EVIL~! alkeiper Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 That's deceiving. The 1930s was the game's greatest offensive era, and runs came easier in those days. In fact, the 1930s rivals the 90s in terms of offense.
Vern Gagne Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Robinson's number isn't really respresenting the Dodgers in Yankee Stadium, and other ballparks. It's representing what he did too break the color barrier.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Robinson's number isn't really respresenting the Dodgers in Yankee Stadium That's because it's, thankfully, not in Yankee Stadium. It's representing what he did too break the color barrier. And it's great that he did it. Still doesn't belong in Yankee Stadium.
Matt Young Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Red Sox management back then was just dumb Back then? I'd say that repeatedly blowing a chance to acquire the league MVP and then allowing him to go to your most hated rival that you lose to every year despite usually fielding a better overall team is pretty fucking retarded. Then, after that monumental screwup, Boston management has the nerve to make complete fools of themselves by lamenting the excessive spending of the Yankees when the Sox themselves have the next highest payroll in the entire league at well over $100 million. Also, I seem to recall hearing on ESPN or maybe reading in Sports Illustrated at the time Robinson's number was retired that he was not the first black player in the majors, but rather the first one to garner any recognition. I may be way off on that one since I only became a baseball fan in 1996, but I'm fairly certain I heard or read something to that effect.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Red Sox management back then was just dumb Back then? I'd say that repeatedly blowing a chance to acquire the league MVP and then allowing him to go to your most hated rival that you lose to every year despite usually fielding a better overall team is pretty fucking retarded. It's not nice to mock the Red Sox's failure. That's what they're good at. Also, I seem to recall hearing on ESPN or maybe reading in Sports Illustrated at the time Robinson's number was retired that he was not the first black player in the majors, but rather the first one to garner any recognition. I may be way off on that one since I only became a baseball fan in 1996, but I'm fairly certain I heard or read something to that effect. Be careful when repeating something slightly odd heard on ESPN. It might be a awful attempt at humor.
Matt Young Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Red Sox management back then was just dumb Back then? I'd say that repeatedly blowing a chance to acquire the league MVP and then allowing him to go to your most hated rival that you lose to every year despite usually fielding a better overall team is pretty fucking retarded. It's not nice to mock the Red Sox's failure. That's what they're good at. Hey, it's not even like that for me. Despite being a Yankees fan (although they're not my #1 team, it was hard not to like them when I started watching in '96), I don't hate the BoSox. In fact, I feel their pain. I grew up in Illinois... in a family full of hardcore Cub fans. I also love the White Sox. I can't say shit about failure. It's just that this time, it was really stupid and hypocritical, and Boston really sealed its own fate in the first place. I took great satisfaction in seeing Steinbrenner OWN the Sox in his response by simply stating the obvious.
Matt Young Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 This is going to make Red Sox fans hate me even more, but I almost forgot to add that while the team was attempting to work out a deal for A-Rod, they went ahead and alienated their 2 best position players. Of course, now they have 2 disenchanted All-Stars that will probably either leave once their contracts are up or end up getting traded for next to nothing, and they got nothing out of the whole ordeal. This time, there's just no way around it. They blew a sure thing and alienated their most talented employees.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Back then? I'd say that repeatedly blowing a chance to acquire the league MVP and then allowing him to go to your most hated rival that you lose to every year despite usually fielding a better overall team is pretty fucking retarded. Then, after that monumental screwup, Boston management has the nerve to make complete fools of themselves by lamenting the excessive spending of the Yankees when the Sox themselves have the next highest payroll in the entire league at well over $100 million. First off, as far as the quote goes separate the owner from the general manager, who makes the personnel decisions. As for A-Rod, its not dumb not to acquire the guy when you're trading one of baseball's best hitters in exchange. Besides, plenty of people, myself included, said the trade was a bad idea. Also, I seem to recall hearing on ESPN or maybe reading in Sports Illustrated at the time Robinson's number was retired that he was not the first black player in the majors, but rather the first one to garner any recognition. I may be way off on that one since I only became a baseball fan in 1996, but I'm fairly certain I heard or read something to that effect. There were some black players, notably Moses Fleetwood Walker, in the majors. This was before the color barrier came up in the 1880s. Robinson was the first since that time.
nl5xsk1 Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 In the Red Sox defense, they DID make the trade, but had it vetoed by the PA. The fact that they'd have had to pay $5-million/year of Manny's salary, on top of the full ARod salary, wouldn't have been feasible. It'd have been a bad business decision, and they'd have been unable to sign as many of their potential free agents at the end of this year. They went as far as they could financially, and when the PA ixnayed the idea, they decided to stick with the team that they had. And to say that they alienated their best two position players is a bit of an exaggeration. Manny doesn't really care one way or another, he'll be the same clueless jackass regardless of these trade attempts. And Nose-mar is only after the almighty dollar, if the Sox offer him enough $$$ he'll stay here without a problem.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 And to say that they alienated their best two position players is a bit of an exaggeration. Manny doesn't really care one way or another, he'll be the same clueless jackass regardless of these trade attempts. I agree. Manny doesn't know which way is up.
nl5xsk1 Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Question for the Yankees fans on the board, and I'm truly not trying to bust balls ... It's generally thought that ARod is the better defensive shortstop, so if Jeter starts having issues, how will be the fans & media react (with my definition of issues being errors, or not getting to grounders, etc)? Will people call for the two of them to switch positions?
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 If Jeter starts to screw up, The Yankees will turn into a traveling circus.
Vern Gagne Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 There's an entire thread devoted to the A-Rod deal? No use bringing it into this one.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Yeah, let's get back to the issue at hand. Who do you guys think Jackie himself would agree with? Would he force his number into Monument Park?
HarleyQuinn Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 I think he'd be humble but would feel that it should be retired at Dodger Stadium at the very least although teams like the Yankees would probably honor his number out of respect as well as him being the first noticeable black player in terms of current day
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 I think he'd be humble but would feel that it should be retired at Dodger Stadium at the very least Oh, that's not even a question.
HarleyQuinn Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 I'm curious if he'd want his number retired at other stadiums or if he would think it to be overbearing and just settle for the Dodger Stadium retirement...
Vern Gagne Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Really who knows what Jackie Robinson would think. If I had too venture a guess. He'd think it was only a number and it was unnecessary to retire it.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 I'm curious if he'd want his number retired at other stadiums or if he would think it to be overbearing and just settle for the Dodger Stadium retirement... That's what I was asking. I have a feeling he would think it was a bit overbearing
HarleyQuinn Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Yeah, seconds after I posted it i realize that was what you were asking and I'd have to agree with him thinking it was overbearing. Wonder how a Ty Cobb would go about this? I think he'd rant that everyone should retire his # for some bogus reason
Vern Gagne Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 I don't think it's a bogus reason. It is however just a number. What Jackie Robinson did goes beyond the number on the back of his jersey.
Guest Anglesault Posted February 20, 2004 Report Posted February 20, 2004 Wonder how a Ty Cobb would go about this? I think he'd rant that everyone should retire his # for some bogus reason I think Jackie was considerably more humble, wasn't he? I don't know if he could have really afforded to be a bastard.
HarleyQuinn Posted February 20, 2004 Report Posted February 20, 2004 Jackie was WAY more humble but I thought it'd be interesting to see how Ty Cobb would react and how extreme it would be compared to a Jackie Robinson. Ty would probably have been a bastard anyways because almost everybody hated his guts during his playing days anyway.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted February 20, 2004 Report Posted February 20, 2004 Of course, Ty Cobb didn't even have a number. The Yankees introduced them in the 1920s.
Vern Gagne Posted February 20, 2004 Report Posted February 20, 2004 Of course, Ty Cobb didn't even have a number. The Yankees introduced them in the 1920s. Babe Ruth would be a better player to ask that question about. He revolutionized the game, and helped bring it back from the Black Sox scandal. Ty Cobb was just a great player.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now