Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

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

    Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Dan Shaughnessy had an excellent column today about how team chemistry can be overrated, which I agree with 100 percent. And he had this nugget in the column:

     On the night the Sox lost, 19-8, in the third game of the ALCS against the Yankees, there was a fight in the wives’ room involving Shonda Schilling and Johnny Damon’s fiancee.

     

    Would have loved to have seen that.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    ROY1NINER,   I would have loved standing there with an expensive FENWAY BEER in hand !!!!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    i think these two ladies misunderstood the playoff 'shot" ritual...

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.




    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

     




     

    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........



    Chemistry is at best 1% of the total equation.

    Beckett had "the fire" when we won, but was a "cancer" when we lost.

    Had we won in 2011, nobody, and I mean nobody would be talking about the "poor chemistry"- just as in 2004 and 2007. As soon as we started losing,all of a sudden Manny was a cancer, Beckett was a cancer, fill in the blank was a cancer...

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

     




     

    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........

     



    Chemistry is at best 1% of the total equation.

     

    Beckett had "the fire" when we won, but was a "cancer" when we lost.

    Had we won in 2011, nobody, and I mean nobody would be talking about the "poor chemistry"- just as in 2004 and 2007. As soon as we started losing,all of a sudden Manny was a cancer, Beckett was a cancer, fill in the blank was a cancer...




    No offense Moon.  Have you ever played a competative sport.  I think you might misunderstand team chemistry, just as the writer of the column does???

    You're dead wrong about chemistry!

    Again...  No offense!!!  But I've lived it.

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    The "chemistry" of which I speak, is guys feeding off one another, pushing eachother to the heights of greatness.  You can have a great deal of resentment, anger, hostility, nastiness, bitterness, envy, etc. and still have "GREAT Chemistry."  It is in FACT the mix, the chemistry, the blend of so many personalities on and off the field that can either push a team over the hump or over the edge.  I've been a teams with many great players, who on paper should have been big winners, but languished.  I've been on "good" paper teams that had no business doing what we did, but because of chemistry, we were great.  We also had a lot of "crappp" swirling around those sometimes dysfunctional great teams.  :)

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

     

    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........

    Chemistry is at best 1% of the total equation.

    Beckett had "the fire" when we won, but was a "cancer" when we lost.

    Had we won in 2011, nobody, and I mean nobody would be talking about the "poor chemistry"- just as in 2004 and 2007. As soon as we started losing,all of a sudden Manny was a cancer, Beckett was a cancer, fill in the blank was a cancer...




    You make my point.....  I do believe the chemistry of Beckett, Lackey, Dice-K, Lester, Buch, and Doubie did in fact combine to help sink this team.  There were key elements in that chemical mix that when combined poisoned the well.  Even A-Gon added to that poisoned mix.  Not to mention little bobby v.  The chemistry added to guys not doing what they needed to do to win.  The entitlement mentality added to the chemistry.

    *******It's all about chemistry.  that is not mutually exclusive of needing players who have the ABILITY to be great. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

     




     

    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........

     



    Chemistry is at best 1% of the total equation.

     

    Beckett had "the fire" when we won, but was a "cancer" when we lost.

    Had we won in 2011, nobody, and I mean nobody would be talking about the "poor chemistry"- just as in 2004 and 2007. As soon as we started losing,all of a sudden Manny was a cancer, Beckett was a cancer, fill in the blank was a cancer...

     




    No offense Moon.  Have you ever played a competative sport.  I think you might misunderstand team chemistry, just as the writer of the column does???

     

    You're dead wrong about chemistry!

    Again...  No offense!!!  But I've lived it.

    YES, CHEMISTRY is so needed for an above average/any  team to overcome better talent !!   Sort of an unwritten, unscouted, but in the end you can "feel it"  !!!

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    The Stanley Cup Bruins of late had more chemistry than other more talented teams.

    The New York Yankees of 2004 likely had more raw talent than the Red Sox that year.  We won the ALCS on chemistry.  Guys like Bill Mueller, Kevin Millar, & Mark Bellhorn were chemically inspired to play way over their heads.... 

    :)   It's all about "chemistry."

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Did they b-slap and use their fingernails?  Did they pull each other's hair? Was Jerry Springer there?




    Easy 'Soft-y'......keep this up and you may have to change your name......

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Did they b-slap and use their fingernails?  Did they pull each other's hair? Was Jerry Springer there?




    "b-slap." Not sure what that means, or this Jerry Springer guy you watch???   Is that what they do in the land of pretend lawyers?  You've been watching way too much CSI, daytime shock tv, or whatever you base your make believe so called life on.  :)

    LOL

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Watching Moon trying to grapple with the unquantitative measurement of "chemistry" is pretty funny...

     

    and i repeat the same thing over and over and over and over...

    when your teammates are more interested in drinking beer in the clubhouse, playing videogames, and ordering take out fried chicken (instead of waiting 90 min to eat the sumptious postgame spread) rather than supporting their team during the thick of a pennant race, there is no team and there is no chemistry...there is just dysfunction....

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to Kingface12's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    Did they b-slap and use their fingernails?  Did they pull each other's hair? Was Jerry Springer there?

     




    Easy 'Soft-y'......keep this up and you may have to change your name......

     




    We changed it to fit his obsessions.......  Stiffy :)  Personified when discussing his most passionate obsessions!!!

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    wink wink ;)  ;)  nudge dudge > >  say no more

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to royf19's comment:

    Dan Shaughnessy had an excellent column today about how team chemistry can be overrated, which I agree with 100 percent. And he had this nugget in the column:

     On the night the Sox lost, 19-8, in the third game of the ALCS against the Yankees, there was a fight in the wives’ room involving Shonda Schilling and Johnny Damon’s fiancee.

     

    Would have loved to have seen that.

     




    btw....

    Has Shaughnessy ever played a competative TEAM sport other than ......

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to georom4's comment:

    Watching Moon trying to grapple with the unquantitative measurement of "chemistry" is pretty funny...

     

    and i repeat the same thing over and over and over and over...

    when your teammates are more interested in drinking beer in the clubhouse, playing videogames, and ordering take out fried chicken (instead of waiting 90 min to eat the sumptious postgame spread) rather than supporting their team during the thick of a pennant race, there is no team and there is no chemistry...there is just dysfunction....

       B I N G O !!!!!!!


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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    geo, had we lost in 2004, would you have blamed Shill for fostering bad chemistry? 

    Afterall, he had "a history" of being a "cancer in the clubhouse" beforehand.

     




     

    Chemistry is extremely important!  The problem is, it's highly misunderstood.  People think it's ALL about "getting along," or "guys having fun all the time."  WAY OFF!  The chemistry that a guy like Schill added was a COMPETATIVE FIRE and A WORK ETHIC that NEVER QUIT.  Even Manny, who was notorious for living in the batting cage.  These guys are not stupid.  They may not like some of their teammates, but they do respect a guy who puts it all out on the line.  A guy who is willing to do anything to help them win between the lines.  This type of thing is infectious, and it is exactly what pushes a team to greatness

    CHEMISTRY is ALL important.  I've been on many teams, with guys I personally couldn't stand!  BUT, their work ethic, toughness, grit, drive, nastiness, contentiousness, ugliness, kill or be killed attitudes were a factor in making our teams better.  On the field, I was their biggest fan.  Win or lose, I knew these guys gave it their all.  The guys I really resented were some of the really nice guys who were not doing everything they needed to do to be all they could be. 

    Schill was a MAJOR factor in giving Boston something we thought we might never see in our lifetime.  Folks want to spoil that by focusing on his big mouth?  Have at it.  Rediculuous!  The chemistry of his literal blood, sweat, and tears was an integral part of our World Series Winning Chemistry!   :)  As was Manny, Pedro, .........

     



    Chemistry is at best 1% of the total equation.

     

    Beckett had "the fire" when we won, but was a "cancer" when we lost.

    Had we won in 2011, nobody, and I mean nobody would be talking about the "poor chemistry"- just as in 2004 and 2007. As soon as we started losing,all of a sudden Manny was a cancer, Beckett was a cancer, fill in the blank was a cancer...




    It's not like you to let this stand Moon?   You ok?  HAPPY EASTER!  You "may be" wrong about this unwinable debate, but more often than not I would not challenge your baseball wisdom :)

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Got to go with redsoxdirtdog on this one.  Chemistry IS a big deal.  It is NOT, however just about getting along and having a good time.  It is about having each other's back, while still able to goad each other into being better and taking the results to heart.  Losing has a way of becoming a habit, unless there are players who do not accept it, and push others to not accept it.

    Winning, obviously, works to cover all manner of bad blood.  And if the Sox had won last season, no one would be talking about chemistry.  But there is no way, despite having more "talent," that last year's team was going to win it all, let alone enough to make the playoffs.  Even before Ortiz managed to hurt himself and the Sox traded away all that "talent" (and let's not undersell that...Gonzalez was not mashing it, but he was very productive, Beckett was having one of his even years, meaning he was doing well.  Even Crawford had proven to be a gamer), the Sox were no more than a .500 club. 

    In this day and age and in this market, bad clubhouse chemistry is over-reported and becomes the obsession of all, and it taints every loss...no, it amplifies every loss -- to a point that it takes on a life of it's own.  That is what Steve Silva was getting at in the recent Globe 10.0.  Bad chemistry is something to be avoided more than in the past, and especially in a market like Boston, because of the intensity of the scrutiny that comes with a 24-hour online news cycle.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Team chemistry is huge. It's a large part of the reason why the Sox won in '04 ... and why they fell apart in '11.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Maybe "chemistry" isn't the word.  Try spinning it as creating "a winning (or losing) culture".  If this were a school district or touchy-feely corporation or organization, we would have workshops about it.  

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

    Re: Here's the Best 2004 Highlight We've Never Seen

    Team is all about chemistry

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share