The most preposterous thing on this thread is the pot-shotting "Babe" making asinine comments that he somehow thinks Red Sox fans care on whit about.  I mean really, who spends his life thinking of ways to irritate and antagonize as many people as he possibly can.  And not get paid for it.  Don Rickles he's not.  And he somehow thinks that his points carry some validity.  Absolutely wasted life.  

 
I knew there would be those who would say there's no comparison between the two.


There is not a perfect parallel.

But I will say this, the musicians get to practice and use all the tools of recording to ex out all errors.  I know that doesn't matter to some, but I can tell you without mixer boards and all the other tools those stars would not sound the way they do. 

Live concerts often have things that happen.  Back in my youth, stoned musicians often seemed mess up.  One might remember some of the more spectacular "lip synch" situations.   I could go on forever.  

I worked in radio for two years.  If the turntables or tape machines weren't working properly, the music would go out altered from the station.  Some of the jocks purposely altered the speed of the tables and players ... because they could and got off on the "power."

Even then, when you and I get the music, over the air, on line, or where ever, our playing devices can still alter the sound ... base, balance, blah blah blah ..

My point? 

ONLY the baseball player can control his play.

Musicians use TONS of tools  to alter their performance.  AND LISTENERS use many more tools to make it sound the way they like.

So, the "wrong note" thing is a practical farce.

We spend billions of dollars to make the music sound the way WE like it.

Guess what?

For all the effort ball players put into becoming pros, it is still the batter against the pitcher and you and I have nothing to do with their performance - unless we somehow get in their heads.

Thus,

   a ball players performance is a far more true record of individual effort.


Ever hear Christopher Cross live?   I like his "recorded" voice.  Live, he sounds like a weasel with one foot caught in a vice.

What did you think of Black Eyed Peas Super Bowl performance?  I like their recorded stuff.  But that performance STUNK....  the whole thing did not have a single moment I enjoyed.



So back to the parallel.


Many of you made valid points.  I don't have a problem with most of them.

But the clear point was if it's the money, don't blame Carl because he found a buyer who wanted him more than anyone else. 

It just makes you sound like a bridesmaid.

And that is really manly.  :o)

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


Dadgum dead on.

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


Thank you, Hammah. And you would be right. I'm not Pike, or anyone else on this board.

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


You're here spending your time passing judgement on a Sox fan. Amazing how that gets absolutely no notice here -- even when your pals spend a huge amount of their time here doing just that. I'll add thier friends, such as yourself being a good friend of Jessey's, as well as posting on other boards with them. You've commented on a number of my posts, and I've yet to see you say anything to them about any of their posts here.

Btw, I love it when you come into conversations like this as an "innocent bystander" when you're anything but.

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


And thank you, Yaz.  Like I said, always the gentleman. Honestly, I wouldn't even let posters defend me if I wasn't telling the truth. Especially you.

How about this one...

Oprah Winfrey: $275M in just salary per year.

If people watch, others get paid.

When you see numbers like this, ARod looks underpaid!

Very interesting thanks for putting the numbers out there.  This is the exact arguement I tried with my father in law, but didn't have the numbers to "prove it."

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:

AGREED

The problem is, the original posters argument is flawed.

My girlfriend for example, is a teacher. I think it is a complete waste. In a certain sense. I mean, she gets to do what she loves to do. And what she wanted to do since I met her. And there is the fact that she is serving the greater good of society. You know, making the world a better place. How many people can say that? We could use far more teachers with her dedication. But honestly? She is far too smart to be teaching schoolchildren.

Despite having two college degrees and an impeccable acedemic record it took her a year and a half to even find a full time teaching job. Lasted a year. She is now on her second job. She teaches a 2nd grade class and an advanced class for gifted students. She probably puts in at least 60 hours a week. And has to drive an hour (each way) to work every day because she couldn't find anything closer.

Her reward for all this? A little over 30k. It's a complete joke. Crawford probably makes that much in one at bat.

So I don't really think there is any point in worrying about how much these people make compared to how much people that actually have an effect on society make.

Certain professions are always going to be underpaid. The flipside to that is- you get what you pay for. Generally speaking.

And I don't even think it's fair to compare Crawford's salary to other players. Every contract situation is different and has it's own set of circumstances.

My problem with the Crawford situation and I'm assuming a lot of people's is the poor value he represents to the team.

The Red Sox have made it clear that they are not going to go all out to win the World Series. They will put a competitive team on the field. But they have a budget they will not deviate from.

So that makes it imperative to get good value from the money they spend. Crawford represents horrible value. They already have a player in Ellsbury that does the same thing Crawford was supposed to do, only better. And at a fraction of the cost. Nevermind the fact that they wildly overpaid for Crawford.

To make matters even worse, they now have 20 million dolars per year tied up in a utility player that does little to help the team. 20 million dollars they could have spent on a player that would have helped the team. Like Cliff Lee or maybe to make a run at Pujols. I wouldn't touch him now, with the wrist injury, but you get the point. Spending 170 million on Crawford really didn't make this team any better. It was a waste. And since this team has a finite budget. They can't afford to keep missing so badly on these mega contracts the way they did with Drew, Lackey and Dice K.  And now Crawford.

Once they get it in their mind they have to get a certain player they will do whatever it takes to get him. the same way they did with Drew. No matter how much they have to overpay. Yet they will let VMart walk over a few dollars. With absolutely no backup plan. Sometimes there really doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to way this team operates

df2 ... appreciate your post.

  And I understand your position, to a degree, no pun intended. 

  My mother had 2 bachelor's and  3 master's degrees and was the daughter of a brilliant hydro-electric engineer ... but never used considerable education and intelligence to work beyond trying to aide folks with difficulties of one sort or another.  Vocational rehab, addiction rehab.  She turned down management level positions because she loved working with the people in need.  Her dad built hydro-electric systems in Greece and all over the US.  And her mom was the old fashioned "school marm" ... taught in Montana Territory ...

  My dad was a Ph.D., a pastor, college professor (elected emeritus upon retiring)  and they were both foreign/overseas missionaries. 

  Like your lady, lives of service. 

  Crawford signed for $142 million not $170 ... sorry .... I slipped off there...

  I understand what you're saying about how the FO has chosen to spend this or that ... I felt particularly upset when Bronson signed a "family friendly" deal and they shipped him to Cincy ...

  But it still is not Carl's fault that he signed.  Uh, not his fault he was OFFERED the contract ... sure, it's his fault he signed.  Wouldn't you?

  I will contend with you about him being a utility player.  He's been more than that for years and an all star as well.  But we won't fight over that ... I understand parabolic speach fairly well, even when people don't inte end to use it.

  You and I, sir, are in the enviable positioin, being Red Sox fans, to be able to see how this all plays out.  Is that not true?

  Let us reengage in this discussion in October and November and see if either of us is molified as to our stance.

  My deepest hope is that you and I and the rest of our Sox fans are idiotically happy with another WS win ...

  And I mean the several upcoming Octobers and Novembers ...   




                     

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:

When are you actually going to post about baseball, pike?

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


I have absolutely no problem with Crawford as human being. The guys that annoy me are people like JD Drew. People that have no passion for what they do. My contempt, in that regard, is certainly not limited to athletes. I saw a documentary on Crawford a little while ago and he seems like a genuinely good guy.What kind of dummy wouldn't take the money?

It's been my contention for years that fan expectations regarding "loyalty" are absurd. Teams rarely show any loyalty. And fans are just as bad, if not worse. Look at all the people that turned on Ortiz in the last few years. It was disgusting. If anybody should have been untouchable it was Big Papi. But the players are supposed to show loyalty? That's crazy. I never have an issue with a player going where the money is. Unless they lie, like Pedro and claim it isn't about the money. Nobody likes to have their intelligence insulted. So no, I have no problem with Crawford taking the money. Or even him playing poorly. It's not like he isn't trying.

And you are right about Crawford not being a utility player. Just a little frustrated at this point.

Here's the thing: At one point earlier this season, I was derisively and sarcastically referring to Ellsbury and Crawford as the Ellsbury twins. But at a certain point I had to stop because Ellsbury was playing so well. And even if he was just having a typical Ellsbury season, would that really be that much worse than what they expected from Crawford?  The fact is they had an obsession with Crawford for years. And they were going to get him no matter if it was a good idea or not.

I don't doubt Ellsbury will help this team win some ballgames at some point this year. He already has with a few walkoffs. But my contention is that they signed and overpaid for a player they did not need. He will never make a big enough impact on this team to even almost warrant 20 million dollars a year. And for a team on a budget that's an issue. For me anyway.

As for the girlfriend Part of me secretly hopes that once we have some kids of our own she will maybe rethink her career choice. She's constantly exhausted. She does two jobs for the pay of one. She is stressed out because she doesn't even know if she will have a job next year. I just hate to see her struggle like that. I can't help but wonder what she could accomplish if she set her mind to something else. She is the most driven intelligent person I've ever met. She's 30. I can't imagine another 30 something years of that.

I know this is going to sound terrible, but if I had a genius level IQ I wouldn't waste it in a classroom. It seems almost tragic. I love that she's so compassionate. But I think there are ways to help people and society without subjecting yourself to poverty. Or ignoring your potential. I just wonder if she retires as a teacher wether she will have regrets when she looks back on her life.

I keep these things to myself because I want her to feel supported. But it bothers me.

hey df2, i agree with you 100% about the bad signings.
however, you failed to mention the genius behind these fiasco contracts.
let me help you here----

                                   theo.

In Response to Re: If it's the contract that's bothering you...:


Yes Theo..The same guy that has signed and drafted many more good than bad..But lets just concentrate on the bad (sarcasm)...I agree there has been some "bad" signings, but why not post with as much energy on the "good" ones like is done with the "bad" ones? I also agree that once Theo sets his sights on someone, he gets tunnel vision..see Julio Lugo..maybe he has "overpaid" for those players, but john henry is the final say on The "Big" deals, its not Theo. If you remember at the winter meetings theo had to call JH in England to get the OK on the CC deal..So if henry doesnt have an issue with spending 20mil per for CC out of his Billion+ worth, I have no problem with it. Do I think hes worth it is another question.. This Ownership is not dumb with money from what Ive seen..So the least of the fans worry should be being handcuffed due to finances..