Page 3 of 3

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:09 pm
by Laxplayer
Don't roll your eyes at me...... :D
It's true though and you know it.

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:51 pm
by Dinsdale
Mikey wrote:Other teams don't give a crap about winning.
:meds:[/quote]


YEAH! WHAT HE SAID!!!

Sin,
David Glass, as he furiously jams the shared revenue into his own pocket while cutting payroll



You just clowned yourself, Mikey


BTW-revenue sharing + Bean now on a percentage basis = No more winning seasons for the A's

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:36 pm
by Mikey
He said "teams" not owners, shit for brains.

You don't think any of the players want to win?

Yeah, they're mercenary for the most part but if they didn't want to win they wouldn't be there in the first place and, for players, winning is at least part of what brings the $$.

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:19 am
by Yer a Fuckin Jerkoff
The Yankees played with much more gusto than I thought they would. I was so confident that they would fold last night, and if it had happened, there's no question that they would be choking away game Seven as I am typing this right now, especially with Damon possibly out.

I'm surprised at how CC wasn't the factor everyone assumed he'd be. The Yankees won the WS with him pitching two good games, not lights out games. I am surprised at how they worked that three man rotation, too, and how each dude really did come through.

One thing that people haven't mentioned in light of all the attention that the three-man rotation is concerned is ....think back to their best pitcher in '08. Mike Mussina. I find it interesting that the Yankees won in 2000 and Moose joined them in '01. He never gets a ring, but the year after he retires, they win. :lol:

But congratulations to the deserving team, the New York Yankees, for knocking off the defending champs fair and square in a competitive series. I truly embarrassed my image, and my legacy definately took a huge hit as I made a horse's ass of myself in this thread. If anyone wants to me follow through on my promise to post that picture, just let me know.

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:33 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Yer a Fuckin Jerkoff wrote:I truly embarrassed my image, and my legacy definately took a huge hit as I made a horse's ass of myself in this thread.
Eh, walk it off. At least you've still got the Cowboys, right? 2009 Super Bowl Champs! :lol:

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:09 pm
by Terry in Crapchester
Mikey wrote:
Laxplayer wrote: It's not all about spending money.
Maybe not, but it sure helps.

Any team that could have bought Sabathia, Texiera and Burnett in the same year would have had a pretty decent chance of going far. Add them to what they Yankmes already had and you get a WS championship.
You're forgetting one part of the equation, at least with respect to the Yankees. It takes a special player to perform well in New York. Major league rosters past and present are littered with plenty of guys who had solid careers but just couldn't cut it with the Yanks. For starters, and just off the top of my head, Kenny Rogers, Jeff Weaver, and Carl Pavano. Hell, until this year there were people putting A-Rod into that category as well. And he won a MVP with the Yankees.

Fortunately for the Yankees, the three guys you mentioned all turned out to be guys who could play in New York. The only addition this year who struggled was Swisher, but given the role the Yankees expected him to fill, even he played well enough.

I realize that a change of scenery usually provides a big unknown in a player's career, and it can either benefit or hurt him. That said, however, from a pressure standpoint, I don't think there's anything in MLB that compares to playing for the Yankees.

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:25 pm
by Laxplayer
Hey Terry, you forgot about me....
Sincerely,
Ed Whitson

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:14 pm
by Rack Fu
Terry in Crapchester wrote:The only addition this year who struggled was Swisher, but given the role the Yankees expected him to fill, even he played well enough.
Swisher's numbers this year were basically on par or better compared to his career averages.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=5937

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:02 pm
by MuchoBulls
Terry in Crapchester wrote:The only addition this year who struggled was Swisher, but given the role the Yankees expected him to fill, even he played well enough.
He played in major role in changing the mood in the clubhouse. The Yankees played very loose as a team and Swisher's to thank for that.

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:22 pm
by jiminphilly
MuchoBulls wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:The only addition this year who struggled was Swisher, but given the role the Yankees expected him to fill, even he played well enough.
He played in major role in changing the mood in the clubhouse. The Yankees played very loose as a team and Swisher's to thank for that.

Yup:

Image

Posada may be the receiver on the field but Swisher took a lot of pressure off of ARod by taking over the receiver role in the clubhouse. Rack that douchebag:

Image

Re: 2009 WS Call It and in-game thread

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:03 pm
by Shoalzie
I think all 4 additions for the Yankees were good character guys that competed hard but could keep that clubhouse loose. Burnett became well known for the shaving cream pie treatment on guys after games. It's almost like they had their own version of 'The Idiots' like the Red Sox in '04. They just seemed to have the right mix this year. In previous year, they just threw money at guys but I think they actually signed the right guys this time around. It would be revolting if they can sign another front-line starting pitcher, a left fielder (Bay or Holliday) and a reliable setup man for Rivera...not that their spending hasn't been revolting enough already.