mickeef2

I hear you, Lorf. They've responded well to adversity so far this year. I just spent the week at the beach with four other families, all of them Yankee fans. Good times (although Thursday's game would've been the icing on the cake). Anyway, they can deal without Beckett for the next week, but if he's gone for the season they're in trouble. His next start will be the true test. If he comes out after a few innings, that's a bad, bad sign.

I think the amount of joy is the same, it's just a matter of the amount of time that you experience it over. In '86, for example, we were the favorites all along, so it was fun being the dominant team in the NFL for the whole year, but there were no real moments of pandemonium during that run (except, of course, when it was all over and we were the champs). Last year, there was never really hope during the season for winning it all, but in the postseason we had so many moments of unparalleled excitement that it made up for it. Same amount of excitement, just packed into a shorter amount of time.

Did they give out souvenir syringes in honor of the occasion?

Mickeef, you think Shockey sucked as a player because of his personality, simple as that. You don't waste any chance to point this out. At least half the players in the NFL act the same way as you describe, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens you name it. They spike the ball, taunt each other, I mean come on, if you've been watching the league for 32 years, then really this shouldn't even be a factor. For you to pin the 49ers loss on his actions is ridiculous, but your dislike for the guy means you're willing to be. Do the names Trey Junkin, Shaun Williams, Omar Stoutmire ring a bell?. How about those guys on defense spotted a 20 plus lead and let Jeff Garcia and Terrell Owens walk all over us. And even then, after all that, we had 2 chances to win it, and the special teams blew it. Again, none of that factors in for you, just the fact that Shockey threw ice at someone and dropped a touchdown pass and that he lost composure....one guy outta 53 was the major factor for the loss!!!. And again, I'm not saying he's right for his bad behaviour, but then again I don't expect much from any athlete in terms of character, that's not what I watch sports for and no-one should.

You're confused. I think you need to go back and read the things I've said about Shockey in this thread. Nowhere do I say, or have I ever said for that matter, that Shockey "sucked as a player". That's you trying to put words in my mouth. What I have said since day one of his Giant career was that he was extremely immature, and would never reach his full potential if he didn't grow up. That he did stupid things on the field. That these kinds of things cost teams games, and that they'd be better off without him if he didn't change. The enablers out there in Giant world, and there were plenty of them- including our inept head coach at the time (and truthfully, I have no idea whether you've been a Shockey supporter or not, and I really don't care), said that he had to play with that "fire", that they loved his "intensity". Well, San Fran was a microcosm of all the things Jeremy Shockey did wrong in his Giant career on the field- dropped passes, stupid penalties, etc., etc. Did these things help cost the Giants the game? I guess you don't think so, and I do. That's really just a matter of opinion. But don't turn this into an argument about whether or not Jeremy Shockey "sucked". That's never been my contention.

If Manny played for the Kansas City Royals and batted 250 and had half the career he's had, then we could blame his poor performance on the fact he's a dick, right?.

 

Because the only reason I can see for you saying you think Shockey stank , is that he's a jerk off the field.

 

And if you think that Shockey was the main culprit for what happened in San Francisco, then simply put you didn't watch the game. The rest of the comments you're making makes it seem that you don't pay attention to a lot of what goes on out there. I can name a lot of guys who were more responsible for what went on in San Francisco before I get to Shockey's name. And if you think that I'm bias towards him, then read my other posts recently. I don't care for some of the shit he's pulled recently, but I certainly don't let it cloud my judgement so much that I flat out refuse to acknowledge anything. TO is a good player, Randy Moss is a good player. Both jerks

The first part of your post makes very little sense in the context of this conversation. I haven't said anything at all in this thread about the guy's off-the-field behavior, so I'm having a hard time even figuring out where you're coming from. Truthfully, you seem like the one who's not paying attention.

I've given more than enough on the field examples of why the guy was such a disappointment- the stupid penalties, the excessive celebrations after routine plays, the mindless taunting, the dropped passes, the tired "hands thrown up in the air" routine- should I go on? I mean, if you don't feel like the guy was a huge reason for the Niner debacle, great for you. Blame whoever you want. But if you're gonna say the guy didn't lose his composure in that game (which, to me, says he was a big contributor to a bad loss), I think maybe you were the one who wasn't watching. I've watched every Giant game for the last 32 years. I'm pretty sure I didn't accidentally miss that one.

the organization as in Sportswrath.

Wow, didn't realize we had reached that status here. Awesome.

Whatever, dude. You have your opinion, I have mine. It's just that in this instance, mine happened to be proven correct.

Kinda like what your doing right now :brooding:

Yeah, I'm sure the Giants organization is hanging its head over mickeef's comments on Sportswrath.

You're right- Jeremy Shockey was a great Giant- even though the team never won a playoff game with him, they went on an incredible run capped off with a Super Bowl victory after he got hurt, and then gave him away for a song. We're gonna miss him.

Yes, I agree with that.

 

Oh and I will miss him catching a ball for a first down, spiking it and then negating the first down.

C'mon, that's just the way the guy plays. If you take away his intensity, he won't be able to perform at the same level (whatever that level is).

its illegal because they call it a SEAT licence. meaning you buy a LICENCE for a SEAT. Meaning thats your seat for whatever happens at the stadium and you have a CHOICE as to whether you want to buy a ticket for it.

It's just a phrase. Your logic is like saying, "I have a drivers license. It's a license to drive, so I can drive whatever I want- motorcycle, car, 18-wheeler, tank..." What you're purchasing is a license for your seat for Giants games. I'm sure that's outlined in your seat license contract.

As for the seat licenses, I feel bad for all of the people who've had great seats forever and now can't afford to keep them, but when it comes down to the the team being profitable and being able to put a winner on the field (and the current agreement runs out in two years and there will be no cap), or a few thousand people getting to keep their seats and the team not having enough money to sign free agents, I'd rather the team be as profitable as possible.

I can't afford to take my family to Fenway more than once a year anymore, but I'm okay with that if there are Red Sox fans better equipped to fund the team. I'd rather watch a championship-caliber team on tv than a losing team in person any day.

It's all semantics at this point, Keefs.

The dropped touchdown shouldn't have even mattered because the Giants defense shouldn't

have given up 24 unanswered points in the 3rd and 4th quarters. The thing that cost the Giants

the game was the fact they didn't have adequate depth on the defensive line.

I hear you. There was lots of blame to go around that day. My point is that nobody embarrassed themselves or the organization that day like that asshole did. Good riddance (although I guess some Giant fans still long for the days of dancing after 7-yard catches and stupid penalties).

Oh fuck off.

Sorry your Shockey jersey is worthless. You should've known better.

Seriously, fellas- time to pull the heads out of the sand, okay? If Jeremy Shockey was such a great asset to the Giants, why is he no longer here?

I believe he said that because Shockey dropped a rather easy touchdown

that day that would have pretty much iced the game.

Not "pretty much"- it would've iced the game. And again, I have no problem with players making mistakes. But if you're gonna shoot your unproven mouth off at every opportunity, you'd better perform.

Shockey plays defense?.

 

Last I heard, a guy who was brought in to snap field goals, botched 2 of them to win the game. A pass downfield was not called for pass interference, by an official who 2 days later admitted he made a mistake.

 

But none of that matters, because Shockey dropped a touchdown pass, it's on him.

...and took a stupid taunting penalty if my memory serves me correctly, and threw ice into the stands, and basically embarrassed the organization. Bottom line- how many playoff games did the Giants ever win with Shockey dressed? How many did they win with him on the sidelines?

Keef seriously, you hate Shockey, we get it, but make some reasonable comments. Manny Ramirez is a great hitter but in reality he's a dick of a teamate and you've had him in your sig for ages. What's the difference?

Other than the two championships Manny played a big part in (one of which he was MVP), and the colossal numbers he's put up in his career, there's absolutely no difference between him and Jeremy Shockey.

That game, in a nutshell, is why we're better off without Jeremy Shockey.

Just to expand on what VG said, while they play 2, 3, or 4 game series, it's not really a "best two out of three" scenario during the regular season. They group the games together to cut down on travel. Of course you like to win every game, and most players and managers look at each series with the mindset "Let's take two out of three", but there's no penalty for "losing" a regular season series (other than hurting your overall won/lost record).

Now, if the young pitchers can do some real growing up, who knows?

You mean like C.J. Wilson? Nice fucking job by him tonight.

where'd you hear that?

from the Globe:

Ramirez Lobbied to Stay

(Reuters)

Of all the Manny moments in Boston, the last ranks as one of the most confounding. Within an hour after Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein informed Manny Ramírez he had been traded to the Los Angeles Dodgers Thursday, Ramírez's agent, Scott Boras, called the Sox back, according to a source with direct knowledge of the negotiations. If the Sox dropped the option years on his contract - which they had agreed to do if they traded him - Boras said Ramírez would not be a problem the rest of the season.

For the Sox, the source said, Ramírez's pledge of good behavior only served as a tacit admission that his disruptive conduct of the last couple of weeks had been calculated, and they had had good cause to suspect more was in the offing if they did not trade him. The Sox told him thanks but no thanks, what was done was done, and pack plenty of sunscreen.

The debate over the merits of trading Ramírez was not going to end last night with a satisfying debut from the new Sox left fielder, which is what Jason Bay delivered in a 2-1, 12-inning win over Oakland. It was not going to end with Ramírez charming the LA glitterati, which he delivered, too, showing up in shades, a smile, and a No. 99 Dodger jersey. It promises to continue through the summer, over the hot stove of winter, and quite possibly through the day Ramírez is inducted into Cooperstown and beyond.

But for Jason Varitek, the pros and cons of that discussion are not terribly important. This was:

"Either way, you had to get to this point and have some closure," said the Red Sox' captain, not long after manager Terry Francona and general manager Theo Epstein had trooped upstairs to answer questions about Bay's arrival and Ramírez's departure, not necessar ily in that order.

"Either Manny's here or he's not," Varitek said. "It became more of an issue of whether or not he was going to be here. And he was pretty adamant he didn't want to be here.

"It came down to his happiness. If they had come to Manny and he said he wanted to stay here, he'd probably still be here. It's kind of out of our hands. I'm glad there's a resolution. There was going to be whether he was here or not."

Truth is, if John W. Henry had cast the deciding vote, Ramírez might not have been frolicking in Chavez Ravine last night. Henry, whose life has been defined by his mastery of numbers, was unconvinced the Sox would be better off without those generated by Ramírez's bat. But in the end, Henry elected to give his support to Epstein and his baseball operations staff.

His people believed they had no choice but to trade a player who was bent not on forcing the Sox to pick up his $20 million option for 2009, as many thought, but, in their view, was willing to do anything - including laying down on the job - to achieve the opposite outcome: becoming a free agent with no strings attached.

In that sense, Ramírez won. To get him to agree to a trade, the Sox had to waive the two option years on his deal. But even after letting it be known they were willing to pick up the remaining $7 million of his salary this season, the Sox were not overwhelmed with offers for the 36-year-old slugger. In that respect, it was reminiscent of 2003, when the Sox placed Ramírez on irrevocable waivers and any team could have had him for a song - and they all passed.

But while one member of the hierarchy expressed regret that the Sox helped Ramírez to achieve his goal, Epstein and Francona were clearly pleased - and relieved - that in the final minutes before the trading deadline, they were able to engineer a three-way deal with the Pirates and Dodgers.

"We were in a bit of a difficult circumstance and we made something good of it," said Epstein, who was in Anaheim two weeks ago when Ramírez balked at boarding the bus taking the team to the airport and a flight to Seattle.

"I heard about that," Varitek said. "I didn't see it."

The acts, and words, of defiance seemed to multiply quickly thereafter.

Ramírez refused to play a game in Seattle, citing a sore knee about which he'd said nothing to the trainers. When he elected to sit out the first game back at Fenway Park, against the Yankees, ownership insisted on MRIs on both knees, and when those tests came back clean, it threatened disciplinary action if he sat out the next night.

That's when Ramírez stepped up the rhetoric - the "they're tired of me, I'm tired of them" diatribe, and the "they don't deserve me" zinger - and his teammates could no longer block out the white noise of discontent. That led to what Mike Lowell described as a "weird atmosphere."

"He's not a press guy," Lowell said. "And when you see his quotes every day, that's something different. I don't think it's surprising, but it was weird.

"If Dustin Pedroia said the same comments, we think he's a Martian. If Manny says it, people like it. It's front[-page] news."

Losing two of three to the Yankees, then being swept by the Angels, the series finale an ill-focused embarrassment, only added to the sense that something needed to be done. The Sox had lived through 2006, when Ramírez claimed patellar tendinitis left him unable to perform for basically the last six weeks of the season.

They judged a similar risk was at hand.

"It's very hard to tangibly evaluate how hurt someone is," Lowell said. "I'd like to, and still do, take his word for it, until someone comes up to me and says, 'I faked the injury.' It's kind of like Barry Bonds. Everyone has crucified him, but I still have to believe he's innocent until someone proves him guilty."

Was Ramírez hurt? "You don't know," Varitek said, "but it was clear he was unhappy here. And we needed a productive Manny Ramírez."

The Sox in the past had always backed off from trading Ramírez. This time they decided there was too much risk in keeping him. Epstein came away elated that the Sox were able to emerge from the process with a quality left fielder, the kind they expected would be in short supply this winter.

"[Ramírez] had a remarkable run here," Epstein said after asserting he would not engage in finger-pointing at one player. "His whole career was remarkable. He is one of the best righthanded hitters in history, and no one can ever take that away from him."

The loss of that player, for David Ortiz, was hardly the cause for celebration. His answers were short, flat, and delivered without the trace of a smile.

"We got to fight through it," Ortiz said. "We'll see. Hopefully, everything will start going good, everybody moves on, and we go where we are supposed to be."

The words seemed to lack conviction.

There was no mistaking the belief in Francona's words, however, that better days lie ahead.

"We want an atmosphere," he said, "where good players want to do the right thing.

"I was very pleased. What we care about, all of us together, is our team, and I think we sit here feeling pretty good about our team."

lol Now today's reports say Manny asked to stay after learning he'd been traded to the Dodgers, promising he'd behave if the team dropped the options for '09 and '10. Manny being Manny right to the very end.

One other thing, Lorf. I feel like an idiot for not seeing this coming the minute Manny hired Boras this past offseason. Think about it- Boras didn't stand to gain a dime if Manny's options were picked up in 2009 or 2010. The odds that the Sox were going to pick those up were very slim, anyway. But Boras couldn't take that chance. Maybe they win the WS, Manny is a hero, and they pick up next year's. So after Manny gets off to that hot start, Boras tells him he's going to approach the Sox about an extension now, knowing full well that there's no way they'd do that because they have options on the next two years. He comes back and convinces Manny that the Sox don't appreciate him. He tells him it's okay, anyway, because he can get Manny 100 million over 4 years on the open market. He's just gotta make sure the Sox don't pick up those options. Manny, being the numnut that he is, actually believes he can get 100 mil for 4 years (that's what he told reporters), and buys into this whole charade. In the end, Boras will be the guy holding the big bag of money, and Manny's legacy in Boston is forever tarnished.

According to the radio, Francona had a meeting with "team leaders" (probably Lowell, Tek, Wake, Ortiz, Beckett, etc.) to discuss the trade before it happened and they all supported it. They were all fed up with Manny.

Yeah, supposedly they had all had it with him. The silly stuff throughout the years they tolerated, mostly because Manny was a mellow guy. But after the Youk and McCormick incidents, I think a lot of guys felt like he had changed.

The problem with that lineup is that it Drew and Ortiz can't hit next to each other in case of a lefty specialist coming in.

Good point. I'd probably flip-flop Drew and Youk in that case, maybe even hit Youk third and Bay fifth.

Great points all, Lorf. It wasn't that I didn't want to see Hansen, or even Moss, go, I just didn't want to use all of our chips in the same trade. Either way, they absolutely had to make this deal, other teams knew it, and they got held for ransom a bit. At least it's over.

My thinking on the lineup is exactly what you said. I think they need to shake things up here. Ortiz should be hitting cleanup now. He's the only logical choice. I don't know why they're so dead set on him hitting third. Ellsbury is absolutely screwing up the whole lineup. If he were even a serviceable leadoff hitter at this point we'd be in so much better shape. Then you could go:

Ellsbury

Pedroia

Bay

Ortiz

Drew

Youk

Lowell

Tek

Lugo

That's not a bad lineup. Not thrilled with Lowell hitting 7th, and he probably wouldn't be, either, but he's going through his usual 2nd half swoon.

You got your wish. You are now the proud owner of Jason Bay. I don't know if he's as clutch as Manny, but his numbers are good, and I'm sure he'll hold down the runs allowed with his improved defense.

Yeah, they had to do it. I didn't want to give up Hansen and Moss, but their hands were tied and they really had no choice.

I really believe what happened is that he got off to a torrid start, had his agent approach the team about picking up next year's option, got rebuffed, and became sour.

Not to toot my own horn, but here's what Curt Schilling had to say today about the situation:

"I think there was, maybe there's some feeling on his part that if he did what he did last winter and he came out and had a monster first couple of months that they'd sit down and say 'OK we want to keep you here the next four years, let's get something done,' and it felt like to me that the second he realized that that was not an option, this just went straight downhill.""

Lorf, you still want this guy around for the rest of the year?