.

    Yaz played 161 games in 1970 walked 128 times and had the highest BA of his career .329.

    These were his peak years.

    In fact Carl played over 125 games every year except 1981....that's right evEry year of his 23 year Hall Of Fame career.

    So don't tell me players NEED scheduled days off. Don't tell me players cannot play through nagging injuries ( you think never was hampered by sore back, sore legs or headache?).

    I feel lucky that I saw a man who exemplified the true baseball and what he should be. Fans paid to see Yaz, and did not disappoint them. When you went to Fenway Yaz was in the lineup...if he was sitting on that day, you would feel cheated. Fans pay to see the best players play, if they can't motivate themselves with today's pay , they never will. Yaz did not make A-Rod money, he didn'y even make J.D.Drew money, yet he played and he gave us his best effort.

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     

     



    First of all, Yaz started playing at age of 21 where he average around 150 to 155 games a year in his first ten years with Boston except one year he only played 133 games.  Then in his last ten years or more with Boston, he went over 150 games only three times.   

     

     

    So therefore, once he got into the 30's he missed more games than in his first 10 years with Boston due to day offs.  Remember Napoli, Drew, Papi, Victorino, Gomes, among others are in the 30's too, and they are resting the same way Yaz did it when he was in the 30's.

    You cant compare players who are in young 20's to mid-20's to the players in the 30's.  



    Today' players are pampered. They are paid extremely well. The training facilities and the medical staff have advanced quite a lot since the days when Yaz was in his prime ( 1966-75). I am not comparing Yaz the 22 year old to Napoli the decripit 31 year old, or Ortiz , who seems as if he has been over 35 for ten years. Carl Yastrzemski was 31 in 1971...one year after the 4 seasons I use as a reference. 1971 was not one of Carl's best years, but he still managed to play in 148 games....then he played:

     

    125 games at age 32

    152 games at age 33

    148 games at age 34

    149 games at age 35

    155 games at age 36

    150 games at age 37

    144 games at age 38

    147 games at age 39

    His last four seasons at age 40-44 he played, 105, 91, 131 , and 119 games.

    Yes , there was a drop off at age 40....but you'd expect that.

    I want to see any player in today's game play 155 games past age 35. Ortiz is a fr**kin' DH and he hasn't played over 155 games since 2005 ,,,and he was only 29 years old!!!

    Pedroia is the kind of guy that exemplifies the old time ballplayer. He wants to play everyday, he hustles everday and he elevates the lineup when he plays both with his offense and defense. Sometimes he hits a rough patch and goes into a slump, but his defense is always stellar...AND THIS IS THE SMALLEST MAN ON THE TEAM.

    Did you know that Carl Yastrzemski was the smallest player physically on the 1967 Red Sox?....when I was 9 years old and Yastrzemski was carrying the 1967 Red Sox on his shoulders to the postseason, I visualized this man as being a real big guy, especially since every time you switched on the T.V. or radio , he seemed to be putting the Sox ahead with a 3-run homer.



    Ortiz playing over 155 games. Wow -- talk about moving the goal posts.

    Ortiz played in 151 in 2006, 149 in 2007, 150 in 2009. In all three years, he would likely have gone over 155 games but because of Interleague, there game when he didn't play because of trying to balance playing time for Youk, Lowell and Papi at NL parks.

    In 2010 and 2011, he played 145 and 146 with the interleague situation likely costing him a couple of games each year, especially in 2011 even with A-Gon playing in RF. In 2010, he missed games not because of "rest" but because of his poor start and poor split against lefites. In 2008, 2011 and 2013 he missed games because of injuries.

    Whatever point you may or may not have about "resting" players, it's lost in that Ortiz is a lousy example.

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    Wilbur Wood also once STARTED both games of a doubleheader!

    Many teams used a 4 man rotation before some agent got involved and the players association got their way.

    Most of the so-called "bench players" were just that. They were "reserves" in case someone got hurt real bad ( Tony Conigliaro). These guys mainly came into a game if the score was 12-1 in the 9th or they gave a catcher or shortstop the 2nd game of a doubleheader a rest....and they actually used to SCHEDULE doubleheaders back in those days!

    I use Carl Yaz as a prime example, but if you look at the careers aof Frank Robinson, Al Kaline, Pete Rose , Hank Aaron , Willie McCovey, Rico Petrocelli, Brooks Robinson and most every good player of the day and these guys weren't given "scheduled days off" , the term was unheard of. If a starter was healthy , he played.....and healthy had a whole different meaning...you played with bumps and bruises in September, if you were in a pennent race....because it was important to have your best players in every game, even if they were at 75% ,they were better than the subs.

    This was when baseball people owned teams, not corporate bigwigs. I'm sorry , but, John Henry can claim to be a baseball fan ( and I'm sure he is) , but he doesn't love his team and attend every game the way Mr. Yawkey did.( Henry has soccer teams, NASCAR and racehorses too) It is a real shame that the Sox couldn't win for Tom Yawkey as he really was a baseball owner in a era when you didn't buy your teams or shop for players on the Free Agent market.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells



    John Henry is not a corporate bigwig. He made his wealth through shrewd investments. He has been a baseball fan for most of his life.

    Tom Yawkey inherited his wealth. He did in fact try to buy championships and was known as one of the most generous owners in baseball. He bought players for amounts that were unheard of at that time. He treated his favorite players very well financially. With Yawkey, players started enjoying some of the benefits that would later explode during free agency. Make no mistake, Tom Yawkey spent and spent big.

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    Speaking of babying the modern day players, here's what Tom Seaver had to say about the Matt Harvey injury,

    “Naturally, I felt terrible for the kid. He’s got such a bright future. But at the same time, all I could think of was how it just goes to show how all this babying of pitchers — pitch counts and innings limits — is a bunch of nonsense. You can’t predict these things, and there’s really not a whole lot you can do to prevent them other than refining your mechanics as (’60s and ’70s Mets pitching coach) Rube (Walker) did with us. But one way I know doesn’t do anything to prevent them is babying these kids like they do.”

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/madden-seaver-pitching-fit-young-arms-babied-article-1.1441192#ixzz2dVophRFa

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    John Henry is not a corporate bigwig. He made his wealth through shrewd investments. He has been a baseball fan for most of his life.

     

    Tom Yawkey inherited his wealth. He did in fact try to buy championships and was known as one of the most generous owners in baseball. He bought players for amounts that were unheard of at that time. He treated his favorite players very well financially. With Yawkey, players started enjoying some of the benefits that would later explode during free agency. Make no mistake, Tom Yawkey spent and spent big.

    He did spend big, and maybe I was too young to understand the financial world during his time, but it seemed to me that he spent enough to make us compete, but never enough to put us over the top.

    (Note: I became a Sox fan in 1972 at age 13.)

    Sox4ever

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    i'm 55 years old...and began following the Sox sometime after birth and the impossible dream team of 196 while i respect that the players back in the day were far different animals than todays breed....fact of the matter is that player back when men were men as rule all weren't iron men...some played more than others. Factuality...when we're talking games played.

    2012 63 played at least 150 games

    1970 there were 56 

    1960 only 21..

    1950  27 

    1940 20 

    1930 23

    Curious? I'd say that perhaps we might all be misremembering the good old days...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    i'm 55 years old...and began following the Sox sometime after birth and the impossible dream team of 196 while i respect that the players back in the day were far different animals than todays breed....fact of the matter is that player back when men were men as rule all weren't iron men...some played more than others. Factuality...when we're talking games played.

    2012 63 played at least 150 games

    1970 there were 56 

    1960 only 21..

    1950  27 

    1940 20 

    1930 23

    Curious? I'd say that perhaps we might all be misremembering the good old days...




    Of course, don't forget that prior to 1961, teams played 154 games so it's not exactly a fair comparison. But your larger point, I agree -- the goold old days were always the good old days in all areas.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fizsh. Show fizsh's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    i'm 55 years old...and began following the Sox sometime after birth and the impossible dream team of 196 while i respect that the players back in the day were far different animals than todays breed....fact of the matter is that player back when men were men as rule all weren't iron men...some played more than others. Factuality...when we're talking games played.

    2012 63 played at least 150 games

    1970 there were 56 

    1960 only 21..

    1950  27 

    1940 20 

    1930 23

    Curious? I'd say that perhaps we might all be misremembering the good old days...



    Ii should be noted that they only played 154 games a season before 1961 (1962 in the NL)

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to fizsh's comment:

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    i'm 55 years old...and began following the Sox sometime after birth and the impossible dream team of 196 while i respect that the players back in the day were far different animals than todays breed....fact of the matter is that player back when men were men as rule all weren't iron men...some played more than others. Factuality...when we're talking games played.

    2012 63 played at least 150 games

    1970 there were 56 

    1960 only 21..

    1950  27 

    1940 20 

    1930 23

    Curious? I'd say that perhaps we might all be misremembering the good old days...

     



    I should be noted that they only played 154 games a season before 1961 (1962 in the NL)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It is noted...my intent was not to weigh and measure merely just to use a single number to illustrate a point. I too am an old school baseball guy, who remembers the good old days. which oh by the way weren't all that good from a Red Sox fans perspective...Unless you go all the way back to the Sox teams of 1918. If we define good old days as the Sox fielding a team capable of winning the World Series. For most of us that haven't recently celebrated our 100th birthday that would take us all the way back to 2004.

    That said, the suggestion that players today are pamapered vs their contemporaies of days gone by and using games played to measure that doesn't take into account all of the variables. A list too long but could be worth a thread. Is flawed. As a rule generalizations are typically not a very sound basis around which to frame an argument. Nor is citing an example using one player Ortiz of today's game v another Yaz from decades past and trying to use that as the litmus. 

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    I'm just not quite sure why a DH gets a "scheduled day off."

    This is a position where the player bats 4 maybe 5 times a game and sits on his behind for the rest of the time. I can understand why a shortstop, centerfielder and definately a catcher would possibly need these, but a DH?...ESPECIALLY A GUY WHO HAS BEEN EXCLUSIVELY A DH FOR THE BULK OF HIS CAREER.

    This is why I mention Ortiz , roy. It just seems to me that this guy got old and slow very early in his career. It just seems like this guy was 35 when he was about 27.

     

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Rest for Regulars

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    I'm just not quite sure why a DH gets a "scheduled day off."

    This is a position where the player bats 4 maybe 5 times a game and sits on his behind for the rest of the time. I can understand why a shortstop, centerfielder and definately a catcher would possibly need these, but a DH?...ESPECIALLY A GUY WHO HAS BEEN EXCLUSIVELY A DH FOR THE BULK OF HIS CAREER.

    This is why I mention Ortiz , roy. It just seems to me that this guy got old and slow very early in his career. It just seems like this guy was 35 when he was about 27.

     

     

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells



    Again, look at his career games played. He was over 150 games (or at 149) a lot and that's with not having a position to play in a handful of NL games becuause of interleague. So you're talking about what -- three to nine games that he didn't play. I don't care if you just a DH, if you're at 150 games or more, there's nothing wrong with that.

    So now you'd have to go back and look at the reasons he didn't play so games. Maybe it was an especially bad matchup, which admittedly was likely rare with Ortiz prior to 2008. Maybe he had small nagging injury that benefitted from a day off. In fact, it would likely keep a DH out if it affected his swing more than a position player who might still contribute because of his glove.

    You make it sound like all that a DH does is get up, drive to the ballpark, sit in the clubhouse before the game, sit in the dugout, walks up to the plate four or five time then goes home. Like all players, he's in the batting cage hitting, and the workout there is much more strenuous than standing around in the outfield for nine innings and there's more of a chance of aggriviating a minor injury that all players get regardless of what position they play.

    Ortiz missed significant time because of injury twice, that affected the end of a season and in both cases the start of another. Using him as an example with the phrase, he's just a DH, is unfair to him, a bad comparision and hardly accurate.

    Besides -- except for recently when he was getting over the heel injury, I NEVER heard the phrase "scheduled day off" in regard to Ortiz when Francona managed.

     

Share