Monday, March 13, 2006

Foulke Festival

Today's piece is a nice summary of Dan's shortcomings as a columnist and a human being.

His bizzaro world analysis: "[Jonathan Papelbon] was in Double A a year ago and he never has saved a game in the majors. He's a nice option for Francona, but Mike Timlin might be the safer choice." Hmmm ... does Bobby Jenks ring a bell? Or is last October too long ago? How about Francisco Rodriguez? Truth is, closers are cheap: if you don't have Mariano Rivera, just find the hot hand and ride him.

His total lack of compassion and humanity: "Along the way he insulted the fans, told us he doesn't like baseball, and appeared miserable just about all the time. He finished with 15 saves and a 5.91 ERA in 43 games. When the Sox were losing their second playoff game in Chicago, Foulke was watching the Bruins at the Garden. Now he comes to the balllpark, works early, and goes home to watch NASCAR while his teammates play in the games." We know, Dan, we know: You rehashed every reason why Foulke is a bad person on Feb. 20.

His Reagan-like math: "The Sox are committed to giving him a chance, but they can't let him torpedo the early part of their season if he's not right. It's too important ... ." I guess I missed that change in the rules that makes the first 30 games count more than the last 30. Don't you recall that on June 26, 2005, the Yankees were 37-37 and you had given them up for dead? All they did after that was go 58-30 to touch out the Sox for the division title.


Anonymous said...

//Along the way he insulted the fans, told us he doesn't like baseball, and appeared miserable just about all the time.//

Foulke? Sounds like CHB to me.

objectivebruce said...

Uh, the Yanks did pretty well in those last 30 games, slick.

And the Yanks did not touch out the Sox for the division title, it was a tie, according to rules and precedent. The Sox assumed the wild card for the playoffs because they lost the season series. The exact same thing happened with St. Louis and Houston in 2001 and MLB says the Cards and 'Stros were co-division champs. Or as the Hall of Fame page on the Astros puts it: "The Astros and Cardinals were declared co-champions of the NL Central in 2001, based on their identical regular season record. Due to the fact that the Astros edged the Cardinals in head-to-head games, 9-7, they were seeded as the division winner in the post-season, and the Cardinals were seeded as the wild-card."

Please get your facts right and correct another in your continuing series of errors.

The Chief said...

Right, dumbass -- they touched them out.

Bruce, you are making less sense than usual. Are you saying the first month of games is more important than any others? Because that's what Dan said today -- which defies all logic.

objectivebruce said...

Touched out for playoff seedings, not, as the blogger wrote, for the division title. Wrong again.

When do we see the correction? Since you're so fond of pointing out the need for them in The Globe, I would assume that you would correct errors of fact when you make them. When do we see your correction? What about your misreading of the column with the MIAA MVP reference, when will that error be corrected? A bit holier than thou, aren't we?

Of course the games can be, and often are, more important late than early in a 162 game season; there's little time to make up ground loss in the standings after a tough loss in September. Blowing a game with 140 left simply doesn't have the consequence of blowing one when you're eight games out with 14 left. Ever hear of a pitcher being asked to eat innings on a night when he doesn't have it when its down-to-the-wire in a pennant race? Of course not.

The Chief said...

Well, then, Bruce, it sounds like you and your mancrush Dan are in for a lover's spat, because The CHB disagrees with you.

Have a nice day.

objectivebruce said...

"lover's spat"
This pretty well sums up why the criticism expressed by the blogger on this site amount to little more than nonsensical rantings with that exhibit very little thought

Columnists write for the purpose of provoking thought, debate and discussion. But what we see here are juvenile attempts to take portions of columns out of context; clearly every paragraph the columnist writes is analyzed and pertinent phrases run through the Globe archives for the sole purpose of taking cheap shots. You may raise some important points, but your zeal to rip everything the man says, and to accuse anyone who doesn't share your view of some sort of homosexual affair, destroys any value your comments may have.

You have no credibility.


The Chief said...

Bruce, aren't you the same guy who called those who read this site idiots who live in their mothers basements? And wouldn't that apply to, too?

Just saying.

The Chief said...

I should add that 900 some people visited this site yesterday. If you don't like what you read, you are welcome to leave anytime.

Of course, I hope you don't: every village needs an idiot.

dbvader said...

Late to the game and the discussion has turned away from this but here are two other names: Huston Street and Chad Cordero.
Street threw 26 innings in the minors before becoming the A's closer and winning AL ROY. Cordero threw 37 innings between the minors and Montreal in the year he was drafted before throwing 80 innings in 2004 with a 2.94 ERA and 14 saves in 2004. In 2005 at the age of 23, he had 47 saves with an ERA under 2.
Right again CHB. There is no precedent for college closers to immediately become MLB closers.

The Chief said...

If you read the CHB, you'd never know that there's this stud named Hansen just waiting to close out games.

Beth said...

//You have no credibility.


then leave, bruce.

i don't know how many times or ways it can be said, or by how many people.