TIMMYCANTDO AND TYLER TOO!!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    TIMMYCANTDO AND TYLER TOO!!

     The Bruins were led last night by Rookie Tyler Seguin, a guy burried on the bench, who gets a chance because of an injury. The Sox showing a little less innovation in the same situation fall back to record chasing starter, nee mop up guy Tim Wakefield. This should put a final end to the Wake debate, either he pitches moderately well, which justifies his spot on the roster, or he comes out with a more Lackian effort which proves that the Wake era is over. Speaking of ending eras, JD Drew continues to eat up AB's, while Josh Reddick tears up the IL. Reddick the heir apparent in RF smacked his 10th homer of the season the other night and has more extra base hits than singles, slugging away at a .551 clip, meanwhile JD continues to impersonate, JD Drew. Reddick could be here by the AS break, perhaps sooner if the Donald's back gets cranky as expected.
     Shaugnessy note; In his story about Seguin, Dan references Dick Williams benching Sox rookie Joe LaHoud after Joltin Joe hit 3 HR's in one game back in 1969.  LaHoud, a lefty was back on the bench for about a month after touching the Twins for 3 bombs in a blow-out win, Williams preferring to give AB's to the RH hitting Tony C. Seems Williams practised loyalty to his veterans, perhaps his 1981 Montreal rookie Terry Francona was paying attention to the future HOF
    manager.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from majorleague. Show majorleague's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    Wastefield is a disgrace to management decision making on active roster spots.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from marstan. Show marstan's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    AS A SOX FAN, I OBVIOUSLY FOLLOW THE DRAMA OF THE
    EVIL EMPIRE IN THE BRONX, ALSO. AFTER ALL, YOU GOTTA
    KNOW WHAT THE " ENEMY" IS UP TO. (JUST GOOFING).
    SERIOUSLY....WOULD THE YANKEES AND CASHMAN KEEP
    THE CURRENT WAKEFIELD ON THEIR 25 MAN ROSTER ??
    DO YOU SERIOUSLY BELIEVE THAT ?? IF YOU DON'T
    BELIEVE IT, THEN WHY IS HE TROTTED OUT ON OUR
    ROSTER. WAKE HAS BEEN A CREDIT TO THE TEAM AND A
    WILLING WORKAHOLIC, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, RUNNERS
    STEAL ON HIM QUITE FREQUENTLY, AND IN A TIGHT
    SITUATION, HIS KNUCKLER CREATES WILD PITCHES, AND
    PASSED BALLS,...AND WHAT IS MORE, IF A KNUCKLER
    DOESN'T DO ITS TRICKS, IT'S BATTING PRACTICE FOR
    OPPOSING TEAMS. IN WHAT IS GOING TO BE A TIGHT
    PENNANT DRIVE IN THE AL EAST, WITH THE TEAMS
    BUNCHED UP, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO GET DOWN 4 OR 5 RUNS
    EARLY BY AN AGING TRICK PITCHER.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE]Wastefield is a disgrace to management decision making on active roster spots.
    Posted by majorleague[/QUOTE]
     The decision making of the 1969 team was quite different, with Tony C displaying power and likely recovery, and Yaz and Reggie Smith ensconced in the OF, Ken "Hawk" Harrelson was replaceable and un-needed. In essence he and Conig were the same players, RH power hitting OF's. In the same way Crawbury is the historical repition. LaHoud being younger and cheaper was the obvious 4th OF on a team with a very solid and young OF corps. The Hawk was dealt to the Indians within the division in early April...shocking everyone, especially Ken. He promptly retired, and Bowie Kuhn inserted himself into the situation and got Ken some more money to go to the Siberia of the AL East. Odd that they broke camp with one team and made major changes after just ten games. The Sox were contending early, 17 games over .500 in June when LaHoud went all Bautista on the Twinkies. All for naught as the Sox played under .500 the rest of the way, and Dick Williams was fired after just three seasons at the helm. Williams went on to the Hall of Fame, Harrelson became a pro golfer, restaurant owner, and General Manager, all activities he failed miserably at, finally settling in as one of baseball's best homers, broadcasting the other Sox in Chicago. LaHoud hit 61 more HR and a lifetime batting avg of .223 in an 11 year career, while Harrelson hit just 36 more homeruns, with a .239 career mark eventually being replaced in Cleveland by Chris Chambliss.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

     The post count showed 4, I only see 3, what's missing??
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO :  The decision making of the 1969 team was quite different, with Tony C displaying power and likely recovery, and Yaz and Reggie Smith ensconced in the OF, Ken "Hawk" Harrelson was replaceable and un-needed. In essence he and Conig were the same players, RH power hitting OF's. In the same way Crawbury is the historical repition. LaHoud being younger and cheaper was the obvious 4th OF on a team with a very solid and young OF corps. The Hawk was dealt to the Indians within the division in early April...shocking everyone, especially Ken. He promptly retired, and Bowie Kuhn inserted himself into the situation and got Ken some more money to go to the Siberia of the AL East. Odd that they broke camp with one team and made major changes after just ten games. The Sox were contending early, 17 games over .500 in June when LaHoud went all Bautista on the Twinkies. All for naught as the Sox played under .500 the rest of the way, and Dick Williams was fired after just three seasons at the helm. Williams went on to the Hall of Fame, Harrelson became a pro golfer, restaurant owner, and General Manager, all activities he failed miserably at, finally settling in as one of baseball's best homers, broadcasting the other Sox in Chicago. LaHoud hit 61 more HR and a lifetime batting avg of .223 in an 11 year career, while Harrelson hit just 36 more homeruns, with a .239 career mark eventually being replaced in Cleveland by Chris Chambliss.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    Don't forget. Hawk Harrelson also broadcast Red Sox games.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO : Don't forget. Hawk Harrelson also broadcast Red Sox games.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]
     So how about a new metric, player to broadcaster percentage...like Remy was decent player, great broadcaster, Hawk was a marginal player and marginal broadcaster...who's the best player/broadcaster? I'll start with Jim Palmer.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE] The post count showed 4, I only see 3, what's missing??
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    The actual 'start a discussion' counts as one. Thus, the OP is "two posts".
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Babe-Ted. Show Babe-Ted's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    Isn't this Youkillis the guy who was comparing Gonzalez to Offerman last week?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE]Isn't this Youkillis the guy who was comparing Gonzalez to Offerman last week?
    Posted by Babe-Ted[/QUOTE]

      Another misread of the post! I said A-Gon was hitting like Offerman, which he was. It's a fact. You could look it up.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO

    In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: TIMMY CAN'T DO AND TYLER TOO : The actual 'start a discussion' counts as one. Thus, the OP is "two posts".
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]
     No sir. I disagree.
     

Share