Bash Boof, Bosox, Back Becks as Best: Twins-Sox Gamer IV

The Sox look to reduce their magic number to 1 tonight against the Minnesota Twins.  With a little offense, some pitching, and help from Scott Kazmir and the Devil Rays, we could have the first division crown for the Red Sox since 1995, a tremendous achievement for sure.

Use this as your game thread for commentary.

1. Dustin Pedroia, 2B
2. Manny Ramirez, LF
3. David Ortiz, DH
4. Mike Lowell, 3B
5. J.D. Drew, RF
6. Jason Varitek, C
7. Jacoby Ellsbury, CF
8. Eric Hinske, 1B
9. Julio Lugo, SS
SP: Josh Beckett

1. Jason Bartlett, SS
2. Jason Kubel, LF
3. Torii Hunter, CF
4. Justin Morneau, DH
5. Michael Cuddyer, RF
6. Garrett Jones, 1B
7. Matthew LeCroy, C
8. Brian Buscher, 3B
9. Nick Punto, 2B
SP: Boof Bonser

248 comments… add one
  • Good job.. =P
    Is he on a leash today?

    Lar September 27, 2007, 6:20 pm
  • Crappy start to the game already.

    rob September 27, 2007, 7:11 pm
  • Ortiz doubles in Manny from 1st base. I guess he’s healthy enough to run hard.
    Lowell then grounds out, moving Ortiz to third, and Drew draws a full count.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:27 pm
  • Drew drives in Papi.

    rob September 27, 2007, 7:29 pm
  • Nice. Drew steals 2nd.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:30 pm
  • Tek walks. And Yahoo!Sports still doesn’t have a player pic for Ellsbury. Criminal.

    Jackie (SF) September 27, 2007, 7:31 pm
  • Have Beckett’s last two starts both begun with a run in the 1st? I’m thinking of the Yankees and his last start against…who the heck was it? Tampa Bay?
    Anyway, it seems like he is often fond of giving the opposition hope early, then crushing them the next six, seven innings. Hope it’s the same tonight.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:32 pm
  • You’re right Devine, I’ve noticed that lately. Seems Schilling has done that in his last few starts too.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:33 pm
  • 33rd pitch for Bonser, which is a swing and a miss but Ellsbury reaches on a bad throw from the catcher to first! Bases loaded, plus a few more pitches for Boof.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:35 pm
  • That’s true, Atheose…I’d forgotten Schilling too has been doing that recently.
    Ha! Ellsbury gets on on the passed ball (?) strikeout. Already 33 pitches for Bonser.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:36 pm
  • Oh, no, it’s Hinske.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:36 pm
  • Take a strike, you big lug. 2-0.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:36 pm
  • NICE, Ellsbury strikes out but beats out the throw to first. Bases loaded for Mr Smiles.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:37 pm
  • 2-2 now. Bonser working his way back.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:37 pm
  • Heh. That’s funny, SF. My thoughts were almost the same: “Damn it, effing Hinske.”

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:37 pm
  • Full count…
    And the payoff pitch: a grounder to first. BOO HINSKE.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:38 pm
  • Pretty expected, Hinske. Angry at himself, apparently.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:39 pm
  • Apropos of nothing except that it was funny –
    I visited the Yahoo boxscore of the Mets/Cards game a short while ago and the matchup pictured was:
    Joel Pineiro (Red Sox hat)
    Luis Castillo (Twins hat)
    That freaked me out on at least three different levels.
    Okay, back to your regularly scheduled gamechat…

    FenSheaParkway September 27, 2007, 7:39 pm
  • Cubs lose, ‘Zona wins today.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:41 pm
  • Dinger for Cuddyer. Bad Beckett showing up tonight. Grrr.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:42 pm
  • Cuddyer homers.
    Is it going to be another one of those nights again?

    rob September 27, 2007, 7:42 pm
  • Cuddyer homers. Piece of shit. Don’t the Twins know they’re out of the race?

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:42 pm
  • Cuddyer ties it on a long ball over the monster.
    Come on, Beckett! Let’s get this thing in the bag.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:42 pm
  • Come on Josh, bear down. Keep it tied.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:43 pm
  • There’s a K, one down.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:44 pm
  • Matt LeCroy is, dare I say it, fat?

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:45 pm
  • Nice breaking ball outside for the second K of the inning.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:46 pm
  • Nice hook to get LeCroy. Now a single for someone I have never heard of. Grrr.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:47 pm
  • Yanks using the C squad tonight.
    All sitting tonight

    rob September 27, 2007, 7:49 pm
  • Gameday thinks Becks is getting squeezed. Can anyone confirm?

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:51 pm
  • Thank goodness not more damage than the homerun. Hopefully the bats are alive and ready to destroy Bonser. I wanna win tonight!

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 27, 2007, 7:51 pm
  • Wow Rob. Maybe the Yanks are happy with the Wild Card?

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:52 pm
  • ath- it’s been tight for both teams tonite.

    sf rod September 27, 2007, 7:52 pm
  • We had better win, because I want Becks to get win #21.
    Plus I bought some cheap champagne to drink if we clinch tonight. I hope I didn’t jinx everything.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:53 pm
  • It’s only a jinx if you uncork it early.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:54 pm
  • Not sure Atheose, maybe they are still punch drunk from getting into the playoffs after the horrible start to the season.

    rob September 27, 2007, 7:54 pm
  • Julio Lugo is just awful.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:54 pm
  • Pedro soft grounder. Horrible inning after working Bonser over in the first for nearly forty pitches.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:55 pm
  • “Maybe the Yanks are happy with the Wild Card?”
    you must have missed the champagne torre tears last nite. i loved every minute it.

    sf rod September 27, 2007, 7:55 pm
  • It’s as open an invitation to clinching the AL East today as we could get from the Yanks…

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:55 pm
  • 8 pitch inning. So poor. Frustrating.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:56 pm
  • 47 through 2, Bonser. Could have used more than the EIGHT that inning, though.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:56 pm
  • Oh I didn’t miss the celebration… seeing Torre get all choked up made me feel warm inside. The man must have known his job was gone if they didn’t make the playoffs.
    Boof has an 8-pitch inning. Bleh.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 7:57 pm
  • Hoo boy, Beckett not awe-inspiring just yet.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 7:59 pm
  • Beckett really looks terrible. Leadoff double.

    SF September 27, 2007, 7:59 pm
  • Jason Barlett, batting .267, now has 2 hits. Also, I just noticed that the highest batting average that Beeckett has to face is .288. That’s pathetic, and now he’s given up 5 hits in 2+ innings.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:00 pm
  • Yanks definitely happy with the WC. Having to play win-or-go-home style baseball since July 1 has got some of the regulars needing much of this next week off.
    Oh, and Mets are losing 3-0 while Phillies are winning 6-0, in case anyone cares. If these scores hold up and San Diego wins tonight, the Mets are suddenly out of the playoff picture for the first time since Opening Day and will need to out-perform one or both of those teams in the few remaining games of the season to get back in. Loving this.

    IronHorse (yf) September 27, 2007, 8:01 pm
  • Let’s all hope that Beckett is getting all of the base hits out of his system now, since his next start will be in a Game 1.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:01 pm
  • Thanks for the update Ironhorse. I’m waiting for the Rockies game to start, cause for some reason I’m pulling for them to come out of nowhere and steal the Wild Card. They’ve won 10 straight, after all.
    Oh, and Phil Hughes has yet to give up a hit through 3. Just throwing out the jinx right now.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:03 pm
  • Sac-fly brings in Bartlett. Let’s see if Becks can get the final out and give our offense a chance to knock Boof around.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:07 pm
  • Another hit. Beckett has nothing.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:08 pm
  • There really is no reason for the Sox to leave Beckett in there, is there?

    attackgerbil September 27, 2007, 8:09 pm
  • Woe if we can’t disembowel Boof Bonser.

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 27, 2007, 8:10 pm
  • MY JINX WORKED! First pitch to Carlos Pena in the 4th inning is a homerun. 1-0 Devil Rays.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:10 pm
  • By the way, let Beckett stay out there. Unless he gives up 2 runs next inning, I say leave him in with the chance of getting win #21.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:11 pm
  • Ortiz lead-off single, he’s 2 for 2 now. Come on Lowell, keep it going.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:12 pm
  • Jeezus, Ortiz singles and Lowell promptly GIDPs. The familiar Sox are back. Frack.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:12 pm
  • Drew walks. Man, he’s been good lately.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:14 pm
  • Lowell GIDP, but Drew walks. Drew has been great this month, batting .333 with an OPS of 1.014.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:15 pm
  • Tek hit, two on. It’s gonna be an LOB parade!

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:16 pm
  • Ells grounds out. Grrrrrrrrr.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:17 pm
  • Beckett needs to put up a quick zero for once.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:17 pm
  • Tek gets on base, but Ellsbury grounds out. Boof is up to 61 pitches after 3.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:18 pm
  • God, Beckett is just BRUTAL. I haven’t seen him suck like this since last year. What the hell is going on?

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:21 pm
  • Garrett Jones singles. Jesus Beckett’s not looking good. We need a DP here.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:22 pm
  • And then, a one pitch double play. Whew.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:22 pm
  • The Sox come up next inning with one out, though. Hinske’s leading off!
    (make that two outs. Lugo to follow.)

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:22 pm
  • Like I said SF, hopefully he’s getting his “suck” out of his system before the playoffs.
    Wow, I got my wish and Mr. Fatty GIDP on the first pitch. Beckett needed that.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 8:23 pm
  • Inning over. RUNS DAMMIT, RUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:24 pm
  • Think Beckett is already taking his week off?

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 27, 2007, 8:25 pm
  • Ugh, Hinske up. What a waste of a lineup spot. Rather see Beckett hitting for himself!

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:26 pm
  • Hinske is barely a major league hitter. Why couldn’t Youk play tonight? Still sore?

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:28 pm
  • Top of the order, maybe we can get a two out rally.

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 27, 2007, 8:29 pm
  • Single for Pedro. Come on, Manny. Knock one onto Landsdowne.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:32 pm
  • Pedro steals, a single from Manny might tie it. Come on, Manny!

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:35 pm
  • Manny pops to right. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:36 pm
  • the mets quit. joel has made them look pathetic all nite, in a game that pedro pitched well in. kinda sad really.
    phils up by 3 in the 6th.

    sf rod September 27, 2007, 8:41 pm
  • Punto doubles. Then a K. Big hold here. 3 runs through five would be forgivable, considering how poor Beckett has looked.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:42 pm
  • Funny, I imagine many Yankees fans will rejoice at the Mets’ failures, yet those same YFs get on Sox fans for rooting lustily against the Yankees in non-Sox games. And the Mets aren’t even in the same league or division, they aren’t even direct competition.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:43 pm
  • Two down.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:44 pm
  • Well, Beckett gets ahead, then loses Hunter on a single up the middle which Pedroia stabs deep in center, then Beckett cuts off the throw from Pedroia to home, inexplicably, and the run scores from second. Beckett’s head is NOT in the game.
    Disappointing final start for our #1.

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:46 pm
  • And like clockwork, the Yankees tie it up. How predictable: our ace is on the field, the Yankees face Kazmir with scrubs, and we can’t do shit while the Yankees hold on tight against the Rays.
    Meanwhile, Ellsbury is now out of the game (Kielty in). Is he hurt? If not, why doesn’t Tito just put in Cora too? And Cash?

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:49 pm
  • Papi pull one back with the dinger!

    SF September 27, 2007, 8:50 pm
  • Wow, a monster homer off Beckett. Why is he still pitching?

    SF September 27, 2007, 9:00 pm
  • Yuck, a stinker for Beckett’s final outing.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:01 pm
  • By a .200 hitter, no less.
    Beckett might have just kissed the CY goodbye, with tonight’s garbage. He looked like he did last year, terrible location, terrible pitch selection, nothing.
    G’night, all (or none, based on the comments!).

    SF September 27, 2007, 9:02 pm
  • So, it looks like it’s gonna take 2/3 over the weekend to do it, what with a Yankees’ sweep of Baltimore in the cards.
    Sox have their work cut out for them.

    SF September 27, 2007, 9:19 pm
  • 2 on, 1 out, Bot 7.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:29 pm
  • Lowell GIDP.
    There goes the neighborhood.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:31 pm
  • Tek homer. 1-run game.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:46 pm
  • hinske finds an acorn. now pack your locker up, and take care.

    sf rod September 27, 2007, 9:50 pm
  • They bring Nathan in with runners at corners and 2 out.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:52 pm
  • Pedroia pops out.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 9:57 pm
  • Holy shit Brandon Moss got a lead-off hit.

    Atheose September 27, 2007, 10:09 pm
  • be the hero Drew

    rob September 27, 2007, 10:14 pm
  • i don’t like tito running for papi here. the lead runner is the important man here. we lose the bat.

    sf rod September 27, 2007, 10:15 pm
  • Come on, Youk.
    Strike one.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 10:21 pm
  • Strike two.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 10:21 pm
  • Strike 3.

    Devine September 27, 2007, 10:22 pm
  • what a friggin tease… oh well, we’ll just have to clinch this weekend (maybe tommorow…)

    Ed September 27, 2007, 10:26 pm
  • what is this negativity? Like the sox can’t win 2 out of three this weekend? And the yankees may not sweep for christsakes.

    Ed September 27, 2007, 10:29 pm
  • boogers. What a bummer. Have to wait another day I suppose.

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 27, 2007, 10:51 pm
  • Looks like ‘the glass is not only half empty but it is poisoned too’ crowd is back.
    What’s up with you people, can’t you accept a single loss? Have you that little confidence in the best team in baseball? You got a problem with Beckett taking it easy for a single friggin night after throwing his heart out all season?
    Cleveland lost too, so the SOX have lost no ground. The Yanks are a mirage, with thin pitching and an offense overly reliant on a guy who disappears in postseason play. Ghost-Rod, Yea!
    LAA is reeling. The NL is a joke.
    The stars are aligning perfectly.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 9:19 am
  • “Funny, I imagine many Yankees fans will rejoice at the Mets’ failures, yet those same YFs get on Sox fans for rooting lustily against the Yankees in non-Sox games. And the Mets aren’t even in the same league or division, they aren’t even direct competition.”
    SF: As I’m the only one to post here on the Mets, Ia ssume you mean me, but I never got on Sox fans for rooting against the Yankees in non-Sox games. I love seeing Boston lose no matter who they are playing and assume SFs feel the same re: NY. Moreover, on the Mets, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. You don’t know what it is like to have two baseball teams in the same town. As great and fun as the NY-Boston rivalry has been these past several years, it is not the be all and end all of Yankee fan rivalry interest. NYM and (recently) LAA offer up huge amounts of tension and interest as well and the former especially so for those of us YFs who live in NY.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 9:20 am
  • BRAW: The Baghdad Bob of RSN.
    “The Yankees are a mirage, they did not defeat our mighty Red Sox 9 of their last 12 meetings, I do not know who is telling you these lies. The Evil Empire shall be defeated, Inshallah.”

    bloodyank78 September 28, 2007, 10:15 am
  • Also, you must understand that the Yanks-Mets hatred goes both ways…alot more Mets fans rejoice at Yankee failure than the other way around. And any life-long Yankee fan around my age (35) who grew up in the NY/NJ area remembers what it was like going to school with Mets fans in the mid-80’s…I still have the emotional scars from ’86 and the Yankee 2nd half fade in ’87.

    Anonymous September 28, 2007, 10:17 am
  • Chemical BRAW

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 10:18 am
  • I don’t understand why being sad or upset they lost is construed as “being negative”; I live and die with every game, that’s all. I still expect them to do well tonight.

    Devine September 28, 2007, 10:34 am
  • Speaking of Baghdad Bob (Comical Ali), here are some of my favorite quotes:
    “Our initial assessment is that they will all die”
    “We have them surrounded in their tanks”
    “We will welcome them with bullets and shoes.”
    “they are nowhere near the airport ..they are lost in the desert…they can not read a compass…they are retarded.”
    “We will kill them all……..most of them.”

    dknyc September 28, 2007, 10:41 am
  • Disclaimer…I know this isn’t a Yankees thread, but everyone seems to be posting in here.
    Yankee fans did any of you get tickets this morning? I was able to get two games, both of which will never happen unless there is a miracle. Home game #3 in the ALDS and Home game #4 in the ALCS. Wonderful.

    John - YF (Trisk) September 28, 2007, 10:49 am
  • ‘Living and dying with every game’ may be detrimental to your mental health in a sport where excellence means your team loses every third game.
    My approach is the best team should win but often times it does not. That is the shit side of sports.
    That said, the SOX are the best team. Have been and will be, for as long as the 2007 season plays.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 10:49 am
  • Trisk: I got tix to 4 games but that was thanks to my partial-season tix package.
    I have to say that that package is the best and most affordable way to see a “healthy” number of games (healthy as in, with wife and child and work involving heavy-travel, you can still catch 10-15 per season) and, most importantly, be assured of 3-5 post-season games.
    I pay $240/year for a pair of tix to every Sat. home game (12 in all) in section 39. I then get pre-sale for playoff tix – one pair for every series plus seemingly get preference in the lottery (I’ve gotten it every time I’ve entered).
    I didn’t try this morning since I can’t make any of the other home playoff games anyway, but even if you are not in NY and can’t use the season tix, it would almost be worth buying it at that price and selling off the tix, which you’d have no trouble doing – just to lock in so many playoff game chances.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 11:06 am
  • “My approach is the best team should win but often times it does not”
    Chemical BRAW already hedging his bets. I can hear it now if Boston actually does lose and proves him to be wrong for the umpteenth time in less than one month: “Sure they lost, but they were still the best, blabber, blabber, blabber.” What a joke.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 11:08 am
  • Yeah IH I know, between the pregnant wife, a toddler, coaching and playing I couldn’t get a package this season. I was only able to make 5 games all season. But I know what you mean, it’s so much easier your way. Next year I am in for a package, so that I can be there for the final season.

    John - YF (Trisk) September 28, 2007, 11:13 am
  • Ummm, correct if I’m wrong but so far the only thing I have wrong is the last series between the two teams, of which could have worked out far differently if Manny was playing as I assumed he would.
    You, on the other hand, have posted so much nonsense (Pudsada for HOF, Wang for CY, or the laughable “6 quality starters” and “excellent defense”) that one has wonder what planet you reside on.
    I don’t see a single issue with a statement like “My approach is the best team should win but often times it does not”. Shit does happen (see the SOX injury toll the past month or the Yanks roll of the die so far with untested rookies) that can effect outcomes. Not saying it will, just that it could.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 11:23 am
  • The real question BRAW is this: if Boston and NY meet in the ALCS and the Yankees win, will you acknowledge that the Yankees, having won in the post-season and in 9 of the last 12 of the regular season are a better team? No. Because you are genetically incapable of doing so. You will blabber on about “s%*t happening”.
    As for your lovley predictions, just off the top of my head:
    Clemens won’t start?? Starts and shuts them down – no hitter into the 6th.
    Sox sweep? Sox lose 2 of 3.
    Manny resting for the Yanks series? Manny plays 0 games of the Yanks series.
    Yanks are streaky? Yanks play consistently great in the second half of the season to the tune of a .671 win percentage.
    Oh, but keep lying about my posts. You have so much credibility here with SFs and YFs alike.
    HONK HONK!!!!!

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 11:35 am
  • Nope. Not that the Yanks will face the SOX, because I doubt they withstand Cleveland, but if they do, and they win, I most certainly will ackowledge they are the better team.
    After all, if Joba, the other rook pitchers, A-Rod, their starters, et el, hold up under playoff pressure, it would be appropriate of me to admit they are better than I believe they are.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 11:55 am
  • Can there just be a permanent BRaw v. Yankee fans thread please?

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 28, 2007, 11:59 am
  • Ok, I know it’s dangerous to actually respond to BRaw, but I can’t resist.
    BRaw- I’ve seen you invoke the Sox’s late-season injuries as the reason behind their troubles of late a number of times. You seem to claim that these injuries explain away the Sox’s losses, arguing that they are still the best team in baseball, it’s just that the injuries are getting in the way.
    My question is this- why don’t the Yanks’ early-season injuries excuse their troubles in the same way? If Boston gets a get-out-of-jail-free card just because Manny’s hurt, shouldn’t NY get the same when practically their entire pitching staff goes on the DL?

    KurticusMaximus- YF September 28, 2007, 11:59 am
  • BRAW;
    I respect your fervent support of your team. I commend your great optmism for the Sox and your belief that they are the best team. What I DO NOT respect, and what I can’t stand is your flippant dismissal of the Yankees. That is what subjects you to ridicule frequently on this site. Hating the Yankees with every fiber of your being is expected of you. Believe me, I feel the same sharp disdain for the Sox. However, I never disrespect them. Sick starting pitching, an excellent line-up, great D, and a great bull-pen. They’re a great team and most Yankee fans on this site who have any modicum of intelligence recognizes that. The fact that you make such foolish statements about the Yanks makes you come off as… not that sharp. There is a lot of mutual respect between fans of both camps on this site and I guarantee you will not see any as long as you continue to post asisne comments.

    bloodyank78 September 28, 2007, 12:07 pm
  • Guys, why do you even bother? He’s troll, leave him be and like all trolls, he will go away.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 12:15 pm
  • Since I don’t believe the Yanks ‘hang their hats’ on their starters, as they suck, but instead on the offense, of which only Matsui lost a brief spell from, no, I don’t think the two scenarios are similar. I don’t think many were relying on Damon and Giambi, and I think more than ‘many’ welcomed Phillips and Cabrera as upgrades.
    Without their pitching the SOX are an also-ran. The team was built around their starters, relief corp, with a keen eye on defense. Offense was a priority, but still almost secondary to those other strengths.
    However, with rookies taking the place of Mussina, Pavano et el the Yanks were no worse off.
    The fact of the matter is Cashman went into 2007 knowing his starters were old and sucky but threw the dice anyway, hoping for enough support for his offense. So their doing poorly or going down was not an unexpected event in 2007.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 12:22 pm
  • by78 says it best I believe.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 12:24 pm
  • Sorry, BY, but in baseball I respect pitching and defense over offense. I’m not a fan of these Yank 2007/SOX (historical) teams of offense over those other attributes. They always choke when confronted by quality pitching.
    Maybe that comes from being a SOX fan for so long.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 12:36 pm
  • The epitome of the post-2004 Red Sox fan:

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 12:44 pm
  • Well, for a team built around pitching, they’re looking like also-rans in September:
    Beckett: 4-1 34 IP 3.18 ERA
    Diced-K: 1-1 20.1 IP 9.74 ERA
    Schilling: 1-2 25.2 IP 3.16 ERA
    Wakefield: 0-2 17.2 IP 10.70 ERA
    So two decent, but not overpowering, pitchers right now and the other two have been simply atrocious. And after last night, I’m not feeling great about Beckett. In his next start, he’ll surpass his career high for innings.
    Suffice it to say, this Sox team is just as flawed as every other. Luckily, the post-season is about who can win 11 games first. I like their chances, but I don’t there’s a clear favorite anywhere.
    And have I mentioned that their best young arm will be sitting because they overworked him in meaningless games?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 12:47 pm
  • For once agree (somewhat) with BRAW: the Yankees’ largest problem in the first half was the left-handed hitters (Cano, Giambi, Abreu, Damon) not hitting worth of crap. Sure they had pitching injuries, but their offense should have been able to carry them.
    Having said that… the Yankees are playing better ball than the Red Sox right now. Once we have Youk and Manny back permanently, that may change. But until then, it’s only speculation.

    Atheose September 28, 2007, 12:50 pm
  • Oh, and I’m 100% to blame for us not clinching last night… I went ahead and bought two bottles of cheap champagne. My bad guys.

    Atheose September 28, 2007, 12:52 pm
  • Could be, but until proven wrong I will continue to rank Beckett, Dice and Schilling as the best playoff threesome, and the SOX relief corps far better than any AL playoff contender.
    If I am right the SOX should win their 2nd WS in 3 years. And I think I am.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 12:54 pm
  • 4 years (duh)

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 12:57 pm
  • As for defense:
    Varitek = 19 CS/ 60 SB
    Youk: 110 RATE (105 RATE)
    Dustin = 102 RATE (Career = 103 RATE)
    Lugo = 90 RATE (Career = 100 RATE)
    Lowell = 106 RATE (Career = 108 RATE)
    Drew: 94 RATE (Career = 102 RATE)
    Coco: 119 RATE (Career = 101 RATE)
    Manny: 99 RATE (Career = 93 RATE)
    So let’s see. The catcher has trouble controlling the running game. The infield up the middle is average, at best, with above average defense at the corners (And I’m still not convinced Youk will be okay. He grimaced noticeably on that check swing last night.) In the OF, their CF is very good, while the corner guys are just a bit below average.
    What I see is a team that has about average defense all around. But then that’s okay, if the hitting performs as it’s capable. If they get shut down, it’s going to be a quick post-season. See, with average pitching and defense, it all comes down to the offense. And too often it’s gone to sleep this year.
    (I like shutting up trolls with good hard facts. Honk! Honk!)

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:00 pm
  • BRAW: um…really??
    C Sabathia CLE 18-7 3.19
    F Carmona CLE 19-8 3.06
    P Byrd CLE 15-8 4.59
    J Beckett BOS 20-7 3.27
    D Matsuzaka BOS 14-12 4.48
    C Schilling BOS 9-8 3.87
    I think the stats prove otherwise…right?

    krueg September 28, 2007, 1:01 pm
  • LOL
    That was some funny shit, Petey!

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:06 pm
  • I agree with Pete, but I also honestly think Daisuke will do very well if given more than 5 days of rest. And Schilling has some of the best post-season stats to back him up as well.
    But I would still fear the 1-2 punch of Sabathia/Carmona more. But the Sox are definitely strong.

    Atheose September 28, 2007, 1:09 pm
  • Kind of depends on how Dice performs, Krueg. I happen to believe the man is closer to his 3.50/1.25 over 3/4 of the season than his last 4 starts, or so. Could been tired, or maybe just bored.
    Unlike Yank fans (Wang for CY! Wang for CY! Jaba for RR!) I don’t judge players after a given month of performance.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:12 pm
  • BRAW,
    I see it’s pointless w/you, so blinded by bias. LOL, you’re a fool. At least I can just ignore you from now on as I am convinced you have no perspective whatsoever.

    bloodyank78 September 28, 2007, 1:13 pm
  • “The epitome of the post-2004 Red Sox fan:”
    Go easy there IH, I would venture a guess that about 80% of all Yankees hat’s we see are nothing more than fashion accessories.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 1:14 pm
  • Uh, okay, so the starting pitching has sucked recently. But they’re the best rotation in the playoffs? That makes a ton of sense.
    And the Sox relief corps in September?
    Paps: 9 IP 3.00 ERA
    Oki: 5.2 IP 9.53 ERA
    Lopez: 5 IP 5.40 ERA
    Timlin: 8.1 IP 3.24 ERA
    MDC: 10.1 IP 1.74 ERA
    and last and certainly least – the guy they “needed” and gave up “nothing” to acquire:
    Gag: 7.2 IP 4.70 ERA
    SO let’s see, the top guys in “the SOX relief corps far better than any AL playoff contender” are:
    Paps, Timlin, and MDC.
    Man, if only they had a young flame thrower to support that group…

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:14 pm
  • “Unlike Yank fans (Wang for CY! Wang for CY! Jaba for RR!) I don’t judge players after a given month of performance.”
    Have these sentiments ever been uttered on YFSF by anyone besides BRAW? It’s bizarre to lie repeatedly on a blog when these things can be easily checked. Kind of just weird.

    Nick-YF September 28, 2007, 1:15 pm
  • All four AL teams are darn good. The postseason this year will truly be a crapshoot. Who is the best team? I have no idea. Whoever wins, I suppose, such is the evenness of all the teams. It will be impossible to claim “the best team didn’t win”, a charge that I hate, as it’s rhetoric typically thrown out by embittered members of a losing team or fan base.
    For a primo example of this, see “Fans and Players of the Steelers, Pittsburgh”, every time they have lost to the Patriots over the past 7 years.

    SF September 28, 2007, 1:15 pm
  • Hey BRAW,
    So my assertion of the Yankees having 6 quality starters in September is “laughable”?
    Let’s look at how those 6 did in September:
    Wang (5): 3-1 / 33IP / 3.27 ERA
    Pettitte (5): 2-2 / 30.1IP / 4.45 ERA
    Hughes (5): 5-0 / 29.2IP / 2.73 ERA
    Kennedy (3): 1-0 / 19IP / 1.89 ERA
    Clemens (2): 0-1 / 10IP / 4.50 ERA
    Mussina (4): 3-0 / 25IP / 1.93 ERA
    Collective: 14-4; 147 IP; 2.94 ERA
    Yeah, that’s laughable. Laughing at you.
    Why don’t you do the same for your pitching-centered Boston Red Sox?
    Facts are a pain aren’t they? They tend to cut through moronic BS.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 1:15 pm
  • What CC and Carmona do not have is the resume of Beckett and Schilling shutting offenses down in the playoffs. Dice too, if one compares the World Championship to our WS.
    Prove it, boys.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:16 pm
  • “Unlike Yank fans (Wang for CY! Wang for CY! Jaba for RR!) I don’t judge players after a given month of performance.”
    Get it right, RAW. It should read “unlike Michael Kay”. The YFs who frequent this site are nothing like what you describe. Can you cut this sh*t out?

    SF September 28, 2007, 1:16 pm
  • I suggest something:
    DISENGAGE. I detest the fact that this site (all too often lately) has become “YFs against one renegade SF”.

    SF September 28, 2007, 1:18 pm
  • Ah, yes, when all else fails, change the argument. Now the Dice-K fiction:
    Apr: 4.36 ERA
    May: 5.22 ERA
    Jun: 1.59 ERA
    Jul: 3.62 ERA
    Aug: 4.45 ERA
    Sep: 9.74 ERA
    Sure looks like “3.50/1.25 over 3/4 of the season”.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:18 pm
  • BRAW, It’s literally impossible for you to sound any more retarded when you start to bring up what pitchers have done in previous post-seasons. Please, just stop.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 1:20 pm
  • Lockland: come on, the hat thing was a joke. There is only one person on this site who posts comments and reflects a lack of knowledge about the history of the game or of either team prior to 2004, and it isn’t you. HINT: It’s the guy who said of Yogi Berra and Carlton Fisk that these guys “died in like the 1800’s”.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 1:21 pm
  • Understood, IH, understood, just keeping everyone honest.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 1:22 pm
  • Whoops, forgot:
    Honk! Honk!
    But, I agree SF, this post-season – like the last 2, is a crapshoot. Who saw the White Sox coming in 2005? Or the Tigers and Cardinals (!) last year.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:23 pm
  • Guys, just ignore BRAW. He’s the lone outlier who refuses all logic.

    Atheose September 28, 2007, 1:25 pm
  • “And the Sox relief corps in September…”
    you just don’t get it, IH

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:26 pm
  • Pete,
    In all fairness, the White Sox had the best AL regular season record, and were just 1 game behind the Cards for best record. They weren’t much of a surprise.
    The Tigers and Cardinals, however, I totally agree about. They both suffered monumental collapses at the end of the season and somehow did well in the playoffs. Flipping a coin to determine ALDS winners would probably work more often than trying to use logic. Which is why BRAW’s comment of “If I’m right then the Sox win the World Series” is idiotic.

    Atheose September 28, 2007, 1:28 pm
  • Don’t drive BRAW away just yet guys, still waiting for him to justify the “laughable” designation when confronted with, you know, FACTS.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 1:29 pm
  • By the way, SF, I resent the shot at the Steelers. I lived there for five years and grew to love the city, people, and team. They got their title without cheating.
    Meanwhile, a guy over at ESPN brings up the question of why the league was so quick to destroy all evidence of the Pats cheating? Couldn’t be that it included video from during Superbowl and playoff wins? Nah, the Steelers fans have no reason to be bitter…

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:29 pm
  • Tag Team!

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:32 pm
  • Yeah, that was me clownboy, and you talking about the whole season means nothing. Oki and Gagne are not the pitchers they were in June. Get over it (and yourself).
    But, I suppose when you think Dice-K has been a 3.50 pitcher for 3/4 of the season, there’s no use pointing out FACTS to you.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:33 pm
  • Wow, a lot of talking here today, but no real conversation. :-P

    Paul SF September 28, 2007, 1:34 pm
  • Sorry, Atheose. I meant that what was surprise about the Pale Sox is how they rolled over everyone. I don’t think anyone saw that coming.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:35 pm
  • I love how Clownboy compares the the “World Championship” to the “World Series”.
    That’s hilarious.
    Honk! Honk!

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:37 pm
  • I already did, IH. Where all most many some Yank fans posting here pick and choose months that support their hair brained theories, I let the whole season become the judge.
    After all, if all you got are September stats to back yer shit up where does that leave those of October? Closer to June, July, maybe August? How about May?

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:37 pm
  • Pete, the Steelers players and their fans used to whine and moan every time they lost to the Pats, no matter the margin. “Best team doesn’t win sometimes”, was the rallying cry.
    It’s a weak claim, regardless of sport. It’s typically uttered after a loss, by a losing player, a fan of a losing team. Forget the Steelers: the line itself is a dead end. If you believe it to be true (and sometimes maybe, just maybe, it is, sometimes the best team doesn’t win) DON’T SAY IT. It never gets anyone anywhere, to say that line.

    SF September 28, 2007, 1:40 pm
  • BRAW, let’s play a game. I’ll pretend to be a Sox fan, and you’ll pretend to know something about baseball.
    I love fantasy games. The ghosts of Carlton Fisk and Yogi Berra would love it. Or they will, once they each die and have ghosts.

    IronHorse (yf) September 28, 2007, 1:43 pm
  • Atheose, if you ask me, the WS and Tigers won because their starters were arguably the best in the league. That is my case for the SOX.
    As far as why St Lou won, it could be because they had a Joba clone on their team. If not only in rotundness.
    Yes, of course, Ponson.

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:46 pm
  • Ok!
    Let me start….
    Pap’s, Ped and Ellsbury are shoo-ins for the hall of fame. If you doubt that just look at their performance in September!

    BostonRAW September 28, 2007, 1:52 pm
  • I understand your point, SF, and I agree to an extent.
    But you have to ask yourself, now, whether the Steelers fans had a point. They do know their football. And in 2001, the Steelers did seem to have the better team. :) Against that great defense, did the Patriots benefit from breaking the rules? If so, there a legit complaint there. Too bad the NFL destroyed all the evidence…

    Pete September 28, 2007, 1:53 pm
  • “Kind of depends on how Dice performs, Krueg. I happen to believe the man is closer to his 3.50/1.25 over 3/4 of the season than his last 4 starts, or so. Could been tired, or maybe just bored.
    Unlike Yank fans (Wang for CY! Wang for CY! Jaba for RR!) I don’t judge players after a given month of performance.”
    BRAW: the stats I quoted were for the season, no “break down” or “lose of focus” for the Indians Top 3. Your opinion is not fact my friend. You should qualify your posts as such. Your backhanded comments after every “editorial” are a joke as well…how old are you, 12???

    krueg September 28, 2007, 2:26 pm
  • Pete- I guarantee you the Steelers cheat too. Every team in the NFL is cheating in some way, shape, or form. Whether it’s PEDs or crowd noise or hidden mikes or cameras. Every team is cheating.

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 28, 2007, 2:48 pm
  • Pete, really man, come on. Every team tapes the opposing coaches signals, this has already been discovered, if it’s from their sidelines, the booth, the stands, all sorts of places. The only place where BB stepped over the line is putting a video guy on the opposing teams sideline. Frankly, it’s was just a stupid and arrogant move, but hardly a significant advantage in any way.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 2:49 pm
  • Anyone see this piece on Paps from Verducci:
    The Papelbon Program? And SF’s give YF’s a hard time about the Joba Rules? Shoot, Paps has tests done after every game. Crazy – I didn’t know they were monitoring him like that.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 2:50 pm
  • Clownboy – if you’re indeed 12, do you still wear knickers and kneeSOX?

    Andrews September 28, 2007, 2:50 pm
  • Seriously- BRaw is baiting YFs and YFs are eating it up. Can there be a separate thread on the forum for back and forth bitch-slapping?

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 28, 2007, 2:55 pm
  • NSTB – Not every team. There is no possible way the Giants cheat. You don’t get to be that God awful via cheating.

    John - YF (Trisk) September 28, 2007, 2:55 pm
  • lol John! You make an excellent point.
    The Colts def cheat with their stupid dome, that’s for sure.

    no sleep til brooklyn SF September 28, 2007, 2:58 pm
  • Honestly, I don’t think every team cheats in that way (stealing signals and using the info during the game). I know I can’t see the meathead Cowher doing it. Analyzing coverages and matching to situations, sure. But trying to figure out the play as it’s being called? That definitely crosses a line.
    Besides, the difference too is the video evidence of cheating. I’d love to know why the NFL destroyed all the evidence. Why not open up the closet and show how far this went back? There’s no doubt in my mind some of it included playoff wins.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:08 pm
  • Pete. Do you actually think that even if the Patriots did cheat in 2001, that they themselves wouldn’t have already destroyed that evidence? Why would it be hanging around? How much has the Steelers team makeup changed since ’01? Or, y’know, every team in the league?
    I mean, if you want to gripe about it, fine, but the NFL was undoubtedly only given tape from this season (possibly/probably just the Jets game). They then destroyed it because they want this story over with. They don’t want the NFL associated with that BS. The best way to do that is to make a statement that says: “Hey, we’re watching you, and if we catch you, we’ll take draft picks and burn your videotapes while you watch and cry.” You’re trying to scare up a conspiracy where there isn’t one.
    And the Colts, cheating or not, completely suck at life. Which makes me a little less upset that they’re very good at football.
    Also, Pete, as a YF, if you want to get into gripes about cheating and whether fanbases or teams were wronged, how about every hit, run scored, home run, rbi, etc. from Giambi these last few years? If you want to take a hard line about the Pats, you have to take a hard line about that too.
    (And P.S. The Patriots were punished for cheating (whether it was enough or not is debatable). Giambi was not punished by MLB for cheating.)

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:09 pm
  • Don’t want to go off on a tangent (though the tangent may already be gone off on…):
    I haven’t heard a single interview with an ex-NFLer that hasn’t said “everyone steals signals, everyone does what the Pats did”. That’s not to excuse the Patriots or Belichick: he was caught cheating and should suffer the penalty and the embarrassment. But the idea that the Patriots somehow had some sort of illegal, unique advantage (in other words, the playing field was tilted ONLY in the Patriots direction) which brought them three Super Bowl victories is kind of silly. The Pats have to endure these questions because of their coach and his arrogance (and justifiably so) but the answer to the question is pretty simple.

    SF September 28, 2007, 3:16 pm
  • “And the Colts, cheating or not, completely suck at life.”
    How so?

    Anonymous September 28, 2007, 3:16 pm
  • They’re the Colts. I’m not sure I need to qualify that.
    Also, I live in Tennessee, and everyone here (guys and girls) is ridiculously in love with Peyton Manning. He’s great, and will go down as one of (if not THE) greatest QB in history. But holy crap it gets annoying.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:20 pm
  • “If you want to take a hard line about the Pats, you have to take a hard line about that too.”
    Absolutely. Cheating is cheating, whether it be PED’s or illegal video. “Everybody does it”, to me, is the weakest excuse in the world.

    Andrews September 28, 2007, 3:22 pm
  • Absolutely. Cheating is cheating, whether it be PED’s or illegal video. “Everybody does it”, to me, is the weakest excuse in the world.
    Agreed, Andrews. And my point with what you quoted was not to say we need to take a hard line on Giambi. Just to say, you can’t pick and choose which cheating is okay and which isn’t based on team affiliation. It all sucks, and there’s hardly anything we can do about it.
    For the record, I’m a Pats fan, and I’d have been fine with a little heavier sanctions to try to discourage such blatant cheating in the future.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:26 pm
  • “They’re the Colts. I’m not sure I need to qualify that.”
    I’ve been a Colts fan since the first Super Bowl I watched – between the colts and cowboys in 1970. I think you do.

    Andrews September 28, 2007, 3:26 pm
  • Sorry, Quo. I just don’t see why it was in their interests to destroy the evidence, unless it involved the Patriots post-season wins. And unfortunately, we’ll never know the definitive answer to that.
    Further, even if the Pats did cheat in those wins, what was the NFL going to do? There was nothing they could do. But yeah, I could see the Pats holding onto Cowher files – to get whatever edge they thought they contained. That’s their modus operandi.
    I was mostly ambivalent about the whole thing, and thought the penalty fair (though Billy boy should have been suspended for a game). It was this article that had me thinking about the longer term consequences about the way it was handled:
    Since SF brought up the whining of Steelers fans, there a chance they had a point. If the Pats were cheating back then, who’s to say how that 2001 game would have turned out?
    And I’m not a YF, just a glass-quarter full SF, born and bred in a way the Pats never were in my family. So when I lived in Steeltown for five years, the city’s love of football and their team infected me. But yeah, anyone who took steroids sucks. And they should be testing for HGH right now. Problem is, you just don’t know who cheated.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:27 pm
  • Well, I wasn’t really serious. I think they suck at life, because I kind of hate that team. I also think the Yankees suck at life. However, in the factual world, it’s really only A-Rod that actually does.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:28 pm
  • “Just to say, you can’t pick and choose which cheating is okay and which isn’t based on team affiliation.”
    I agree 100 percent.

    Andrews September 28, 2007, 3:28 pm
  • Pete, then you and I will have to agree to disagree. How was it not in the NFL’s best interest to destroy the Pats tapes this season, if only to show Manungenious that they did so?
    And honestly. It’s not Cowher’s team anymore. Maybe they hung onto the tapes until last season, maybe not. But they’d be both completely useless and incriminating if they’d still had them after he announced he was leaving. Say whatever you want about the Patriots in this, but I don’t think the NFL itself has an ulterior motive here.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:30 pm
  • And Pete, I’m sure I’m not the only one around here (YF or SF) who’s unsure about which team you really root for. I guess it’s not that important in the grand scheme.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:32 pm
  • Andrews:
    I agree on the “everyone does it” excuse. I found it interesting, however, that every ex-NFLer that I have seen interviewed said exactly that, regardless of affiliation. To me, all that means is that it is harder to sully the accomplishments of the Patriots as due to the illegal activity, as some would like to have us believe. The outrage is convenient. It’s like Soxfans bitching about Giambi: we had cheaters too, we just don’t know who they all are/were, besides Paxton Crawford.

    SF September 28, 2007, 3:34 pm
  • SF –
    Who’s to say how those games would have turned out. In that 2001 AFC Championship, Kordell was picked three times where he had 11 all season (sure, it was still Kordell Stewart). And it’s not like the Pats secondary had superstars. If they knew what was coming on even one of those picks, because they stole the sign, the outcome is questionable in a game they won by 7.
    And why is it that the Pats have been so good at getting the “most” out of their usually terrible secondary? I’d say putting them on routes where they know where the ball is likely to end up is a huge advantage. And that makes those players look that much better than they really are.
    The problem with Belichick is that he’s always seemed to be the smartest kid in the class – consistently winning games he wasn’t supposed to win. Now we find out that kid has been cheating, and much more than the rules allow. I don’t see how it doesn’t make folks wonder if that’s always been how he’s so “smart” – at going around the rules.
    And the real problem is – we’ll never know the truth.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:36 pm
  • Sorry, SF, I saw a few former players that said that particular cheating took it to a whole new level.
    And Quo, lucky for me, I don’t have to prove anything to you.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:39 pm
  • Right, Pete. We’ll never know the truth. We’ll never know if Cowher had videographers as well, but Belichick just had more intelligent videographers with better equipment. An entirely plausible scenario, especially based on the fact SF cites that almost every ex-NFL player has said that this goes on everywhere.
    We’ll never know why the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, and UFOs are so frickin camera shy.
    We’ll never know why Mr. and Mrs. Spears didn’t just “take a night off”.
    We’ll never know whether eggs are truly good or bad for you.
    It’s a horribly mysterious world out there.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:43 pm
  • “stealing signals and using the info during the game”
    Pete, please read a little more on this. Goodell said point blank that not only was the tape not used for that game, that he didn’t think it would be possible for any in game situation.
    Also, every single authority on the NFL also said that it would be nearly impossible if not totally impossible for taped signals to have any effect on the game in which they were taped.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 3:45 pm
  • All I know is Belichick took the cheating to a whole new level (with ex-players saying exactly that). That’s a fact.
    What we don’t know is how long he’s been doing it. And that’s a question the NFL should have answered.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:48 pm
  • On a more general statement, kind of in support of what Lockland is saying, if you don’t think Roger Goodell has his heart in the right place as far as trying to level the playing field, prohibit/punish cheating, and trying to make character a more important part of the NFL, then I think you should stop watching. Just stop. If you don’t think that, everything about it is just going to piss you off.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 3:49 pm
  • The “whole new level” was primarily the arrogance of putting the camera guy on the other teams sideline.
    I forget which coach said it, but it was pretty funny, basically saying that he knew BB had a guy there and they used to look at the camera and say, “Hi, Bill!”

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 3:51 pm
  • I think it’s all a questions of resources, Lockland. Other teams might have three guys on the problem where Belichick had six. Shoot, if one guy’s sole job was recording signals, what’s that say about what’s going on elsewhere?
    And, with enough people on the problem, they could surely make use of data collected in the 1st and 2nd quarters to read plays in the 2nd half. There’s enough time. The only question is how many people were working on the solutions.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:52 pm
  • Excellent point Quo, I think he’s doing a hell of a job putting his foot down.
    The 500k fine to BB was pretty serious. Think about it, BB makes roughly 5.5 mill a year, in order to pay a 500k fine, he needs to make about 800k before taxes.
    Also keep in mind, very few wealthy people keep 500k in cash just sitting in the bank. I’m guessing he had to sell something or a lot of something and chances are he wasn’t planning on that.
    Trust me, this was a message to BB and all of the coaches from Goodell. If you break the rules, no matter how trivial, I’m coming after you personally.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 3:55 pm
  • You missed my point, Quo. If Goodell found evidence of cheating in any post-season game (not even 2001 – but maybe just 2006), really what were his options? What could he do?
    There are just a ton of unanswered questions. And destroying the evidence most certainly is fishy. As Easterbrook points out, the explanation he’s received doesn’t really say anything. There’s no good reason to destroy the evidence. There never is.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 3:56 pm
  • No, you missed my point. WTH would they keep that kind of stuff laying around? Are the Chargers likely to be using the same signals with a new coach? The Colts maybe, but they haven’t even played them yet. I very much doubt there was pre-2007 evidence for Goodell to get his hands on, whether that means it was hidden or already destroyed, it doesn’t matter.
    And I’m not sure the Bills are a sophisticated enough team to USE signals.
    And why would teams keep their signals the same from season to season anyway? With the turnover rate in the NFL, it’s likely that guys on one team will be on another the very next season. They’ll know the defensive or offensive calls and could tell their new coaches about it. Heck, some NFL coaches bring in players who are cut in order to pick their brains for just that reason. Then they put em back out in the FA pool.
    I fail to see why there would’ve been pre-2007 evidence for Goodell to find, even if the Patriots have been doing this for years anyway.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 4:01 pm
  • They don’t even keep the signals the same from game to game, let alone season to season. Some coaches have up to two or three sets of dummy signals being sent in by decoys, with the real signal caller never being the same guy twice in a row. Some teams use a different set of signals at half time.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:03 pm
  • I got that point, Quo. But you recognize that many coaches (Dungy) are still in the league. You think that Belichick is going to throw that stuff out? And they were told that if they didn’t hand over everything there would be severe consequences.
    Further, Goodell isn’t going to say, “Oh, you just started doing it this year. I believe you.” No, he’s going to pressure them enough and Billy Boy probably handed over enough from the past to satisfy the commish – going back a few years.
    The point still is: Why destroy the evidence? What’s the point of that? So all this meaningless info (as you say) doesn’t fall into another coaches hands?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:07 pm
  • The Pats just played the Chargers, and destroyed them. Only a simpleton would assert that the Patriots gained an advantage from videotaping the Chargers last year, though that has certainly been bandied about. The Chargers have a new coach and new plays, new signals. Many teams change signals within a game.
    And we all know who fingered Belichick: the guy who celebrated championships right alongside his mentor but didn’t object to the methods while employed by the Patriots.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:10 pm
  • And let me ask this question: Why would Belichick go through the trouble of not only having a guy tape the signals but presumably having a staff analyze them. You don’t think that he found some use for them? The guy was doing everything in his power to cheat. But it’s not working or conferring any advantage? That’s absurd.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:11 pm
  • You obviously didn’t read Lockland’s comment or all of mine. Teams don’t use the same signals every year, or even every game. When the Colts play the Titans, with Nick Harper in the Titans secondary, is it intelligent of them to still be using the same signals?
    And if you’re going to make a point about general tendencies next (because I truly believe Lockland shattered whatever case you could’ve made about reviewing past signals), then I’m done. Because holy crap. If Dungy (to re-use our example) and Belichick don’t know each other’s tendencies by now, then no amount of videotape is going to make up that gap anyway.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 4:13 pm
  • Bill Cowher, on Belichick:
    “I think No. 1, from a coach’s perspective, trying to steal signals has been a part of the game. We understand that as a coach. You know, using walkie-talkies, tape recorders … but when you take the camera on the field, that’s just arrogance.
    I think the penalty was stiff by the commissioner, I think it’s going to be a great deterrent. I will say this: I believe in the two AFC Championship games that we lost to the New England Patriots … I don’t believe that this played any factor in it.”

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:15 pm
  • Who’s to say, SF, they haven’t shifted to back using the binos as every other team does? The difference is: Belichick has had an entire staff doing this work for years. I bet they’re really good at it.
    Still, I don’t think that affected the San Diego game. The Pats actually do have a good team. It really is like the smartest guy in the class – who still decides to cheat. It’s probably not going to do much for him now. All we’re left to do is wonder about the past. How much of an advantage did he get? We’ll never know.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:15 pm
  • Pete, BB is a information addict, he gathers as much information as humanly possible and then combs through it to find anything at all that could be useful. The best estimate I heard was that he uses tapes of signals to try and pick up trends or patterns, not actual signals, since those would be worthless as I explained above.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:15 pm
  • Still no one’s answered the question (not even Cowher): Why would Belichick go through all the trouble? Because it wasn’t working?
    And no one’s answered: Why destroy the evidence?
    Saying the signals change doesn’t answer either of those questions.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:18 pm
  • Right, Lockland. He is exactly that. And he’s used every means at his disposal (including illegal ones) to “find anything that could be useful”.
    Who’s to say what is and isn’t useful, especially in games won by 7 points?
    Still, I can’t understand (and this is where it all started for me): Why destroy the evidence?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:21 pm
  • What should they have done with the evidence (and I’m still 100% positive there was only 2007 evidence to be had)? Put it on youtube?

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 4:23 pm
  • I have no idea, Quo. But destroying it doesn’t look good.
    And you honestly think that Goodell would believe that this just started this year?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:25 pm
  • Move those goalposts, Pete. Cowher himself says he doesn’t believe the Patriots derived any advantage with their tapes. So now it’s “why won’t he answer what Belichick’s reasoning was”. Cowher himself remarks on the the videotaping’s “arrogance”, but he doesn’t say that it is a better method or more fruitful method than stealing signs in any other manner. I imagine that would be an easy question to get an answer to: does videotaping from the sideline trump videotaping from the press box, or any other location?
    Obviously Belichick thought he could learn something, who would deny that?

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:26 pm
  • What if Cowher found out that Belichick had a staff of ten working on those tapes and gleaning patterns? Whereas he only used a guy with binos talking to his coordinators. The fact is, we still have no idea how deep this ran.
    And folks were denying that it could be useful because the signals change (within games, between games, across seasons). That’s all I was commenting on. Belichick went through alot of trouble to get and analyze the info. Obviously he thought there was a use for it. But we’ve only heard about how he acquired the info. We’ve heard little about the operation to make use of it.
    Meanwhile, my goalposts haven’t moved one bit. I just don’t see how destroying the evidence was a good idea. That’s really my only problem. It raises many more questions than it answers.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:34 pm
  • “Why destroy the evidence?”
    First, I’m pretty sure it was only the Jets tape that got destroyed. Second, I think they did it to put the matter behind them. To let the Jets know that the tape was not and now could not be used.
    Why keep the tape?

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:34 pm
  • Who else is going to review the tape other than the NFL, which they did?

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:36 pm
  • “Why keep the tape?”
    To use during the interminable NFL Network off-season of course! Even old films of the Steelers and Packers run out eventually.

    FenSheaParkway September 28, 2007, 4:36 pm
  • Read the Easterbrook column, Lockland. They required the Pats to turn over everything they’ve ever had. They they destroyed it.
    People really think that Goodell would believe this only happened once? And that they only had video from 2007? If he did, either he’s an idiot or less interested in answers than Selig (and thus a moron).

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:38 pm
  • Belichick went through alot of trouble to get and analyze the info.
    No, he didn’t. That’s the amazing thing.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:39 pm
  • Even more off-topic, but this clip is one of the funnier things I’ve seen in some time

    attackgerbil September 28, 2007, 4:40 pm
  • Gregg Easterbrook is a complete idiot. He is a big proponent of intelligent design, which is about all you need to know about how Gregg Easterbrook’s brain works.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:40 pm
  • Meanwhile, they destroyed the evidence after less than one week. That must have been a very thorough investigation.
    Shoot, OJ storming an hotel room is going to take years to figure out.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:40 pm
  • “He is a big proponent of intelligent design”
    This is the single biggest reason I gave up on TMQ a long time ago. I feel dirty even thinking about his “Kick Early, Go for it Late” immutable truths, now that I know what he thinks about real evidence.

    FenSheaParkway September 28, 2007, 4:43 pm
  • What? Was it Kraft that hired a guy specifically to record hand signals? That was his sole job? I want to know who took the tape from there. Who worked with them to decode it. How they did it. And how Belichick used the information. SF, you have no idea how many people were involved in analyzing the info. Suffice it to say, it wasn’t just the guy collecting the video.
    Ah, yes, the old stand by – go ad hominen on Easterbrook. I care less about his other beliefs. On this topic, and that column, he’s spot on.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:44 pm
  • Easterbrook is an idiot. Therefore, everything he writes is, de facto, written by an idiot. Including whatever he writes about football.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:47 pm
  • Easterbrook is an idiot. Therefore, everything he writes is, de facto, written by an idiot. Including whatever he writes about football
    I imagine there is a portion of our readership that would gladly substitute “SF” for “Easterbrook” and “baseball” for “football”.
    Them’s the breaks, I guess.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:49 pm
  • Clay shut down
    By Amalie Benjamin, Globe Staff
    The Red Sox today announced that rookie pitcher Clay Buchholz will be shut down for the rest of the season, including the postseason.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:52 pm
  • Who worked with them to decode it. How they did it.
    The CIA, the NSA. Flash Gordon. They used a ring they found in an Ovaltine can. The biggest scandal is that Belichick wore these during a game and NOBODY SAID A THING.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:52 pm
  • Oh, I think you’re being too hard on yourself SF. I’ve never heard you worry about the Sox fortunes due to “ye gods”.

    FenSheaParkway September 28, 2007, 4:52 pm
  • Uh oh. Cue a trademark Pete rant on Clay, Gagne, Theo, and the moronic Sox front office.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:53 pm
  • SF, you’ve written a few idiotic things yourself. By that logic, you’re an idiot :)
    Easterbrook’s logic, in this case, is so simple an idiot could understand: Why destroy the evidence? (Though some of you I wonder about.)
    And I still haven’t gotten a good answer to that question. We have no idea how deep into the past it reaches.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:53 pm
  • We have no idea how deep into the past it reaches.
    Back to Wesleyan/Williams. Belichick stealing signs singlehandedly kept Wesleyan from only losing by an average of 27 points a game instead of 34.

    SF September 28, 2007, 4:55 pm
  • Perfect change of topic!
    Ah, yes, good thing Clay made those three September starts (totaling more innings than Gagne). So they could win a post-season berth by 8 games or so (with Gagne’s choke jobs too).

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:56 pm
  • It okay, SF. You can feel good about Tito continuing to run Gagne out there – esp. because they “needed” him and gave up “nothing”.
    I’m going to slam my head in a car door a few times.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 4:58 pm
  • Pete, you really make my ass itch.
    Also, I’m more than 80% certain that you are a Yankees fan and Jets fan.

    LocklandSF September 28, 2007, 4:58 pm
  • SF x2
    Used to be Celtics, but they haven’t given me much to cheer for in a long time. And Ainge truly is a moron. Theo is just an idiot.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:01 pm
  • Ainge is a moron, we agree on something. My Celtics fandom (which for 15 years was pretty rabid) died with ML Carr being handed to coaching reins.
    And if the Sox don’t go very far in the playoffs, I’d be willing to predict that it will be on the offense. Or the starting pitchers. But it could be the relief pitching or the baserunning. Or the managing. Or, most likely, the opposition being damn good.

    SF September 28, 2007, 5:04 pm
  • By the way, I f*cking called it on Buchholz. What a f%cking waste those god damn motherf&ckers. I’m going to have to watch motherf$cking Eric f@cking Gagme blow donkey d%ck this post-season.
    That’s f#cking faaan-tastic!
    (I had to get that out, thanks.).

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:04 pm
  • Sorry, one more thing:
    Those mother f#ckers had an 10 game f&cking lead and they just had to get f%cking Eric motherf*cking Gagme before trying any other f@cking option, including sitting Oki’s a$$ down for a month in June.
    Who posted the Theo quote saying they knew he was being overworked?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:09 pm
  • Where’s Clownboy when we need him?
    Honk? Honk?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:11 pm
  • I’m happy to have seen Buchholz start in the bigs, because know I have at least some idea of how he could do the same next season. I’m glad they didn’t try to push him into a role they hadn’t prepared him for in the minors at all, or even given him much prep for in the Majors.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 5:13 pm
  • Know should be “now”.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 5:13 pm
  • Ah, yes. You do realize that they had months to prepare him. BEFORE trading for Gagme, they could have tried Buck in the AAA bullpen. They knew he was going to be on strict innings limit, and they did absolutely nothing to make the most of those innings.
    Meanwhile, why did they have Buck pitch out of the bullpen once?

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:18 pm
  • Know to now ended up being the least of my grammatical problems. I think you all got it anyway.
    I’m not sure where the guarantee of success for Buchholz in that role would’ve been. Some pitchers can handle starting and short relief, and some can only handle one or the other. Who can say that Buchholz would’ve been lights out in a role where he’d have to pitch single innings in consecutive games.

    Anonymous September 28, 2007, 5:18 pm
  • Meanwhile, I love how it’s being reported as this:
    “This was not the result of Buchholz reaching his predetermined innings limit, Francona said, but rather a result of the strength and mobility testing the Red Sox do on all their pitchers.”
    Like the two aren’t related. The Boston press corps getting to the bottom of things as usual!

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:21 pm
  • Who knows, indeed, Quo (though he looked very good in his one relief appearance). The point is: They never tried.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:22 pm
  • They had two options Pete.
    Option 1: Go with a pitcher who started the season at AA, has been a starter for the entirety of his professional career, and try to convert him into a bullpen piece.
    Option 2: Trade the 7th or 8th most talented starter in the organization (if that), our third best AAA outfielder, and an 18 year old with about a negligible amount of professional experience for a proven bullpen stud who had pitched well all season for the Rangers, and in a hitters’ park.
    At the time, it was an easy decision, and a really easy one, now, to ridicule in hindsight. The best way to attack the trade, I think, is to attack the neccessity of it. It probably wasn’t neccessary to begin with. But if they felt they had to go with Option 1 OR Option 2, then I think they picked the right one at the time.

    QuoSF September 28, 2007, 5:29 pm
  • Joba started the year in A+. They could have tried Buck in a relief role. Nothing was preventing that.
    And Beltre is 17 years old and have I mentioned he was the second rated prospect in hisleague this year?
    I’ve been ridiculing the trade since it went down. They continued to misuse Oki until it was too late. They got rid of Romero who is now a vital cog for Philly. And they absolutely wasted Buck’s innings in September.
    I’m going now to drink heavily. I’ll talk to you all next week.

    Pete September 28, 2007, 5:44 pm
  • Cheap scrubs
    • Are you forever spilling a super secret formula on your lab coat?
    • Are you tired of crack babies puking on your colorful print top in the maternity ward?
    • Maybe you want a new print pattern to wear on those dreary and drably days at the veterinarian’s office?
    • Need a new medical jacket to replace your 6 year old jacket that’s hanging on the back door in your office?
    • Do you want to look stylish in your trim top and pant while walking down the halls turning the heads of those doctors with the fancy beemers and Rolex watches?
    • Are you on a tight budget since your employer is squeezing as much money as they can out of your service and not on your clothes?
    • Could it be possible you are a wealthy patron who would like to purchase a 100 scrubs for the non-profit clinic you found in Guatemala?
    • I know, you must be a cosmetologist who is forever getting nail polish remover on your protective garments at the salon?
    If you answered YES to any of these questions, you must be working in a sterile environment in some sort of medical profession, either a lab, a doctor’s office, a veterinary, or a hospital or someplace similar.
    At the behest of at Review Me, this sponsored post is brought to you by TheLocoMono. TheLocoMono Website is in no way affiliated with medical Scrub Sets.
    Every now and then, your need to be replaced for one reason or the other. You always want to give off your best impression to your customers, whether they be monkeys at the lab, venture capitalists touring your lab, concerned relatives awaiting news in your office, or even Paris Hilton, should she happen to walk into your salon in a need of a quick pedicure.

    jose gonzales January 2, 2008, 11:23 pm
  • Cheap scrubs set
    My mom always goes to my auntie’s house for monitoring her blood pressure and since she’s already 63 years old. She needs to have a blood pressure monitoring even for monthly checkup or at least twice a month. My cousin is a 20 years old nursing aid student and because of that she has stethoscope with her. She always brings it if she’s on school or on duty for her on-job training in a medical hospital. When on duty, she wore a scrubs set and because she only have one. She requested her mom to buy her one. And yes since my auntie got an internet connection just last week. We help her find cheap scrubs set and we found it! For Unisex Single Pocket Top/1 Pocket Pants it only cost $9.99 which is very affordable compared to the last one that they bought that cost $20.00 and the quality is not good. Well, the quality is good and they all have the different kinds of uniform and you choose the color you want order that you will surely love to buy. My auntie has decided to buy 3 pairs on them plus a set of medical clogs that the nurses today loves to wear.
    And what’s good in this company is that you can order their product online at or call them in their toll free number or even fax them if you want. You can send them email if you want. Plus companies can buy the as many as they want for their nurses to have a uniform color and they also can choose on the sizes they like. And I am pretty sure that they can have discount on the items they bought. So visit the site and start ordering.

    jose gomez January 3, 2008, 6:24 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.