A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I doubt they'd talk for very long, as both parties would be seeking extended tenure as the likely criteria for the deal. Borass won't go there.  
    Posted by harness
    But Harness, Madras, Or is only 533 miles from San Francisco so Jacoby would anxious to forego FA for a chance to be as close to home as kid from Richmond, VA would be to Boston.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : But Harness, Madras, Or is only 533 miles from San Francisco so Jacoby would anxious to forego FA for a chance to be as close to home as kid from Richmond, VA would be to Boston.
    Posted by fivekatz


    Borass will reward Jake's sentimentality in spades.
    And that'll include a daily Madres Pioneer.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, I don't think many people here bought every word of that article. Notice that they gave everyone a chance to respond to what they brought up. Francona chose to respond and did so vehemently and they seemed to print every word of his denial. They offered the same opportunity to Beckett, Lester and others if I remember correctly. They have a team of reporters covering the Redsox and that article attempted to make some sense of what occured in this historic meltdown.

    We can think everything is hunky dorry but when a team loses the playoffs when they are 9 games up entering the month, and there really were not that many big injuries, the probability of some issues coming up from the back ground is good.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Yeah, maybe not that many, but several are using it like the Bible.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Boom, let's not confuse that article with the work of Woodward and Bernstein. It was a TMZ caliber piece. Frankly the pain killers were a low blow and discussing Francona's marriage after he was not renewed was the ultimate in poor taste.

    I am not surprised almost none of the players wanted to talk to the media right now. They are sharks that smell blood in the water.

    One of the first fixes the next manager is going to have to make is to radically limit media access to the team and get everyone on the Bellichick train of cliche non-answer-answers IMHO.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Moon, I don't think many people here bought every word of that article. Notice that theygave everyone a chance to respond to what they brought up. Francona chose to respond and did so vehemently and they seemed to print every word of his denial. Theyoffered the same opportunity to Beckett, Lester and others if I remember correctly. Theyhave a team of reporters covering the Redsox and that article attempted to make some sense of what occured in this historic meltdown. We can think everything is hunky dorry but when a team loses the playoffs when they are 9 games up entering the month, and there really were not that many big injuries, the probability of some issues coming up from the back ground is good.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom



    They? Who's they? It was Hohler, get it?
    He got permission to use pieces from other articles.
    It was his dirty work. Period.

    He throws out garbage and the minnows swim toward it.
    Moon's right. It's being sucked up as gospel.
    Hohler is a parasite at a picnic.
    Of course, you see it as "information that appeared to be presented fairly".
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Boom, let's not confuse that article with the work of Woodward and Bernstein. It was a TMZ caliber piece. Frankly the pain killers were a low blow and discussing Francona's marriage after he was not renewed was the ultimate in poor taste. I am not surprised almost none of the players wanted to talk to the media right now. They are sharks that smell blood in the water.One of the first fixes the next manager is going to have to make is to radically limit media access to the team and get everyone on the Bellichick train of cliche non-answer-answers IMHO.
    Posted by fivekatz


    Exactly. Perfect analogy. Theo sees his lifeboat in Chicago.
    This media filth will drive future players - players who might have wanted to be a part of this proud town at one time - away.

    I hope you're right in that the press will face future restrictions, but I think that will sadly translate into an effort of futility.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : They? Who's they? It was Hohler, get it? He got permission to use pieces from other articles. It was his dirty work. Period. He throws out garbage and the minnows swim toward it. Moon's right. It's being sucked up as gospel. Hohler is a parasite at a picnic.
    Posted by harness


    Here are the credits on that piece. Perhaps you missed it harness:

    Bob Hohler can be reached at hohler@globe.com; Globe staffers Nick Cafardo and Peter Abraham contributed to this report. 

    A major report like that would involve a lot of fact checking and editorial approval from management. The same management that used to be part owners of the Redsox just a short while ago. Maybe this piece is an example of more to come, now that they can be truly objective in their reporting without affecting their stock position.

    I don't know how accurate it is but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't report that Tito has been living in a hotel all year unless he was living in a hotel all year. That he was getting a divorce and on major pain medication. That he had withdrawn from the team some possibly given the circumstances of his life. Could he be depressed some in that situation? Who wouldn't be? Could it have affected team management? Given the results obtained, that is certainly a fair question.

    Any politician or public figure like Tito and Theo are going to get dissected in the media. It is what reporters do. They take what information they have, try to make  sure it is accurate information, and report it if it might have been a factor in the situation. 

    For example, when I "reported" that about 58% of all professional baseball players suspended for PED use since 2005 were from the DR, it was pertinent to the Bautista discussion. Some of you had a heart attack over it and called it effectively a hatchet job, but the facts are the facts and that is what good reporters do. That discussion went on to call me irresponsible and then I was completely slandered in the process with zero proof of your accusations but I'm the hatchet guy right? The Globe reporters are all hatchet guys right?

    These guys are reporting the situation to the best of their ability and there is no reason to think that there are any inaccurate statements in that report. Everyone was offered the opportunity to respond. We are now seeing a complete changeover in the management team, from GM and all coaches down. Do you think that just maybe some of that reporting might have been true?

    It's discussions like this which make me weary of this forum. Hacks accusing professional reporters of irresponsible behavior when they don't have a clue to the situation or apparently understand journalism at all. Everyone can have an opinion, and that opinion can be questioned with reason and analysis, but all too often we end up reading one ignorant putz after another spout what he thinks is reason. I grow tired of it.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Moon, I don't think many people here bought every word of that article. Notice that they gave everyone a chance to respond to what they brought up. Francona chose to respond and did so vehemently and they seemed to print every word of his denial. They offered the same opportunity to Beckett, Lester and others if I remember correctly. They have a team of reporters covering the Redsox and that article attempted to make some sense of what occured in this historic meltdown. We can think everything is hunky dorry but when a team loses the playoffs when they are 9 games up entering the month, and there really were not that many big injuries, the probability of some issues coming up from the back ground is good.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom

    I'm with Boom on this one ... don't shoot the messenger.

    Something went terribly wrong with the Red Sox in September. If 90 percent of the information in the article is accurate, that information provides some context for the historic demise.

    I would be more concerned if the Boston Globe had the unflattering information from reliable sources and declined to share those reports with its readers.

    For what it's worth, nothing in the piece caused me to lose respect for Terry Francona.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I'm with Boom on this one ... don't shoot the messenger. Something went terribly wrong with the Red Sox in September. If 90 percent of the information in the article is accurate, that information provides some context for the historic demise. I would be more concerned if the Boston Globe  had the unflattering information from reliable sources and declined to share those reports with its readers. For what it's nothing, nothing in the piece caused me to lose respect for Terry Francona.
    Posted by hill55


    Me either Hill. I'd hire Tito in a heartbeat on another team. Sometimes even the best of managers need to move on though, and maybe Tito needs to take a year or 2 off even to recharge his batteries. It sounds like he could use some recharging.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : I'm with Boom on this one ... don't shoot the messenger. Something went terribly wrong with the Red Sox in September. If 90 percent of the informationin the article is accurate, that information provides some context for the historic demise. I would be more concerned if the Boston Globe  had the unflattering information from reliable sources and declined to share those reports with its readers. For what it's nothing, nothing in the piece caused me to lose respect for Terry Francona.
    Posted by hill55


    That's the whole point, Hill; IF. How much of it can be substantiated? How much of it is manipulated hack writing from a known leper?

    What ever happened to the kind of writing where these questions didn't have to be asked?

    The messenger in today's pathetic press more often than not becomes a manipulative pariah. And the Globe is ultimately the responsible party.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : That's the whole point, Hill; IF . How much of it can be substantiated? How much of it is manipulated hack writing from a known leper? What ever happened to the kind of writing where these questions didn't have to be asked? The messenger in today's pathetic press more often than not becomes a manipulative pariah. And the Globe is ultimately the responsible party.
    Posted by harness


    There you have it. Harness knows all, sees all. Those guys who travel with the team and talk to everyone in the organization have NO CLUE what is going on. Just listen to Harness for the final arbitration of the truth.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : That's the whole point, Hill; IF . How much of it can be substantiated? How much of it is manipulated hack writing from a known leper? What ever happened to the kind of writing where these questions didn't have to be asked? The messenger in today's pathetic press more often than not becomes a manipulative pariah. And the Globe is ultimately the responsible party.
    Posted by harness

    I suspect that is a question asked by a team of Boston Globe editors and the newspaper's attorneys. Without adequate answers, the story does not run. The Boston Globe is not some obscure blog with little oversight.

    BTW, can you substantiate that Globe reporter Bob Hohler is a "known leper"? Hohler became an award-winning* investigative reporter after serving as the Globe's Red Sox beat reporter during the 2004 World Series run.
    * http://www.ewa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=contest_grandprize

    ** http://www.amazon.com/Touch-Future-Story-Christa-McAuliffe/dp/0394557212
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    The situation within the Redsox this year was apparently not conducive to winning. The Globe appears to be trying to decipher what happened. Let the truth be unveiled as long as journalistic ethics are adhered to and I think that overall, they are being adhered to. These reporters gave everyone a chance to respond. It's very likely that they have talked to everyone from the club house boy on up. The trainers, the travel secretary...etc. If this is the overview of the situation, that the club was out of control, management lost control, then let the facts be known.

    The starters drinking in the clubhouse during games says it all. That has not been denied by anyone. When players are added the bad habits acquired from losing teams and losing environments can take hold if it isn't watched closely. Management lost control.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I agree here in part,  harness you act like your more in the know than anyone else here on the debacle. Your "unsubstantiated" remarks towards the reporter are actually unsubstantiated.

    Rather than the obvious "you cannot believe all that you read" harness has gone with the "cannot believe one iota of what your read," and that is your choice but you have used some fairly nasty words in your opinion of the writer. Did he do something to you personally?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I


    A Nick Cafardo's article the other day used Oscar Minaya as an expert resource on the intracies of GM responsibilities, duties, etc.   The 'job' Minaya did on the Mets was certainly less than adequate.

    Anyone who uses Minaya as the perfect example of a GM loses some credibility as far as I'm concerned.  So, using Cafardo as a source probably should be taken with a grain of salt.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Here are the credits on that piece. Perhaps you missed it harness: Bob Hohler can be reached at  hohler@globe.com ; Globe staffers Nick Cafardo and Peter Abraham contributed to this report.  A major report like that would involve a lot of fact checking and editorial approval from management. The same management that used to be part owners of the Redsox just a short while ago. Maybe this piece is an example of more to come, now that they can be truly objective in their reporting without affecting their stock position. I don't know how accurate it is but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't report that Tito has been living in a hotel all year unless he was living in a hotel all year. That he was getting a divorce and on major pain medication. That he had withdrawn from the team some possibly given the circumstances of his life. Could he be depressed some in that situation? Who wouldn't be? Could it have affected team management? Given the results obtained, that is certainly a fair question. Any politician or public figure like Tito and Theo are going to get dissected in the media. It is what reporters do. They take what information they have, try to make  sure it is accurate information, and report it if it might have been a factor in the situation.  For example, when I "reported" that about 58% of all professional baseball players suspended for PED use since 2005 were from the DR, it was pertinent to the Bautista discussion. Some of you had a heart attack over it and called it effectively a hatchet job, but the facts are the facts and that is what good reporters do. That discussion went on to call me irresponsible and then I was completely slandered in the process with zero proof of your accusations but I'm the hatchet guy right? The Globe reporters are all hatchet guys right? These guys are reporting the situation to the best of their ability and there is no reason to think that there are any inaccurate statements in that report. Everyone was offered the opportunity to respond. We are now seeing a complete changeover in the management team, from GM and all coaches down. Do you think that just maybe some of that reporting might have been true? It's discussions like this which make me weary of this forum. Hacks accusing professional reporters of irresponsible behavior when they don't have a clue to the situation or apparently understand journalism at all. Everyone can have an opinion, and that opinion can be questioned with reason and analysis, but all too often we end up reading one ignorant putz after another spout what he thinks is reason. I grow tired of it.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom


     I agree BOOM. I actually am familiar with Bob Hohler, having played pick-up basketball with him, and he lived next door to my sister-in-law in Concord NH, a hundred years ago. He wasn't a dirt bag, so I really doubt he morphed into one.
     I listened with great interest to Nomar on ESPN. Unfortunately he is not anything close to a journalist. Nomie stayed with the player line, that the stuff shouldn't be discussed outside of the club house. The same tact that Youk took.
     The players also complain that Jackie Mac, made stuff up, and wasn't around to get it right in the first place. That's fine, but then the players never fill in the blanks. they want it both ways, first a perception that there is nothing going on in the clubhouse that effects play, and then whatever happens in the club house, stays there. I understand their point of view, but, it's nonsensical.
     The Tito pill story is relevant, and just because he has a legit need for them, doesn't mean that he might not abuse them, and that they could effect his judgement, and his ability to interact with others. The reporters have been given scraps, and then put together a cohesive joint report and get taken to task. Nomar has a particular difficulty separating the media from the FO, he traced a line of blame from Ted to Yaz to Rice to Clemens to Manny to himself and Damon and Wakefield et al, as if the Manny antics are defensible, as well as Nomar himself sitting and stewing on the bench. It was disgusting. Nomar should either take an editorial position up front, or save jounalistic face and submit his resignation.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    YOUKILLUS20 did you catch NOMAR on ESPN saying how he told LA writers how great Manny was and how the Boston media gave Manny a bad wrap - Nomar still thinks Manny was a great guy even after Ramirez quit on LA.  I decided I liked him even less after listenign to him yesterday on ESPN.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    I agree here in part,  harness you act like your more in the know than anyone else here on the debacle. Your "unsubstantiated" remarks towards the reporter are actually unsubstantiated. Rather than the obvious "you cannot believe all that you read" harness has gone with the "cannot believe one iota of what your read," and that is your choice but you have used some fairly nasty words in your opinion of the writer. Did he do something to you personally?
    Posted by BurritoT



    You would fit in beautifully with the hacks...if you could write...or spell.
    Read some of Hohler's garbage instead of skimming.

    "I really have a strong distaste for the press. Anytime you see "sources say" you know nothing at all is fact".
                                                   Burrito

    Now tell me more about "unsubstantiated remarks".

    Tell me more about how you termed Softone's Wake/Tek dumbed-up repitition as "relentless.
    I love it".  What a hypocrite.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    My "sources" comment was on talking about actions which have not come to pass yet and may never come to pass. Hohler wrote about something that actually did happen, the Sox did fall a part.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I :  I agree BOOM. I actually am familiar with Bob Hohler, having played pick-up basketball with him, and he lived next door to my sister-in-law in Concord NH, a hundred years ago. He wasn't a dirt bag, so I really doubt he morphed into one.  I listened with great interest to Nomar on ESPN. Unfortunately he is not anything close to a journalist. Nomie stayed with the player line, that the stuff shouldn't be discussed outside of the club house. The same tact that Youk took.  The players also complain that Jackie Mac, made stuff up, and wasn't around to get it right in the first place. That's fine, but then the players never fill in the blanks. they want it both ways, first a perception that there is nothing going on in the clubhouse that effects play, and then whatever happens in the club house, stays there. I understand their point of view, but, it's nonsensical.  The Tito pill story is relevant, and just because he has a legit need for them, doesn't mean that he might not abuse them, and that they could effect his judgement, and his ability to interact with others. The reporters have been given scraps, and then put together a cohesive joint report and get taken to task.Nomar has a particular difficulty separating the media from the FO, he traced a line of blame from Ted to Yaz to Rice to Clemens to Manny to himself and Damon and Wakefield et al, as if the Manny antics are defensible, as well as Nomar himself sitting and stewing on the bench. It was disgusting. Nomar should either take an editorial position up front, or save jounalistic face and submit his resignation.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20


    He sure as hell writes like a dirt bag. People change, Youk.

    The reporters have been given scraps, and then put together a cohesive joint report and get taken to task.

    It's how it's put together that counts. Think about how tape recordings can be edited to convey a certain message.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    YOUKILLUS20  did you catch NOMAR on ESPN saying how he told LA writers how great Manny was and how the Boston media gave Manny a bad wrap - Nomar still thinks Manny was a great guy even after Ramirez quit on LA.  I decided I liked him even less after listenign to him yesterday on ESPN.
    Posted by BurritoT


     I liked Buckley comments on ESPN, that he wasn't going to blame Tito, in order to curry favor with the players next year. That's what I want from the press. Not a free ride and a wink and a nod to "our" little secret.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Buckley takes a lot of crap from fans but I enjoy listening to him on WEEI.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : He sure as hell writes like a dirt bag. People change, Youk. The reporters have been given scraps, and then put together a cohesive joint report and get taken to task. It's how it's put together that counts. Think about how tape recordings can be edited  to convey a certain message .
    Posted by harness

     BUNK buddy. You hypotheticals are over reaching. The team failed miserably. the leadership was lacking, and have been pushed out/let go. The picture painted by the reporters fits the evidence, and the perps aren't talking to refute it. Hohler may have changed, but I don't see evidence of that.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I agree 110% with Boom and Hill on this article and can't improve on their comments.  Evidently I'm "one of those posters" who believes everything I read. But some posters here aren't keeping an open mind themselves as I DID NOT BELIEVE EVERYTHING I READ but I found a compelling array of reasons which in minor ways and major ways likely contributed to the downfall of this team.  As was said earlier, these reporters are with the team every day.  Where is the "sensationalism" of this article?  Posters here have been saying for a while that players were out of shape, undisciplined, making stupid errors, and not supporting their fellow players.  This article only named names which I don't think were any surprise.  What about this article do you want to disagree with?  "Dedication waned,  unity unraveled, the manager lost influence."  Tito has admitted all this already.  He said he saw it and couldn't seem to do anything about it.  Pedey said, "We let each other down in the clubhouse."  This isn't sensationalism--It's what the manager and the most respected player are saying.  Finally, I did not see the discussion of Tito's medication or marital woes as a cheap shot.  I believe the author was saying they could have been distractions in a tough year with many distractions.  Hey, if "One of his children expressed concern about a pill bottle in his hotel room," isn't it fair to inquire if maybe the health issues weren't a factor?  I too don't see this as a put down of Tito; he said himself it may be time for players to hear a new voice.

    Harness and Moon, I know you love the Red Sox.  Pretty much everyone here does.  But can you back off on the tone a bit.  I think this is a raw wound for you guys, maybe because you care more.  Cleaning the wound is painful but it's got to be done.  I know at least one of you thinks this is pretty much a 95% pitching problem, but these other problems need to be cleaned up too.


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share