12/04/24
October 07, 2005
Atlanta pulls even: with Houston while St. Louis goes up 2-0 on San Diego.
San Diego has a baseball team?!
posted by StarFucker at 02:37 AM on October 07, 2005
A well kept secret.
posted by justgary at 02:54 AM on October 07, 2005
Yeah, but I'd rather talk about the BoSox or the Yanks! Ha.
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 06:13 AM on October 07, 2005
A dilemma. I want the Astros to win because of Pettite, but I want 'em to lose because of Klemens.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:50 AM on October 07, 2005
I want the Astros to win because of Pettite, but I want 'em to lose because of Klemens. Why do you prefer one over the other? Both former Yankees who moved to Houston.
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 07:25 AM on October 07, 2005
while l_b_b may have different reasons, i think most fans still like Pettitte because he was a life-long yankee. and many fans feel that it was the yankees fault for not re-signing him and that he really wanted to come back to new york. (personally i think the mistress rumor could've been true.) clemens is just an asshole. an asshole with a golden arm, but still an asshole. i don't think many fans got an emotional attachment to him. the whole "i'm retiring...no, wait i change my mind" thing pissed off a lot of people.
posted by goddam at 07:36 AM on October 07, 2005
What goddam said. Pettite always struck me as a decent guy -- the way I heard it was, the Yankees' botching the deal plus some personal connections in Houson was why he went, with regrets. I think he was always straight up with what he wanted and what he was doing and why. I could never like Klemens, though -- he was just too much of a blatant whore.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:43 AM on October 07, 2005
Well, I guess it's working out for ya. Didn't Pettit win game one and Clemens lose game 2? Astros can never score for Clemens.
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 08:02 AM on October 07, 2005
Clemens looked pretty bad - but I still have to think the Astros are getting through. Oswalt is up next. Too much for the young Braves. I am looking forward (perhaps prematurely) to a Cards/Stros tilt. That should be quite entertaining. Hey - Clemens is a top 3 pitcher All-time... I love the fact that he never seems to get much done in the postseason. There's something karmically fitting about that.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:13 AM on October 07, 2005
Karmically fitting...get it, karmically, hee hee hee...
posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:48 AM on October 07, 2005
Andruw Jones is going to love (all over again) that short porch in left field in Houston. Just because Houston finally beat the Braves last year in the NLDS doesn't make it a trend. I don't think Hudson will have two horrendous outings and if Bobby Cox continues to play the kids, the Braves can still pull this out.
posted by trox at 08:59 AM on October 07, 2005
I think Asros-Braves is a dead heat at this point. Could really go either way. With respect to Cards-Pads, did anyone else see that Game 3 is on at 11:00 pm ET (8:00 pm PT) Saturday? That's just crazy and wrong. I understand the desire to not have games go head-to-head against one another on the different networks, but it's ridiculous to force the players to play that late, the fans of one team (primarily in the Central time zone) to stay up that late to catch the game, and to follow it up with an early day game (1:00 PT) the next day.
posted by holden at 10:14 AM on October 07, 2005
It's not going to matter what time game 4 is because the Cards are going to spank the Pads and sweep the series.
posted by mcstan13 at 10:17 AM on October 07, 2005
My magic 8 ball says, "it is certain."
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 11:03 AM on October 07, 2005
A dilemma. I want the Astros to win because of Pettite, but I want 'em to lose because of Klemens. Jesus, I spent 15 minutes trying to weave a "K" word into my comment and it was staring me right in the face. KLEMENS! Thanks LBB.
posted by justgary at 11:15 AM on October 07, 2005
How about a litle love for Smoltz? He is now the winnest pitcher in post-season history. He is a 1st class all the way. For Smoltz to throw that game against clememts seemed like poetic justice. The life long brave who does anything his team needs against the overbearing, money hungry, club hopping, bullying villan. Karma is a bitch isnt it.
posted by scottyooooo at 11:43 AM on October 07, 2005
Hey, I had Smoltz in the pool this year, which essentially gave me a bonus starter, although my saves suffered.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 12:21 PM on October 07, 2005
In a big game, I'd rather have Smoltz on the mound than any pitcher playing today. There I said it.
posted by trox at 12:30 PM on October 07, 2005
money hungry, club hopping If I were in the bigs, I would go to whichever team wanted to pay me the most coin. Knowing that I'll get dropped as soon as the organization can find someone to out-produce me, why shouldn't I do the same? Loyal to my family first, employer second.
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 12:34 PM on October 07, 2005
If I were in the bigs, I would go to whichever team wanted to pay me the most coin. I don't think I would. Mind you, I've never been granted the opportunity to make an obscene amount of money, but if I had the choice between two (or more) positions that were willing to pay me like that, I don't think I'd automatically pick the top dollar offer. Reasoning: while ObsceneAmount1 < obsceneamountsub>2, it's still much, much more than I need.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:08 PM on October 07, 2005
er. sorry for the bad tag. you know what I meant.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:08 PM on October 07, 2005
Everybody always thinks that they "need" more. Why does Bill Gates still work?
posted by Bill Lumbergh at 01:20 PM on October 07, 2005
Why does Bill Gates still work? For chicks. Oh, and the fact that his little start-up now is directly responsible for tens of thousands of workers, indirectly responsible for hundreds of thousand more, and contributes to the overall health of the US economy. Also, he might be proud. What it most certainly isn't about any more is the money. Given the hundreds of millions he's giving away to Africa and the sheer impossibility of even accurately knowing how much he's worth, I would think other factors are at play.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:25 PM on October 07, 2005
If the difference was between $6M and $7M per year, I'd let my heart decide, I think. If it was $4M and $8M annually, you can take your home cookin' and sack it -- I'll be dining at the Ritz every night anyhow.
posted by wfrazerjr at 01:28 PM on October 07, 2005
Un-hunh, but didn't Clemens fake his own retirement to get out of his last deal and then sign on with the Astros? I am a bit fuzzy on the details, please forgive the lack of research.
posted by Amateur at 01:47 PM on October 07, 2005
Loyal to my family first, employer second. Yep, poor roger. Gotta get those kids through school.
posted by justgary at 03:57 PM on October 07, 2005
In a big game, I'd rather have Smoltz on the mound than any pitcher playing today. There I said it. Word. I remember being in town for that 91' run and throughout the entire 90's he was money in the playoffs. Sure, Maddux & Clemens may have had better regular seasons, but Smoltzie just seems to have that extra over-drive come playoff time. Plus, I loved his interview, "Yea, I'm going to challenge hitters. I'll give them strikes. They just have to hit it."
posted by jmd82 at 08:21 PM on October 07, 2005
Un-hunh, but didn't Clemens fake his own retirement to get out of his last deal and then sign on with the Astros? No, he did retire, his buddy Pettitte decided to leave the Yankees and sign for his hometown team. Roger allowed Andy to talk him into postponing his retirement so they could pitch together for THEIR hometown team...the Astros. The Astros only paid Clemens 5m last year (not much for a Cy Young winning performance) and they were willing to make personal concessions so Roger could spend more time with his family. All in all, it was an offer he couldn't refuse, far from making him a "whore". And the Hummer George gave Roger as a retirement present? Clemens offered to return it but Steinbrenner told him to keep it. Time to empty that bottle of Bitters. Go Astros.
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 09:32 AM on October 08, 2005
That particular deal may not make him a whore, Texan...but he still is a whore.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 09:38 AM on October 08, 2005
Not unlike the vast majority of professionals in a capitalistic world, athlete or otherwise. I would say in our reality, that makes Roger "normal".
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 09:43 AM on October 08, 2005
Ah, texan, sorry if I struck a nerve. Yes, they all work for money, but I guess I just think that Clemens seems to have fallen into the trap of believing his own PR to a greater degree than average. The K thing creeps me out.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:33 PM on October 08, 2005
Loyal to my family first, employer second. justgary: Yep, poor roger. Gotta get those kids through school.Wait, I totally don't understand this remark. In this day and age, anyone loyal to their employer first and their family second would be fucking retarded! Your employer is likely itching to ship your job overseas to someone earning pennies on the dollar, and you're a scoundrel for not getting all you can? Should Roger work for free, letting the owner's pocket more of your money? It's not like the owners are eager to reduce ticket prices and start turning away the largesse of corrupt and pliable city and state officials! Why should players start doing these bastards any favors? Okay, the K thing is weird, but I'm overall with Texan. As far as I can tell, Roger's not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. And as a Boston fan I'm pissed that he seemed to phone it in quite a lot his last couple of years- although to Duquette's eternal discredit, his stats didn't suggest a guy in decline, but a guy pitching great and simply losing wins to poor run support and a lousy bullpen- predicting 4 more Cy Youngs over the next decade is pretty hard, but recognizing that he was still a top flite pitcher should have been easy. But, I'll be the first to call him a unanimous HoFer, probably the greatest pitcher that ever lived, and if it's a crime to demand so much money for playing, then most of us would be criminals in the same boat. After all, T_l_i_NY did note that Roger came to the Astros for less than other teams would have paid, because he wanted to pitch in Houston. I am often reluctant to begrudge players making the most kwan they can (except when they go all Sprewell and basically make everyone want to slap them around for being greedy and taking their money for granted, or when they mouth empty platitudes that are insulting for thinking anyone believes it was anything but the money!). The owners will toss these people aside like pieces of meat on a moment's notice, and even as we see skyrocketing salaries we don't hear the story of how the big money men and women that own the teams cook the books and still make out like bandits. Bitching at someone making even $25m is silly when the owners bilk taxpayers and fans alike out of hundreds of millions in stadiums, taxbreaks, and spending cash, all the while calling "Alms! Alms for the poor!" It's only relatively recently that the players were even getting a fair shake, instead of being vastly underpaid (compared to their contributions) sweat labor for the Comiskeys and his ilk through the years.
posted by hincandenza at 12:18 AM on October 09, 2005
justgary: Yep, poor roger. Gotta get those kids through school. Wait, I totally don't understand this remark. In this day and age, anyone loyal to their employer first and their family second would be fucking retarded! Your employer is likely itching to ship your job overseas to someone earning pennies on the dollar, and you're a scoundrel for not getting all you can? Should Roger work for free, letting the owner's pocket more of your money? It's not like the owners are eager to reduce ticket prices and start turning away the largesse of corrupt and pliable city and state officials! Why should players start doing these bastards any favors? Well, in one way I was being a smart ass. Simply because, well, I think roger is evil incarnate. He's a flat out liar, classless, and although for a career he'll go down as one of the greatest ever, if a team had to win one game, well, clemens isn't anywhere near the top. I could go on with my top ten reasons roger is evil, but I'll wait until he's enshrined at kooperstown. Roger has every right to go for as much money as he can get, and he has. He's a pitching whore, and for that reason, pretty much no one gives a fuck about roger clemens. But people choose jobs all the time for more than money. For location, loyalty etc. Even in the majors there have been players who could have moved on to other teams to make more money but stayed put. So it's not like it's unheard of to not go for the money. Your employer is likely itching to ship your job overseas to someone earning pennies on the dollar, and you're a scoundrel for not getting all you can? Should Roger work for free, letting the owner's pocket more of your money? Well, the first part has nothing to do with roger, the second is just silly and has nothing to do with what I said (and the owners are a whole nother topic). We're talking about someone who makes 15 millions a year, for example, choosing to go elsewhere to make 17 million. Go for the 17 million, fine, but sorry, 'everyone' wouldn't do that. And if you do that, great, you play strictly for the money. Nothing wrong with that, but let's not pretend otherwise. And it's also misleading to compare roger's situation to joe average. If I make 35,000 a year, and I have an opportunity to make 45,000 a year, that's huge. That could make the difference between sending my kid to college, or buying that house I couldn't afford. The difference in money for roger clemens means he can get a 24k gold toilet instead of 18k. About family? That's funny. The owners will toss these people aside like pieces of meat on a moment's notice Baseball contracts are guaranteed, unlike football. If at the end of your 25 million dollar contract you're not performing, you should be tossed aside. This isn't the same unfair situation many believe football is. his stats didn't suggest a guy in decline, but a guy pitching great and simply losing wins to poor run support and a lousy bullpen I beg to differ: BOSTON 1993 W11 L14 ERA 4.46 1994 W9 L7 ERA 2.85 1995 W10 L5 ERA 4.18 1996 W10 L13 ERA 3.63 TORONTO 1997 W21 L7 ERA 2.05 1998 W20 L6 ERA 2.65 We must be reading completely different stats. and they were willing to make personal concessions so Roger could spend more time with his family. Which basically were "do whatever you want". And it had nothing to do with roger's ego, it's all about the family. You keep telling yourself that.
posted by justgary at 01:16 AM on October 09, 2005
Interesting stats justgary. Actually, you're both right. Roger's ERA during his Yankee stay was similar to the Boston stats that you list. His won - lost stats were much better because of run support and the Yankee bullpen.
posted by drevl at 08:03 AM on October 09, 2005
Gary, while my memory jibes with yours about Clemens' last years with the Sox, the stats do not (W/L/ERA doesn't tell us much). His ERA+ for the four years you cite was 105, 177, 115 (strike-shortened season), 142.
posted by yerfatma at 09:46 AM on October 09, 2005
Gary, while my memory jibes with yours about Clemens' last years with the Sox, the stats do not (W/L/ERA doesn't tell us much). His ERA+ for the four years you cite was 105, 177, 115 (strike-shortened season), 142. Interesting stats justgary. Actually, you're both right. Roger's ERA during his Yankee stay was similar to the Boston stats that you list. His won - lost stats were much better because of run support and the Yankee bullpen. Hal didn't state what stats he was referring to, so I just took the basic ones. And I have no idea what his run support was during those years or the blue jay years or the yankee years. I don't know if drevi knows or if he's just pulling that out of the air. Regardless, I saw clemens pitch many, many times over those years, and then after he left. It wasn't the same pitcher. If Hal saw as many clemens games as I saw, I don't know how he can say it was Duquette's fault. I was NO fan of Duquette, but in this instance roger looked like a pitcher on the way down.
posted by justgary at 08:15 PM on October 09, 2005
With the sox down 2-0 the baseball gods throw me a bone with clemens losing.