MLB THREAD

[Myshkin]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1545714' date='Oct 7 2008, 03.43']I had a whole post here and I decided to just delete it. Myshkin, you hate the Red Sox and Red Sox Nation. That's cool, I hate most of Red Sox Nation as well. I don't have to answer for their unforgivable sins of fandom and I also don't have to answer for the ESPN East Coast bias. You've been an entertaining part of these threads (which are supposed to be fun) in the past, so I'm not sure who shat in your coffee but I'm sure it'll pass. There isn't anything entertaining or constructive in this argument, so let's just move on...with grace ;) .[/quote]
I agree. Emotion got the better of us, and we derailed this thread. Sorry if I said anything that was personally offensive, I usually try not to get personal as I feel it is a poor debate tactic, but sometimes I cross the line. Go Dodgers. Go Red Sox. I'd like to see that match up, with all the history behind both those teams.

[quote name='Rockroi' post='1545862' date='Oct 7 2008, 06.40']Yeah… this is constructive. Look, I’m trying to define for you why the Sox won and why the Angels lost. Myshkin, I think you are one of those people who clings to this notion that the best team does not “always” win, and thus this explains why your team(s) lost. Well, statistically the best team does not “always” win, but they win the vast vast vast majority of the time. And even if your statement is correct, THAT does not explain why the [i]Angels [/i]lost. The Angels lost because the Sox were better. Simply saying that its somehow a grand conspiracy that the “better” team does not win is a fallacy. You and John Lacky should get together and explain to us how the “better team” didn’t win.[/quote]
I don't want to argue about this, but I do want to clear up a misconception you seem to have: I am [b]not[/b] an Angels fan.

[Week]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546532' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.51']I agree. Emotion got the better of us, and we derailed this thread. Sorry if I said anything that was personally offensive, I usually try not to get personal as I feel it is a poor debate tactic, but sometimes I cross the line. Go Dodgers. Go Red Sox. I'd like to see that match up, with all the history behind both those teams.[/quote]
It's cool, no worries.

I'm just pissed now that there's no baseball until Thursday! What the hell am I supposed to watch until then? :(

[smegma]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546537' date='Oct 7 2008, 14.54']It's cool, no worries.

I'm just pissed now that there's no baseball until Thursday! What the hell am I supposed to watch until then? :([/quote]

This day already feels so empty, and soon there will be none at all. Ugh.

Winter is coming alright. Dang it :(

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546532' date='Oct 7 2008, 14.51']Go Dodgers. Go Red Sox. I'd like to see that match up, with all the history behind both those teams.[/quote]

Ah...now there in lies the MLB nightmare: A Phillies/Rays WS. Sure the draw of the Rays, the little engine that could, is appealing, but they're not dragging in the cross country crowds.

Yeah, it's pretty much going to be a Rays/Phillies WS.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Rockroi' post='1545862' date='Oct 7 2008, 06.40']However, ESPN ALSO has a decided California bias.[/quote]
Really?

[quote]They have jumped on the Dodgers (all but ignoring the Diamondbacks);[/quote]
As of when? Early in the season when the Diamondbacks were the clear division favorites? Not true. When the Dodgers signed one of the most dynamic players in the league and started taking the division back? Understandable. When the playoffs started? Well, duh.

[quote]they gave plenty of play to the angels,[/quote]
Moreso than the White Sox, Red Sox or Rays?

[quote]refused to speak ill of Barry Bonds,[/quote]
This seems absurd to me, but I'll admit I'm biased.

[quote]still think the 49’ers are great,[/quote]
But now you're just making stuff up.

[quote]follow the Lakers with rabid dedication, and have this fixation with USC. I’m just saying. Goose, meet gander.[/quote]
One has arguably the best player in the league, the other has recently been the best team in college football. Both are in a huge sports market.

Getting tired of hearing about the A's? The Warriors? The Kings? (Either one) [i]The Clippers[/i]? UCLA? Cal? Stanford? San Diego State? Fresno State? [i]San Jose[/i] State?

Edit: :)

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546532' date='Oct 7 2008, 12.51']I don't want to argue about this, but I do want to clear up a misconception you seem to have: I am [b]not[/b] an Angels fan.[/quote]
I don't know if it was you or Dub that said that Angels fans don't exist, but my A's fan buddy confirms that yes, Angels fans are largely ficticious. He went to a game in Anaheim and claims that their fans are clueless and there for the spectical more than the baseball. Of course, he's biased.

[Myshkin]

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1546757' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.39']Really?

Getting tired of hearing about the A's? The Warriors? The Kings? (Either one) [i]The Clippers[/i]? UCLA? Cal? Stanford? San Diego State? Fresno State? [i]San Jose[/i] State?[/quote]
You tell him! The idea that ESPN has a California bias is ridiculous! Some days SportsCenter doesn't even show the Dodger highlights. More often they don't show the A's or Padre's highlights. Have they EVER missed a Yanks or Sox highlight?

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1546757' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.39']I don't know if it was you or Dub that said that Angels fans don't exist, but my A's fan buddy confirms that yes, Angels fans are largely ficticious. He went to a game in Anaheim and claims that their fans are clueless and there for the spectical more than the baseball. Of course, he's biased.[/quote]
It was me who made that claim, and bias or no your A's fan friend is 100% correct about the state of Angels fandom.

[Week]

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1546757' date='Oct 7 2008, 18.39']Getting tired of hearing about the A's? The Warriors? The Kings? (Either one) [i]The Clippers[/i]? UCLA? Cal? Stanford? San Diego State? Fresno State? [i]San Jose[/i] State?[/quote]
Which of those professional teams deserve to get a lot of air time? Who wants to watch them? Why would anyone [i]nationally [/i]want to watch them?

I'd say the A's get a decent amount of respect on ESPN as a result of Billy Beane who pretty much can do no wrong (admittedly, he is very good). So they'll get more play than say the Reds, Pirates, or other mediocre to bad teams.

Triskele,
If that happens, I really hope that Manny gets cheered. Even if someone wants to believe the entire second half of this year is 100% Manny's fault, he still gave 7.5 years of some of the best baseball you can get from a right handed hitter in history.

[Myshkin]

Double post, but I don't care.

[quote name='Triskele' post='1546764' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.42']Dodgers v. Red Sox would be incredible theater. What is the reaction when Manny comes up to the plate in Boston? I mean, he did act like a petulant child. He also hit the cover off the ball for the better part of a decade for you.

You know the media is hoping for that matchup.

The Rays are a good story but you just know they won't get the ratings that Boston will.[/quote]
The great thing ratings wise about a Dodgers/Red Sox match-up would be that not only would the people of LA and Boston be watching avidly, but the people of New York and San Francisco would be tuned in with almost as much intensity to try and see their hated rival lose. That's four large markets all with some stake in the outcome.

[Young Wolf]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546780' date='Oct 7 2008, 18.53']Double post, but I don't care.


The great thing ratings wise about a Dodgers/Red Sox match-up would be that not only would the people of LA and Boston be watching avidly, but the people of New York and San Francisco would be tuned in with almost as much intensity to try and see their hated rival lose. That's four large markets all with some stake in the outcome.[/quote]

Not to mention the Dodgers still have a decent following in Brooklyn and Florida. (Dodgertown)
Red Sox have people all over the nation as well. I think it would be the MLB's wet dream come true to have that match up.

Angels fans...pft. People dont go to Angel games to watch baseball, its more of a place where people take their kids to be distracted for a few hours and watch the fireworks and water fountains in center field. And then there's that fucking Rally Monkey...

YW

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546780' date='Oct 7 2008, 17.53']Double post, but I don't care.


The great thing ratings wise about a Dodgers/Red Sox match-up would be that not only would the people of LA and Boston be watching avidly, but the people of New York and San Francisco would be tuned in with almost as much intensity to try and see their hated rival lose. That's four large markets all with some stake in the outcome.[/quote]

Yet, ironically, any mach-up that doesn't include the Rays will result in pretty much the rest of the country tuning out. And, no disrespect meant more than usualy, but any WS with the Red Sox in it isn't going to get any help in the ratings from my television.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1546771' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.48']You tell him! The idea that ESPN has a California bias is ridiculous! Some days SportsCenter doesn't even show the Dodger highlights. More often they don't show the A's or Padre's highlights. Have they EVER missed a Yanks or Sox highlight?[/quote]
The Padres get so much coverage, [i]I forgot about them[/i]. :lol: :dunce:

I left off the Giants, Sharks, and Ducks on purpose. And Chico State.

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546778' date='Oct 7 2008, 15.52']Which of those professional teams deserve to get a lot of air time? Who wants to watch them? Why would anyone [i]nationally [/i]want to watch them?[/quote]
Exactly. But if there [i]were[/i] a West Coast bias, you may have to anyway.

[Week]

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1546804' date='Oct 7 2008, 19.05']Exactly. But if there [i]were[/i] a West Coast bias, you may have to anyway.[/quote]
Ok, so the next time the Sox are well below .500 and still trumping most teams for air time, then you'll have a point. You haven't shown that undeserving teams are getting undue time on air. It has been pointed out several times that the teams getting the most time on ESPN are from the major centers of sports (Boston, NY, LA) and they have the best teams (almost always) and the best players.

[Bronn Stone]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546892' date='Oct 7 2008, 16.59']Ok, so the next time the Sox are well below .500 and still trumping most teams for air time, then you'll have a point. You haven't shown that undeserving teams are getting undue time on air. It has been pointed out several times that the teams getting the most time on ESPN are from the major centers of sports (Boston, NY, LA) and they have the best teams (almost always) and the best players.[/quote]


I think there are a dozen teams with players as good as or better than this year's edition of the Yankees. Their pitching was dreadful. ARod great, Jeter above average, Cano below average, 1B below, C below, OF average. But they still probably got as much coverage as any team in the game.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546892' date='Oct 7 2008, 16.59']You haven't shown that undeserving teams are getting undue time on air.[/quote]
No shit. You know why? Because I'm not trying to. I'm saying the existence of an ESPN West Coast bias is laughable. That's it.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546892' date='Oct 7 2008, 18.59']Ok, so the next time the Sox are well below .500 and still trumping most teams for air time, then you'll have a point. You haven't shown that undeserving teams are getting undue time on air. It has been pointed out several times that the teams getting the most time on ESPN are from the major centers of sports (Boston, NY, LA) and they have the best teams (almost always) and the best players.[/quote]

To be fair, it took quite a lot of time for ESPN, among others, to come around in the case of Tampa this year. In fact, I don't think they took Tampa even halfway seriously until the Rays took Boston out behind the woodshed at one point. But didn't we argue this midway through the season? :P

I think the only thing for ESPN to do is to move to somewhere in the middle of Nebraska and start over, centrally located so they can try to appear a little less left costal. :P

[Myshkin]

Did anybody else just see The Daily Show tear into Cubs fans? It was pretty harsh... but, and I don't want to sound unsympathetic here, it was also kind of hilarious.

[add-on]

Yeah, I saw that. And yeah, it was definitely funny. Me and both of my roommates (also big Cubs fans) all laughed out loud. We've got some pretty thick skin over this way. ;)

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1546892' date='Oct 7 2008, 18.59']Ok, so the next time the Sox are well below .500 and still trumping most teams for air time, then you'll have a point. You haven't shown that undeserving teams are getting undue time on air. It has been pointed out several times that the teams getting the most time on ESPN are from the major centers of sports (Boston, NY, LA) and they have the best teams (almost always) and the best players.[/quote]

About one half of the nationally televised games between ESPN and Fox this season involved either NY or Boston. (and of course sometimes both) Counted it up some weeks ago when I got really bored one night.

Not sure if this adds to the debate at all. Choosing not to really take part in it myself much.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='add-on' post='1547403' date='Oct 7 2008, 22.56']Yeah, I saw that. And yeah, it was definitely funny. Me and both of my roommates (also big Cubs fans) all laughed out loud. We've got some pretty thick skin over this way. ;)[/quote]

Gotta agree with add-on here. It was pretty funny. And well deserved.

[smegma]

Cubs picked up Harden's option today, a no-brainer. Even if the guy can only pitch half the year at full capacity, 7 mil isn't too bad. He'd still be about 80 times more valuable than Soriano.