Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 10:54:00 AM (view original):
I'm actually in that group.  I think all top-level people, in any walk of life, have a selfish side.   Ghandi died a long time ago but I bet he kept a little something on the side for himself.     That said..........

If you're immensely successful at your profession, regardless of what it is - 100% agree.

It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

Steve Carlton comes to mind.  He was pretty horrible at the end.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore.

But, as someone who roots for any team playing the Yankees, I hope Jeter limps out for at least 120 games at short and gets 600 PA.

As good as Brendan Ryan is in the field, I imagine he's worse overall to Jeter.

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/20/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):
As good as Brendan Ryan is in the field, I imagine he's worse overall to Jeter.

Oh, I know he is.

Stephen Drew, though, is better than Jeter.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/19/2014 10:28:00 PM (view original):
Did the retard saying playing SS is not more wear and tear on the body than playing 3B?   Has he watched a game?    You play 3B, you take one step, you catch the ball or you don't.    Play over for you.   SS does so much more on every play. 

Classic. "I have him blocked, but I'll bet he said...". The surest sign you read the post and, in fact, don't have the guy blocked.

Apparently those whores are still a touchy subject?

Posted by seamar_116 on 2/16/2014 8:55:00 AM (view original):
Is that what I said? Do you understand how baseball works?  So by your reasoning, any day that Ruth or Mantle or Cobb didn't get a hit is a day that their team would have been better off with them not playing? Are you sure you want to go there?

Thank you Capt. Clairvoyant for knowing which players to play which days. I am surprised that you are not a major league manager. You would be the highest paid one in history and a lock for the HOF. You have missed your calling!

Here you go, tec. And I asked you the same thing about Cabrera in one of my posts.

You're an idiot if you look back at the end of every game and say 'Player X had an 0-fer? What a selfish *****! Manager definitely should have benched him for this one!"

But I'll rephrase my earlier question, since you're so "simple": give me one example when a manager writing Ripken's name in the lineup BEFORE THE GAME STARTED was a bad decision for the team given who they had on the bench to take his place.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore.

But, as someone who roots for any team playing the Yankees, I hope Jeter limps out for at least 120 games at short and gets 600 PA.

They sign these things called "contracts".    You're kind of stuck with them when you give a player one of those. 

Now, if you're suggesting they tell Jeter that he's not playing SS, they sort of need a better option.   Right now, they don't have one. 

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/20/2014 1:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seamar_116 on 2/16/2014 8:55:00 AM (view original):
Is that what I said? Do you understand how baseball works?  So by your reasoning, any day that Ruth or Mantle or Cobb didn't get a hit is a day that their team would have been better off with them not playing? Are you sure you want to go there?

Thank you Capt. Clairvoyant for knowing which players to play which days. I am surprised that you are not a major league manager. You would be the highest paid one in history and a lock for the HOF. You have missed your calling!

Here you go, tec. And I asked you the same thing about Cabrera in one of my posts.

You're an idiot if you look back at the end of every game and say 'Player X had an 0-fer? What a selfish *****! Manager definitely should have benched him for this one!"

But I'll rephrase my earlier question, since you're so "simple": give me one example when a manager writing Ripken's name in the lineup BEFORE THE GAME STARTED was a bad decision for the team given who they had on the bench to take his place.

Cal Ripken: selfish *****.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore.

But, as someone who roots for any team playing the Yankees, I hope Jeter limps out for at least 120 games at short and gets 600 PA.

They sign these things called "contracts".    You're kind of stuck with them when you give a player one of those. 

Now, if you're suggesting they tell Jeter that he's not playing SS, they sort of need a better option.   Right now, they don't have one. 

As far as I know, the MLB contract doesn't guarantee playing time. Nor does it guarantee a raise to buy out an option year. Giving Jeter a raise and playing time are choices the Yankees made of their own free will. No one is forcing them to do it.

Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to do, but the Yankees have a shot at contending this year and I'd be upset by these choices if I were a fan.

Drew is a much better option. They don't have him but they could if they wanted to spend the money.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore.

But, as someone who roots for any team playing the Yankees, I hope Jeter limps out for at least 120 games at short and gets 600 PA.

They sign these things called "contracts".    You're kind of stuck with them when you give a player one of those. 

Now, if you're suggesting they tell Jeter that he's not playing SS, they sort of need a better option.   Right now, they don't have one. 

As far as I know, the MLB contract doesn't guarantee playing time. Nor does it guarantee a raise to buy out an option year. Giving Jeter a raise and playing time are choices the Yankees made of their own free will. No one is forcing them to do it.

Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to do, but the Yankees have a shot at contending this year and I'd be upset by these choices if I were a fan.

Drew is a much better option. They don't have him but they could if they wanted to spend the money.

So Jeter didn't decide to give himself a raise?   Or give himself playing time?   What was your point again?

As for Drew, two things:
1.  Maybe he would be a better option.   Jeter isn't making that decision.
2.  He might be a better option for a lot of teams but no one is offering him what he wants.   Is it because he's asking for too much as a player who has played less than 300 games over the last 3 seasons?    I'd say "yes".

Posted by tecwrg on 2/20/2014 2:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/20/2014 1:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seamar_116 on 2/16/2014 8:55:00 AM (view original):
Is that what I said? Do you understand how baseball works?  So by your reasoning, any day that Ruth or Mantle or Cobb didn't get a hit is a day that their team would have been better off with them not playing? Are you sure you want to go there?

Thank you Capt. Clairvoyant for knowing which players to play which days. I am surprised that you are not a major league manager. You would be the highest paid one in history and a lock for the HOF. You have missed your calling!

Here you go, tec. And I asked you the same thing about Cabrera in one of my posts.

You're an idiot if you look back at the end of every game and say 'Player X had an 0-fer? What a selfish *****! Manager definitely should have benched him for this one!"

But I'll rephrase my earlier question, since you're so "simple": give me one example when a manager writing Ripken's name in the lineup BEFORE THE GAME STARTED was a bad decision for the team given who they had on the bench to take his place.

Cal Ripken: selfish *****.

BLASPHEMY!!!!!

CAL WAS A CONSUMATE PROFESSIONAL!!!!!   HE'D HAVE TAKEN HIMSELF OUT IF HE THOUGHT HE WASN'T HELPING THE TEAM!!!!!

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 2:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/20/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
It's a confidence thing.   Even if you've failed the last 10 times, you think you deserve one more shot at it because you've been so successful and you know, deep down, that you'll do it better than that other schlub they think has surpassed you. 

I imagine a lot of professional athletes, several years after it's over, look back at the last few years of their careers and say "Wow.  The haters were right.  I really couldn't do the job at the end."

That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore.

But, as someone who roots for any team playing the Yankees, I hope Jeter limps out for at least 120 games at short and gets 600 PA.

They sign these things called "contracts".    You're kind of stuck with them when you give a player one of those. 

Now, if you're suggesting they tell Jeter that he's not playing SS, they sort of need a better option.   Right now, they don't have one. 

As far as I know, the MLB contract doesn't guarantee playing time. Nor does it guarantee a raise to buy out an option year. Giving Jeter a raise and playing time are choices the Yankees made of their own free will. No one is forcing them to do it.

Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to do, but the Yankees have a shot at contending this year and I'd be upset by these choices if I were a fan.

Drew is a much better option. They don't have him but they could if they wanted to spend the money.

So Jeter didn't decide to give himself a raise?   Or give himself playing time?   What was your point again?

As for Drew, two things:
1.  Maybe he would be a better option.   Jeter isn't making that decision.
2.  He might be a better option for a lot of teams but no one is offering him what he wants.   Is it because he's asking for too much as a player who has played less than 300 games over the last 3 seasons?    I'd say "yes".

I'm blaming the Yankees, not Jeter. If I were him, I'd do the same thing.

The Yankees are treating him differently than they'd treat any other player. Maybe you think that is a good thing from a PR perspective but I think the best PR is winning.

Giving Jeter a raise so that he can maybe go out and play shortstop (at a below average level) and maybe give you 600 PA (probably at a below average level) isn't the best strategy if you're trying to win.

Signing Drew is. Trading for Andrus or Castro could be. Signing Peralta would have been.

And you're right, maybe Drew is asking for 6 years and $120 million. I'm guessing he ends up signing somewhere for something like 3 years $34M or 4 years $40M, which are prices the Yankees should be able to afford for a large upgrade at a position where talent is scarce.

Or maybe they accept winning 83 games with Jeter this year and break the bank on Hanley and another starting pitcher next offseason. Who knows.

This is what I've been referring to:

"That's probably why teams shouldn't leave it up to their stars to decide when they aren't good enough to be the starting shortstop on the New York Yankees anymore."


So far, you've stated that your scenario did not happen.    What was your point?