Ramirez Hustle Complaints Are Starting Already

[Derwood]

anyone think this is rooted in our "everyone wins, thanks for trying" society? we're raising our kids in a culture where they never have to deal with losing, and that "trying hard" is more important than results

[CubColtPacer]

I don't believe in it nearly as much as most people do, but yes, seriously that's what a large, large number of people care about-I've heard many, many fans say that they would rather want a mediocre team that is giving their full effort than a good team that doesn't hustle at times.

 

Those people are liars.

 

Well, I've seen it-people who want to trade players they fully realize are the key to winning for their team, but because of either off-court issues or because of lack of caring on the court they'd rather lose without them than win with them. When it gets to specifics like that, I'm pretty sure they are telling the truth that they would trade those players in a second.

 

if this is true, those people are either liars or losers, complete losers that have lost touch with professional sports.

 

they can go watch college sports and root for their teams to lose. that's pathetic.

 

Well, my guess is that you just called 60% or more of sports fans losers (no, I don't have a study for that like the study I had yesterday that conclusively said that certain productive outs increase run production :D)

 

that study isn't really what we were talking about. a player trying to hit the ball sharply is probably more likely to make a "productive" out or get a "productive" hit or get a "productive" walk than a player who's not focused on what he does best. that study does not take into account that a player hitting with an even keel can score a run in a multitude of ways, not limited to making a "productive out". but anyway, you can take that over to the other thread if you want, i hadn't read your last post until just now.

 

just because people watch sports with different priorities does not mean they have "lost touch" or that they root for their teams to lose. They are the same type of people who don't want to sign a person like Barry Bonds or T.O. to their team (which polls have shown that a majority of sports fans would not support those players on their team)-they don't just want to win, they want to win "the right way", while most of the people on this board believe that winning itself is "the right way", no matter how you do it. Isn't there room for both philosophies without calling everybody who subscribes to one losers?

 

people who root for their teams to lose because they aren't winning the "right way" are losers, and i'm not afraid to say that here. i don't think there are many people who want to see their favorite team lose because they dislike the personnel.

 

it's stupid. i'd root for the bears if TO played for them. but if they started to lose when the team lost focus because of him, i'd be one of the first railing for his release.

 

teams that generally have to rely on blood-and-guts and all that whatever-it-is usually are losers themselves, but they can still feel like winners when they get the good sportsmanship award, if they gave one, which they don't.

 

I'm not saying they root for their teams to lose if they don't have the right personnel. I'm saying that they would be willing to trade the player even if it meant having to re-build and lose more in the short-term in order to have a better team. For example, most Pacers fans want Jamaal Tinsley gone-not for his production (which most people consider good most of the time) but for his off-court issues and for his laziness sometimes on the court. He doesn't want to try, and the fans don't want to root for a player like that, and that (along with Jackson and Artest) is the reason that attendance has been falling rapidly at Pacer games. The team will get worse when Tinsley is traded, but the franchise will actually be able to represent its fanbase once again, which I believe is more important. They can always find another player even if takes a little while to get back onto the winning track. They'd never root for the team to lose, but they will boo Tinsley every chance that he gets and write letters demanding he be traded.

[Magnetic Curses]

anyone think this is rooted in our "everyone wins, thanks for trying" society? we're raising our kids in a culture where they never have to deal with losing, and that "trying hard" is more important than results

 

having fun should be the main thing in kids' sports. if anything, playing a game in which everyone does not win makes people try harder, and forces parents to beat each other up at baseball games.

 

if a kid has fun running into a catcher at home plate, so be it, if the kids like to pick their nose in the outfield while chasing butterflies, great.

[Soul]

I seriously cannot believe there exists a fan who would trade a World Series championship won by guys who sometimes don't hustle for a team of ultra-hustlers who lose.

 

This can't really exist, can it? Can't be. That's depressing. Why would someone buy into such a thing?

[Magnetic Curses]

 

I'm not saying they root for their teams to lose if they don't have the right personnel. I'm saying that they would be willing to trade the player even if it meant having to re-build and lose more in the short-term in order to have a better team. For example, most Pacers fans want Jamaal Tinsley gone-not for his production (which most people consider good most of the time) but for his off-court issues and for his laziness sometimes on the court. He doesn't want to try, and the fans don't want to root for a player like that, and that (along with Jackson and Artest) is the reason that attendance has been falling rapidly at Pacer games. The team will get worse when Tinsley is traded, but the franchise will actually be able to represent its fanbase once again, which I believe is more important. They can always find another player even if takes a little while to get back onto the winning track. They'd never root for the team to lose, but they will boo Tinsley every chance that he gets and write letters demanding he be traded.

 

then we're talking about different things. besides, basketball is a game where hustle can actually have a major effect on the game.

 

baseball is more complicated and hard for the casual fan to get their mind around. people want to understand it like they understand any other sport, but it's not, it's completely different. players who don't "hustle" are sometimes and even most times the best players in the sport. baseball is about skill, football is about hustle, just ask rudy.

 

people who would demand that aram be traded because he doesn't hustle, or actually root for him to do poorly, thusly hurting the team's chances of being competitive, are ignorant losers. ignorant because they fail to grasp baseball at it's most real level. this is what the converstaion is about. ramirez is a very good player who doesn't need to hustle to be good. we shouldn't even want him to hustle.

 

i'm not going to be angry at aram not running out a meaningless ground ball with 2 outs. i'd rather have him for an entire season than watch him strain a quad or groin muscle doing something that those who don't understand the game wish he'd do.

[CubColtPacer]

Ok, that's fine. Personally, as I've said earlier in the thread, I just want Aramis to hustle out of the box instead of admiring balls that might or might not be home runs, and that's not a big issue with me. I do think the Aramis issue is way overblown, and he is definitely good hustling or not. I was just addressing the argument in this thread of not understanding why people care if anybody ever hustles or gives their best effort as long as they are productive, and so why would an issue like this ever have to be brought. The first poster asked if anybody cared if people hustle-I responded with that people care, but for Aramis most of that caring is mitigated because of a very good reason for him not hustling (his legs) and I think some Cubs fans who value hustle do understand that and give him a pass on it because of that.

 

In short, thank you for clearing that up-sorry my point wasn't more clear.

[Danny82]

anyone think this is rooted in our "everyone wins, thanks for trying" society? we're raising our kids in a culture where they never have to deal with losing, and that "trying hard" is more important than results

Or that it doesn't matter how you carry yourself as long as you are good at what you do?

[Magnetic Curses]

anyone think this is rooted in our "everyone wins, thanks for trying" society? we're raising our kids in a culture where they never have to deal with losing, and that "trying hard" is more important than results

Or that it doesn't matter how you carry yourself as long as you are good at what you do?

 

i don't know aramis ramirez, why should i care how he carries himself? it has no effect on his performance on the baseball field.

 

i like the way he hits and i want him to keep on hitting. if that means taking it easy on the basepaths, i understand. aram does the majority of his damage with the bat in his hand.

[A New Era]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

[A New Era]

anyone think this is rooted in our "everyone wins, thanks for trying" society? we're raising our kids in a culture where they never have to deal with losing, and that "trying hard" is more important than results

Or that it doesn't matter how you carry yourself as long as you are good at what you do?

 

I take that as a knock on Ramirez? You realize he has had hamstring injuries and that he was being careful down the first base line as to not injure it. I think more people need to realize this. That by "being careful" is not exactly "lack of hustle". And thank God he was careful otherwise he'll be on the DL for 2-3 weeks.

[satxcubfan]

i expect my football team to go all out 100% of the time for 16 games. I expect the same of my 35 game college b-ball team. 162 games (with few days off) is tough to go all out on every single play

 

That's a good point. For both the NBA and MLB, there are going to be a few games where your team just isn't there-the long season just makes it that way. Also, some players just don't have it at times-if it's an aberration, most people dismiss it as such. For most people, hustling doesn't become that big of a problem unless it happens on a decently routine basis.

 

Bring back "greenies"!!!

[Magnetic Curses]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

 

i just don't see the need to make a complete ass of yourself in a public venue in front of mthousands and millions.

 

i understand your point, but i also think a lot of people are expecting piniella to be the anti-dusty and see tantrums as a welcome change.

[KingCubsFan]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

 

i just don't see the need to make a complete ass of yourself in a public venue in front of mthousands and millions.

 

i understand your point, but i also think a lot of people are expecting piniella to be the anti-dusty and see tantrums as a welcome change.

Any time a coach gets fired, fans (and the organization doing the hiring) look for the new coach to be able to do what the old coach couldn't or wouldn't. That's why you see Charlie Manuels after Larry Bowas, Ozzie Guillens after Jerry Manuels, and Lou after Dusty. I don't really care if Lou ever throws a base, but I do expect him to do what Dusty couldn't: handle the clubhouse and hold players accountable for their mistakes. I'm sick of seeing major league players make little league mistakes. If Lou has to throw a base or kick dirt to get his point across, so be it.

[Magnetic Curses]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

 

i just don't see the need to make a complete ass of yourself in a public venue in front of mthousands and millions.

 

i understand your point, but i also think a lot of people are expecting piniella to be the anti-dusty and see tantrums as a welcome change.

Any time a coach gets fired, fans (and the organization doing the hiring) look for the new coach to be able to do what the old coach couldn't or wouldn't. That's why you see Charlie Manuels after Larry Bowas, Ozzie Guillens after Jerry Manuels, and Lou after Dusty. I don't really care if Lou ever throws a base, but I do expect him to do what Dusty couldn't: handle the clubhouse and hold players accountable for their mistakes. I'm sick of seeing major league players make little league mistakes. If Lou has to throw a base or kick dirt to get his point across, so be it.

 

this is only necessary if he sees the right mistake.

 

missing a cutoff man = minor mistake

 

forgetting to ever be selective at the plate = major, recurring and thematic mistake

 

dusty's problem wasn't that the players had no respect for him, his problem was that he told them to swing at everything for the sake of "just putting the ball in play".

 

fans of every unsuccessful team almost uniformly bemoan the team's inability to execute the "fundamentals" of the game. fans of successful teams still hate that sometimes the baserunners overrun the bag or miss a cutoff man, but their teams are successful so the "fundamental" miscues get forgotten quickly.

 

fans of unsuccessful teams sit and stew after a loss. "why couldn't he hit the cutoff man on that one play?" instead of "why did that guy come to bat 4 times and see only 5 pitches?" the idea of a guy missing a cutoff man once becomes a shining symbol, a scapegoat for the whole season.

 

you can see why ramirez's lack of hustle was blamed for the downfall of 2006 cubs when nothing could be farther from the truth. if anything, ramirez's play was one of the few bright spots during an otherwise dreary season full of 1-pitch plate appearances, cowardly slap-hitting, sub-par pitching, and under 400 walks.

 

an easily identifiable, though inherently meaningless, problem is a "lack of fundamentals". it sounds good to say, makes a fan feel like a ballplayer when all it is is a small pimple on the side of the face of a season; a season raging with several STDs, emphysema, ulcerative colitis, hysterical pregnancy, AND juvenile diabetes.

[Sammy Sofa]

This team would be so much better with a "hustler" like Eckstein, right Sullivan? :roll:

Actually, we probably would be a lot better with Eckstein.

 

only because our current SS options suck

 

Yeah, that was a pretty bad example. I'd take Eckstein over Izturis everyday of the week and twice on double header day.

 

I picked the player synonymous w/hustle, my bad.

 

Go with good ol' Burnitz. I have nothing against the guy, but I remember my dad just gushing all the time about how Burnitz would "hustle it out" every time he grounded out, etc.. It was like the rest of Jeromy's mediocre playing was erased just because he pumped his legs harder when it meant absolutely nothing 99.9% of the time. Baffling.

[A New Era]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

 

i just don't see the need to make a complete ass of yourself in a public venue in front of mthousands and millions.

 

i understand your point, but i also think a lot of people are expecting piniella to be the anti-dusty and see tantrums as a welcome change.

Any time a coach gets fired, fans (and the organization doing the hiring) look for the new coach to be able to do what the old coach couldn't or wouldn't. That's why you see Charlie Manuels after Larry Bowas, Ozzie Guillens after Jerry Manuels, and Lou after Dusty. I don't really care if Lou ever throws a base, but I do expect him to do what Dusty couldn't: handle the clubhouse and hold players accountable for their mistakes. I'm sick of seeing major league players make little league mistakes. If Lou has to throw a base or kick dirt to get his point across, so be it.

 

this is only necessary if he sees the right mistake.

 

missing a cutoff man = minor mistake

 

forgetting to ever be selective at the plate = major, recurring and thematic mistake

 

dusty's problem wasn't that the players had no respect for him, his problem was that he told them to swing at everything for the sake of "just putting the ball in play".

 

fans of every unsuccessful team almost uniformly bemoan the team's inability to execute the "fundamentals" of the game. fans of successful teams still hate that sometimes the baserunners overrun the bag or miss a cutoff man, but their teams are successful so the "fundamental" miscues get forgotten quickly.

 

fans of unsuccessful teams sit and stew after a loss. "why couldn't he hit the cutoff man on that one play?" instead of "why did that guy come to bat 4 times and see only 5 pitches?" the idea of a guy missing a cutoff man once becomes a shining symbol, a scapegoat for the whole season.

 

you can see why ramirez's lack of hustle was blamed for the downfall of 2006 cubs when nothing could be farther from the truth. if anything, ramirez's play was one of the few bright spots during an otherwise dreary season full of 1-pitch plate appearances, cowardly slap-hitting, sub-par pitching, and under 400 walks.

 

an easily identifiable, though inherently meaningless, problem is a "lack of fundamentals". it sounds good to say, makes a fan feel like a ballplayer when all it is is a small pimple on the side of the face of a season; a season raging with several STDs, emphysema, ulcerative colitis, hysterical pregnancy, AND juvenile diabetes.

 

You write many words. Me no like many words. Many words make A New Era head hurt.

 

sorry I'm just tired and silly.

[KingCubsFan]

as has been stated, mike murphy was all in a tither today, and all week, about lou stating that he's matured and doesn't throw bases anymore.

 

murphy seems to think that base-throwing is a method of scoring runs. what a dope.

 

this is another odd characteristic that some fans look for in their players and managers, a hot temper. why does a manager need to be a firebrand or yell at players?

 

i'd imagine because many people get yelled at at work and need to see that other, more famous people, are getting it as well. what a joke. those people have serious issues.

 

Hey, I want to see Lou's "FIRE". But for reasons of him yelling at the UMPS when a bad call is made. IE: Him defending his players. So please understand there is not just one side of this. Remember when Mabry was called out at first and he was CLEARLY safe? He threw his helmet down and looked in disbeleive. It's moments like that a manager NEEDS to go out there.

 

i just don't see the need to make a complete ass of yourself in a public venue in front of mthousands and millions.

 

i understand your point, but i also think a lot of people are expecting piniella to be the anti-dusty and see tantrums as a welcome change.

Any time a coach gets fired, fans (and the organization doing the hiring) look for the new coach to be able to do what the old coach couldn't or wouldn't. That's why you see Charlie Manuels after Larry Bowas, Ozzie Guillens after Jerry Manuels, and Lou after Dusty. I don't really care if Lou ever throws a base, but I do expect him to do what Dusty couldn't: handle the clubhouse and hold players accountable for their mistakes. I'm sick of seeing major league players make little league mistakes. If Lou has to throw a base or kick dirt to get his point across, so be it.

 

this is only necessary if he sees the right mistake.

 

missing a cutoff man = minor mistake

 

forgetting to ever be selective at the plate = major, recurring and thematic mistake

 

dusty's problem wasn't that the players had no respect for him, his problem was that he told them to swing at everything for the sake of "just putting the ball in play".

 

fans of every unsuccessful team almost uniformly bemoan the team's inability to execute the "fundamentals" of the game. fans of successful teams still hate that sometimes the baserunners overrun the bag or miss a cutoff man, but their teams are successful so the "fundamental" miscues get forgotten quickly.

 

fans of unsuccessful teams sit and stew after a loss. "why couldn't he hit the cutoff man on that one play?" instead of "why did that guy come to bat 4 times and see only 5 pitches?" the idea of a guy missing a cutoff man once becomes a shining symbol, a scapegoat for the whole season.

 

you can see why ramirez's lack of hustle was blamed for the downfall of 2006 cubs when nothing could be farther from the truth. if anything, ramirez's play was one of the few bright spots during an otherwise dreary season full of 1-pitch plate appearances, cowardly slap-hitting, sub-par pitching, and under 400 walks.

 

an easily identifiable, though inherently meaningless, problem is a "lack of fundamentals". it sounds good to say, makes a fan feel like a ballplayer when all it is is a small pimple on the side of the face of a season; a season raging with several STDs, emphysema, ulcerative colitis, hysterical pregnancy, AND juvenile diabetes.

These "meaningless" fundamentals were a systematic, recurring problems as well. Unless you're the Yankees, you can't win consistently and shoot yourself in the foot like the Cubs did the past two years. Missing cutoff men, terrible baserunning, horrible pitch selection, missing signs, inability to lay down a bunt, etc. were all things that have plagued the Cubs, and these are all directly on the shoulders of the manager. Successful teams either do these well, or don't do them at all because the manager plays to the team's strength. Dusty tried to play small ball, but he couldn't stop his players from screwing it up. He tried to preach defense, and yet he somehow managed to screw that up too. OBP, in my opinion, is a failure of the whole organization, from Baker to Clines to the players Hendry picks. There was only so much Baker could do, although he certainly made it worse. OBP is important (and the downfall of our offense) but it's not the ultimate determinant of every game. There's a lot more to a manager's job than just making sure someone takes pitches, and that includes preparing his players and correcting mistakes that are made.

[Cubsown2007]

I wish everyone would leave the man alone. When he stops becoming productive, then we can talk hustle issues. Jeez.

[Soul]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

[C.C.]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

 

It's not only Chicago. NY and Boston are the same way.

[Soul]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

 

It's not only Chicago. NY and Boston are the same way.

 

Yeah. Mark me down as not wanting to follow NY and Boston's lead......on much of anything. I'll take their rings, and that's pretty much it.

[C.C.]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

 

It's not only Chicago. NY and Boston are the same way.

 

Yeah. Mark me down as not wanting to follow NY and Boston's lead......on much of anything.

 

I'd like to follow their lead in winning a World Series...

[Soul]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

 

It's not only Chicago. NY and Boston are the same way.

 

Yeah. Mark me down as not wanting to follow NY and Boston's lead......on much of anything.

 

I'd like to follow their lead in winning a World Series...

 

Yeah, I edited my post to include that little tid bit ;) It appears we *ARE* following their lead in the spending-to-win department.

[Cubsown2007]

I know. It's frustrating. Seems that Chicago likes to tear up its sports teams before the season even starts. And it starts to happen earlier each year. Now we're talking about stuff when there hasn't even been a ST pitch thrown! What's next? The post-season press-conferece questions: "Lou, assuming you'll suck next year, should you be fired?"

 

Give me a freaking break, man. This is silly.

 

With the Bears/Saints game horse**** and hearing this, i'm almost glad I don't live in Chicago. God bless the Cubs, i'd die for em, but screw the north.

[CuseCubFan69]

I like Rameriz and I'm happy he's on the team.