|
Post by AztecBill on Feb 3, 2012 18:13:08 GMT -8
Detroit Tigers were a playoff team. From 3B they got: .222 .286 .331 .617 The Padres got: .262 .342 .368 .710 With their main 3B, Headley, much better than that. I think you are wrong Chase would start on the Tigers. OK, one player could start for one playoff team. That just goes to show how bad this roster was, and how bad it still is. The Padres are light years away from being a legit World Series contender. You said "none" so I disproved it by showing one. Now you say only one. I proved you were wrong so you changed your quote. You have no credibility on this issue now. I will not show another so you can say OK 2.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Feb 3, 2012 22:10:35 GMT -8
OK, one player could start for one playoff team. That just goes to show how bad this roster was, and how bad it still is. The Padres are light years away from being a legit World Series contender. You said "none" so I disproved it by showing one. Now you say only one. I proved you were wrong so you changed your quote. You have no credibility on this issue now. I will not show another so you can say OK 2. The point is that the Padres are nowhere near being a World Series contender, let alone being a champion. And you know it. They almost lost 100 games last season - and we all saw it coming. That's pathetic. There is no other way to put it but that the managment of the organization gave up on last season, and this year isn't going to be much better. And it's all by design. They're hoping that they get good for 2013. Hoping. I guarantee you that if they were offered a bet that the Padres wouldn't be in the World Series in 2013 there is no way that Moorad and Byrnes would bet on their team making it there. Not if they had to put their own money on the bet.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Feb 3, 2012 22:20:16 GMT -8
So that makes it OK? There's a reason why MLB was overtaken by the NFL as the #1 sport in the country 4 decades ago. There's a reason why since then the NFL has flat out eclipsed MLB in popularity. In the NFL any team can go from last place to Super Bowl champs in just a year or two. Everyone has the same opportunity. It's all about how smart/wise managment of any given team is. In MLB it's about money first, and then how smart you are. Yes, a poor team can win a World Series every now and then, but the big boys are in the mix each and every year. And that's all based on money. It's not a competitive league. The small market teams have to work twice as hard to get the same results, and they cannot maintain a playoff level for more than a couple years in a row before they have to sell off their talent and start rebuilding again. The big market teams never have to sell of their players. That's why they never have to rebuild - they just reload. A game between the Red Sox and a small market team is barely more than an exhibition. The Red Sox will win 3 out of every 4 of those games, as will the Yankees and Phillies, etc. The Dodgers, Cubs and Mets would tell you that the Phillies, Yankees and Red Sox are doing something right. It's truly incredible that you could argue that in MLB it isn't about how smart you are when there are teams with seemingly endless budgets that never win because they're poorly run while other teams are well run and do nothing but win with half the payroll. You missed what I said. In MLB you don't have to be as smart to win with a big market team. You can make up for a lack of smarts or judgment by buying better players. You can make up for mistakes much easier by signing new free agents the next off season. It still takes smart GM's with good judgment and good scouts to win, even with big market teams. It's just easier for them to win than someone like the GM for the Royals. The Royals will be lucky to have 3 winning years every decade. The Dodgers can count on 7 or 8 winning years every decade. Especially now that McCourt is gone. The Phillies, Red Sox, and Yankees win almost every year. Money matters. Big time. You cannot say otherwise. Damned right I'm a frustrated fan. I grew up in an era where team salaries were not this disparate. The top salary teams were not 6 or 7 times that of the bottom teams. Maybe twice as much, but not the ridiculous chasm between the top and bottom that now exists. You cannot tell me that the system as it is now is a good thing. It's horsecrap. Yeah, the NFL is more popular because it is a more exciting game - but not that much more. For every minute of game time there is only about 10 seconds of playing time. Most of the clock is taken up by setting the ball and the players huddling. Brits think that NFL football is boring compared to soccer/football. Baseball continues to lose fan support because a lot of people in smaller markets have no reason to root for their teams most of the time. They need to fix the system or contract back to 20 teams. Oh, wait - the players union and the big market teams run the league. Neither one of those things will happen. Those big market guys like playing against the Washington Generals. They need those games just like BCS teams need to play FCS teams to have some guaranteed wins.
|
|