S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    Had we just signed 2-3 younger FAs, a couple stop-gap role players, and made one trade, I think the fans would have been just as enthusiastic as they are now.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Putting a competitive team on the field and filling up Fenway to capacity brings in $4 mil. per home game or $324 mil. per season.  Then there are extra revenues from TV and radio if the ratings are good. Of course, they could have written off this year and saved the $40 mil. but they would also be sacrificing revenues by being non-competitive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Drivel. Stick to moderating.

    '10 '11  '12               

    Cubs  Wins  75  71  61  Attend:  3.1M  3.0M  2.9M

    BoSox Wins  89  90  69  Attend: 3.1M  3.1M  3.0M

    Pike are you saying the Sox fans will abandoned ship?  Why haven't the Cubs fans!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard core fans won't.

    But casual fans, the one's that help to fill Fenway, will.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Drew should be as good or better than Scuter was if hes healthy and I certainly have yet to see anything written that backs up your statement.

    "If he's healthy"? Is that some kind of a joke? Drew's not healthy!

    What part of "plate attached to broken bone and ligament damage do you not comprehend?

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm no doctor (or pretend lawyer), but I would a think a human bone would be stronger, with a couple of steel plates screwed to it.


    It's more realistic to believe the plates were removed after the bone healed.

    But I know you and reality aren't close friends.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    Drew should be as good or better than Scuter was if hes healthy and I certainly have yet to see anything written that backs up your statement.

    "If he's healthy"? Is that some kind of a joke? Drew's not healthy!

    What part of "plate attached to broken bone and ligament damage do you not comprehend?

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm no doctor (or pretend lawyer), but I would a think a human bone would be stronger, with a couple of steel plates screwed to it.


    It's more realistic to believe the plates were removed after the bone healed.

    But I know you and reality aren't close friends.

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course not, reality is gay.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Putting a competitive team on the field and filling up Fenway to capacity brings in $4 mil. per home game or $324 mil. per season.  Then there are extra revenues from TV and radio if the ratings are good. Of course, they could have written off this year and saved the $40 mil. but they would also be sacrificing revenues by being non-competitive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Drivel. Stick to moderating.

    '10 '11  '12               

    Cubs  Wins  75  71  61  Attend:  3.1M  3.0M  2.9M

    BoSox Wins  89  90  69  Attend: 3.1M  3.1M  3.0M

    Pike are you saying the Sox fans will abandoned ship?  Why haven't the Cubs fans!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard core fans won't.

    But casual fans, the one's that help to fill Fenway, will.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Sox drew just over a million fans in 1981. They went up to 2.7 million without ever winning a ring.

    1997  78-84  2.2M

    1998  92-79  2.3M

    1999  94-68  2.4M

    2000  85-77  2.586M

    2001  82-79  2.625M

    2002  93-69  2.650M

    2003  95-67  2.724M

    2004  98-64  2.837M

    2005  95-67  2.848M

    2006  86-76  2.931M

    2007  96-66  2.970M

    2008  to2011  3.047M to 3.063M

    2012  69-93  3.043M

     

    I don't see much evidence here that winning or losing makes a big difference.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

     

    Putting a competitive team on the field and filling up Fenway to capacity brings in $4 mil. per home game or $324 mil. per season.  Then there are extra revenues from TV and radio if the ratings are good. Of course, they could have written off this year and saved the $40 mil. but they would also be sacrificing revenues by being non-competitive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Drivel. Stick to moderating.

    '10 '11  '12               

    Cubs  Wins  75  71  61  Attend:  3.1M  3.0M  2.9M

    BoSox Wins  89  90  69  Attend: 3.1M  3.1M  3.0M

    Pike are you saying the Sox fans will abandoned ship?  Why haven't the Cubs fans!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard core fans won't.

    But casual fans, the one's that help to fill Fenway, will.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Sox drew just over a million fans in 1981. They went up to 2.7 million without ever winning a ring.

    1997  78-84  2.2M

    1998  92-79  2.3M

    1999  94-68  2.4M

    2000  85-77  2.586M

    2001  82-79  2.625M

    2002  93-69  2.650M

    2003  95-67  2.724M

    2004  98-64  2.837M

    2005  95-67  2.848M

    2006  86-76  2.931M

    2007  96-66  2.970M

    2008  to2011  3.047M to 3.063M

    2012  69-93  3.043M

     

    I don't see much evidence here that winning or losing makes a big difference.

    [/QUOTE]


    The small size of the venue is a bigger issue.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Putting a competitive team on the field and filling up Fenway to capacity brings in $4 mil. per home game or $324 mil. per season.  Then there are extra revenues from TV and radio if the ratings are good. Of course, they could have written off this year and saved the $40 mil. but they would also be sacrificing revenues by being non-competitive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Drivel. Stick to moderating.

    '10 '11  '12               

    Cubs  Wins  75  71  61  Attend:  3.1M  3.0M  2.9M

    BoSox Wins  89  90  69  Attend: 3.1M  3.1M  3.0M

    Pike are you saying the Sox fans will abandoned ship?  Why haven't the Cubs fans!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard core fans won't.

    But casual fans, the one's that help to fill Fenway, will.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Sox drew just over a million fans in 1981. They went up to 2.7 million without ever winning a ring.

    1997  78-84  2.2M

    1998  92-79  2.3M

    1999  94-68  2.4M

    2000  85-77  2.586M

    2001  82-79  2.625M

    2002  93-69  2.650M

    2003  95-67  2.724M

    2004  98-64  2.837M

    2005  95-67  2.848M

    2006  86-76  2.931M

    2007  96-66  2.970M

    2008  to2011  3.047M to 3.063M

    2012  69-93  3.043M

     

    I don't see much evidence here that winning or losing makes a big difference.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're the stat guy, Moon. So, I don't doubt the numbers.

    But, as someone that goes to a couple of games a year, I know it was much easier to get tickets in the '90s than it has been in the last dozen years.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Putting a competitive team on the field and filling up Fenway to capacity brings in $4 mil. per home game or $324 mil. per season.  Then there are extra revenues from TV and radio if the ratings are good. Of course, they could have written off this year and saved the $40 mil. but they would also be sacrificing revenues by being non-competitive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Drivel. Stick to moderating.

    '10 '11  '12               

    Cubs  Wins  75  71  61  Attend:  3.1M  3.0M  2.9M

    BoSox Wins  89  90  69  Attend: 3.1M  3.1M  3.0M

    Pike are you saying the Sox fans will abandoned ship?  Why haven't the Cubs fans!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard core fans won't.

    But casual fans, the one's that help to fill Fenway, will.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Sox drew just over a million fans in 1981. They went up to 2.7 million without ever winning a ring.

    1997  78-84  2.2M

    1998  92-79  2.3M

    1999  94-68  2.4M

    2000  85-77  2.586M

    2001  82-79  2.625M

    2002  93-69  2.650M

    2003  95-67  2.724M

    2004  98-64  2.837M

    2005  95-67  2.848M

    2006  86-76  2.931M

    2007  96-66  2.970M

    2008  to2011  3.047M to 3.063M

    2012  69-93  3.043M

     

    I don't see much evidence here that winning or losing makes a big difference.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're the stat guy, Moon. So, I don't doubt the numbers.

    But, as someone that goes to a couple of games a year, I know it was much easier to get tickets in the '90s than it has been in the last dozen years.

    [/QUOTE]

    Tickets are easy to get... just more expensive.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     don't see much evidence here that winning or losing makes a big difference

    And, other than desparately saying anything to get re-elected, Obama wants us to get away from winning or losing mentality.

    [/QUOTE]

    More "on topic" drivel.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A good discussion and I hope that BostonTrollSpanker reads the data presented. She is convinced that attendance is going to drop drastically since Ben is inept, cautious, and near-sighted. Let her attack you people instead of me.

    All of you failed to display any drop in ratings for radio and TV. That needs to be considered also.

    [/QUOTE]

    http://deadspin.com/5949107/people-watch-the-red-sox-even-when-they-suck-and-other-things-about-mlb-tv-ratings

     

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/07/13/media/knL69JSi7YsgPLHb6ya56L/story.html

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

     

    Tom, how come you ignored revenues from their TV and radio networks? Isn't that a significant portion of revenues.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomvanriper/2012/05/07/red-sox-at-the-crossroads/

    The 2010 saw a 30% drop in viewers on NESN from 2009, following a sweep out of the playoffs by the Angels and a relative lack of star power after the team had jettisoned Manny Ramirez to Los Angeles. Ratings rebounded strongly in 2011 after a big winter landed Adrian Gonzalez and Crawford. But a historic September collapse, an off-season of controversy over a chicken and beer clubhouse culture, the departures of both the GM and manager, and now a rocky start to 2012, Red Sox Nation could easily start getting bored again. If NESN ratings drop this year, and remain lower for any significant period of time, the corresponding drop in ad revenue would directly affect the Red Sox, who own 80% of the network.

    That pressure to keep the RSN ratings up is what complicates rebuilding.  Cherington might prefer to trade the highly paid 30-somethings or let them walk as free agents over the next couple of winters, and build his own club. But in this era of RSNs and expensive tickets for big market clubs, rebuilding is a dirty word.  Red Sox have a disincentive not to invest in the team every year, says Carter.

      We have seen the minefield that comes with the (try to win every year approach) It has backfired on the Mets and it is now creeping up on the Phillies. The Yankees have made plenty of bad spending calls, too, but their bottomless payroll has allowed them to paper over the mistakes. Cherington can do it, but he hass got little room for error. Spend wisely, the bonanza continues. Spend poorly, you™ll be spinning your wheels for years.

     

    My fear is LL has followed the Mets path  and troubles will ensue.  I have faith that the fans would have  embraced a youth movement, and the lower payroll would more than offset any advertising drop.   Even if Henry lost a bit of profit for two years or so, he will make hundreds of millions when he sells.

     

    Did you cherry pick the Cubs as an exception? How about some other examples to prove your argument?

    No other club comes close to being as similar to the Sox as the Cubs.

    Take a chill pill, Tom. Stop being so combative and seeking conflict. You are letting your forum ego take away from your enjoyment.

    I am sorry I find your posts (80 / day can't be healthy) so annoying, I used to have you on ignore.  I vacilate between worrying about your mental health and finding your attempts to moderate irritating.  This forum is part of a BUSINESS.  All the rules are designed to maintain traffic, the content (Red Sox) is immaterial to the owners and should be to you too.  I have checked out many others and none get anywhere near the amount of posts this one does.  Offer for you, if you only post about baseball (not other posters). I will never criticize one of your posts again.  Have a nice night.

     




     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    The New York Yankees are being paid $90 million a season by the YES Network, ....TheRed Sox are paid $60 million by NESN, which seems like small potatoes compared to some of the other figures I’ve mentioned. Of course, the Yankees own over 30% of the YES Network, whose profits were reportedly ~$450 million in 2011. The Red Sox own 80% of NESN, also a very profitable corporation. Both ownership groups are bringing in far more money than the team is officially paid for television rights, money that isn’ta part of MLB’s revenue sharing pool. The Yankees could run a $400 million payroll and still turn a profit.

     

     

    The team’s annual revenue has climbed 104 percent to $310 million, second only to the Yankees’ $439 million, since the Henry group took over just before the 2002 season, according to data compiled by Forbes magazine. That growth outpaced the 78 percent average jump for major league teams. The majority of the increase in Boston has come from “attendance and ballpark- related revenue,” Lucchino said.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    The signing of Drew may be a small window into the consensus in the FO.  They obviously want to give Iggy more time to develop his hitting, although this also may be a sign that that Drew is a 1 year stop gap untill Xander is ready for SS.  The consensus I have got from reading all the scouting reports and insider info is that there is a growing opinion that he can stay at short.  If Both those things happen then Iggy provides an option at 2nd base if Pedey continues his health woes or he becomes a viable trade chip.  Also if Iggy starts to hit and Xander outgrows the postion then Iggy can start at SS in 2014 and Boegarts will likely be in LF/3B.

     

    I'm not saying both optimal outcomes will happen, but I believe this is what the F.O. is thinking right now. 

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Had we just signed 2-3 younger FAs, a couple stop-gap role players, and made one trade, I think the fans would have been just as enthusiastic as they are now.

    [/QUOTE]


    Can you please clarify who these 2-3 younger free agents are, other than Sanchez and Greinke who got long term deals??

    Which everyday players other than BJ Upton are you referring to?

    You seem to be making a statement that has no backbone...like there was a bunch of these type of players available in the marketplace for the Sox to choose from??

    I find it interesting that so many posters here were happy to get out from under the big long-term deals but now want the Sox to go and dive back in long term for lesser talent than what they already had.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to Soxdog67's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Had we just signed 2-3 younger FAs, a couple stop-gap role players, and made one trade, I think the fans would have been just as enthusiastic as they are now.

    [/QUOTE]


    Can you please clarify who these 2-3 younger free agents are, other than Sanchez and Greinke who got long term deals??

    Which everyday players other than BJ Upton are you referring to?

    You seem to be making a statement that has no backbone...like there was a bunch of these type of players available in the marketplace for the Sox to choose from??

    I find it interesting that so many posters here were happy to get out from under the big long-term deals but now want the Sox to go and dive back in long term for lesser talent than what they already had.

    [/QUOTE]


    if the sox sorely need a #1 or 2, why would you need to exclude the two best pitchers in free agency? this is EXACTLY who ben shouldve signed...one or the other...he didnt because he is too chickenchit so instead we have a cripple like napoli still being coveted for 40 mil...but hey he's only for 3 years!  great job ben....

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Soxdog67's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Had we just signed 2-3 younger FAs, a couple stop-gap role players, and made one trade, I think the fans would have been just as enthusiastic as they are now.

    [/QUOTE]


    Can you please clarify who these 2-3 younger free agents are, other than Sanchez and Greinke who got long term deals??

    Which everyday players other than BJ Upton are you referring to?

    You seem to be making a statement that has no backbone...like there was a bunch of these type of players available in the marketplace for the Sox to choose from??

    I find it interesting that so many posters here were happy to get out from under the big long-term deals but now want the Sox to go and dive back in long term for lesser talent than what they already had.

    [/QUOTE]


    if the sox sorely need a #1 or 2, why would you need to exclude the two best pitchers in free agency? this is EXACTLY who ben shouldve signed...one or the other...he didnt because he is too chickenchit so instead we have a cripple like napoli still being coveted for 40 mil...but hey he's only for 3 years!  great job ben....

    [/QUOTE]


    First off, Greinke was the only pitcher on the market that would be deemed a #1 or #2 starter in a rotation...and for one likely didn't want to come east anyway. Did you see East coast teams get into the Greinke bidding?? I didn't, including the Yankees.

    Secondly, Sanchez is nothing more than middle of the rotation guy who was satisfied to stay in Detroit..the Sox would have had to overwhelm him to get him to come to Boston.

    Once again another poster ASSUMING that Napoli still gets his $40million deal...ya think he would have been officially signed by now if that was the deal they were still willing to give him??

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Holding Big Labor accountable, and the management that signed them, is going to cause a civil war in Wisconsin. Most Red Sox fans pay a ton of money just to have a nice day at the ballpark. It's like little league baseball, winning is not important. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The highlighted statement, while sarcastic on your part, is factually correct.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: S. Drew has Permanent Ankle Structural Damage

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's not sarcastic, it's factual truth used to make fun of most Red Sox fans. A nice day at the ballpark is what minor league, little league and amateur baseball parks are for. Big Labor and 150 million a year provides, for the sane, is a poor entertainment value when it doesn't produce winning baseball.

    [/QUOTE]

    Millions of people disagree with you. Every level of sports is about entertainment. There is no dollar threshold that changes anything. Entertainment is subjective. People can choose to be entertained by something that you may view as foolish but that does not diminish their pleasure, nor should it. Your definition of sanity needs a little work.

     

Share