Tank

"i'm tellin' ya, larry, they were really biting on saturday. it was like i was the only one there!'

he batted hamilton down in the order IIRC, not cleanup, which was probably difficult for him to do. but for about the billionth time, player performance and the lack of it was critical in that series, not scioscia's decision on who to play. the outcome of the entire series did not swing on the addition or subtraction of hamilton and his play. the royals should also get some credit for having very good pitching in that series and for making the world series that year. they were a tough team and the angels clearly had their hands full. you just don't seem to grasp that how the players perform has such a huge effect on the outcome of the game. you want to lay every single thing on the doorstep of the manager. Uneven.

hey at least we didn't have to listen to chris berman call the game. i'll take the mowins chick over boomer any day of the week.

LOL. that was awesome.

it's about time. you deserve it!

so only @Bruce Nye remembers that season. got it.

you'd think i'd have remembered that someone typed that just a few posts before mine. d'oh!

me too!* * not my money, either

this team lacks a true stud #1 pitcher (been lacking one for a while). wouldn't this be a prudent move to make the team better, especially while trout is still here? nothing crazy like an 8 year contract, but maybe something like 5/125 should be doable.

i think only one thing in your list isn't possible...

not sure i can remember hearing a team with such a huge difference like that. pretty darn impressive.

so then let's start by signing a really good one.

as a team, the halos hit .170 in that series. tell me anything the manager could have done to change that, especially when your star player, in an MVP season, hits .083 in the series. take as much time as you need to explain how this was the managers' fault. you constantly ignore player performance in all of your uneven rants against the manager. there is absolutely no balance in your argument.

have we reached a point where possibly signing a pitcher like arrieta is seen as "oh well, might as well. whatever." kind of thing?

that's just crazy enough that it might work.

my brother had this very same surgery in june and is going through this same rehab procedure. doctor told him it would be six months before he could play hockey again - understanding this is for a man in his mid-50s who isn't a professional athlete. i don't know what kind of arm & shoulder strength it takes to be a major league pitcher, but after watching my brother i can understand why it takes a year for an elite athlete to recover.

the fallacy in the argument is that it's top heavy on the manager's decisions and that player talent/performance is significantly less important.

thanks, nate. no kidding. an unnecessary change.

another perfect assessment!!

the buckeyes didn't look very good saturday night. i hope they've got this out of their system and can salvage the rest of the season. going to be a tough year with 4 big ten teams in the top ten.

can someone remind me what an FCS school is and and FBS school is?

yes! what a perfect example of how he manages!!

this is one of the best posts i've read here in a long, long time. you know, because this team is just dripping with incredible talent, but the manager can't get out of their way.

nice! do you know what section they'll be sitting in? i'd like to avoid them in case i decide to go to this years championship game.

great game all the way around today. i like Kupp.