Ben Sheets (Was Sheets Signs with A's)

[Guest]

I think people are a little too sensitive regarding Theriot's comments, considering how benign they were.

 

Exactly.

 

It's tempting to try to put words in Theriot's mouth regarding his comments about Sheets. But nowhere does he say or even imply that good chemistry => winning.

 

The comment BigBadB quoted was benign - something anyone could say about their job: would you rather work with good guys or jerks?

 

But that's the thing. He has decided to put that element into play by saying anything at all. He could just shut the hell up and go out and do his job like he's supposed to and then no one would call into question what he means or doesn't mean by his comments.

 

Instead, he poked his nose into the Bradley issue in regards to clubhouse behaviors and now he's doing it again with Sheets, as if clubhouse behaviors should have anything to do with putting a winning club on the field.

 

A better approach would be Soto, who has said absolutely nothing in regards to Bradley or Sheets, instead electing to use the time off running off some pounds rather than his mouth.

 

I don't give a rat's behind whether Theriot loved or hated Milton Bradley. What I do know is Milton Bradley is a better player than Theriot, yet Bradley is gone and Theriot isn't. For that, Theriot should be thankful that he still has the job he does. And if he performed better on the field, it might be easier to give him a pass. I'd much rather hear that Theriot is out there working on his running game (ie: Getting better jumps, reading pitcher's, etc.....) than telling fans how great or lousy one of his teammates is in the locker room.

 

Disagree with me all you want, but that's the way I see it. If he was an all star caliber player who had no weaknesses in his game, I'd probably ignore his comments. But, I'd be thrilled to replace him with a better overall player if we had one, thus I really don't like hearing him act all high and mighty or holier than thou.

 

A way more classy way for him to behave is: We didn't perform well as a team last year, including myself. We will all be working hard this offseason to be in better playing shape and looking to make less mistakes on the field. He could then point out ways he can improve on his own game and stop talking about his teammates in any sort of negative fashion.

 

If someone asked about Milton, fine, comment on how he became a distraction, but that had nothing to do with how the team failed to perform the way they expected to perform. That's a much classier way of dealing with that stuff. Instead, he comes off looking like a jackass.

[davearm2]

What Theriot says or doesn't say to the media tells us nothing about how hard he's working during the offseason. Training your butt off every day and feeding the media a quote or two once a month are not mutually exclusive activities. Heck for all we know Theriot's working way harder than Soto.

 

More to your point, though, whatever Theriot has said is virtually certainly in response to questions he's been asked. It's not like he's picking up the phone to call a reporter and tattle on Bradley. Sure he could've said "no comment", but as has been said many times, the rather innocuous comments he has made have taken on a life of their own around here.

[davearm2]

If someone asked about Milton, fine, comment on how he became a distraction, but that had nothing to do with how the team failed to perform the way they expected to perform. That's a much classier way of dealing with that stuff. Instead, he comes off looking like a jackass.

I asked this at the time Tim wrote his Theriot article, but I'll ask it again now.

 

Does anyone have a link to the quotes that have gotten so many folks fired up? Because I don't ever recall reading anything particularly noteworthy. In fact I seem to recall that he responded more or less the way you said he should have.

[dew1679666265]

But that's the thing. He has decided to put that element into play by saying anything at all. He could just shut the hell up and go out and do his job like he's supposed to and then no one would call into question what he means or doesn't mean by his comments.

 

Instead, he poked his nose into the Bradley issue in regards to clubhouse behaviors and now he's doing it again with Sheets, as if clubhouse behaviors should have anything to do with putting a winning club on the field.

 

A better approach would be Soto, who has said absolutely nothing in regards to Bradley or Sheets, instead electing to use the time off running off some pounds rather than his mouth.

 

I don't give a rat's behind whether Theriot loved or hated Milton Bradley. What I do know is Milton Bradley is a better player than Theriot, yet Bradley is gone and Theriot isn't. For that, Theriot should be thankful that he still has the job he does. And if he performed better on the field, it might be easier to give him a pass. I'd much rather hear that Theriot is out there working on his running game (ie: Getting better jumps, reading pitcher's, etc.....) than telling fans how great or lousy one of his teammates is in the locker room.

 

Disagree with me all you want, but that's the way I see it. If he was an all star caliber player who had no weaknesses in his game, I'd probably ignore his comments. But, I'd be thrilled to replace him with a better overall player if we had one, thus I really don't like hearing him act all high and mighty or holier than thou.

 

A way more classy way for him to behave is: We didn't perform well as a team last year, including myself. We will all be working hard this offseason to be in better playing shape and looking to make less mistakes on the field. He could then point out ways he can improve on his own game and stop talking about his teammates in any sort of negative fashion.

 

If someone asked about Milton, fine, comment on how he became a distraction, but that had nothing to do with how the team failed to perform the way they expected to perform. That's a much classier way of dealing with that stuff. Instead, he comes off looking like a jackass.

 

Theriot was asked what he thought about Ben Sheets, he started by talking about Sheets' ability to be dominant on the mound and how much he'd help the team on the field and then added on that Sheets is a good guy in the clubhouse. If he's asked the question, I don't see how it's fair to criticize him for answering it fully. Here's the entirety of the quote:

 

"The front end of that rotation is pretty tough... and maybe you throw in a Ben Sheets and see what happens." "That'd be great," Theriot said. "I think we all know what Ben can do on the field, a dominating shut-down pitcher. When he's right, there's not many guys that are better. But from a clubhouse standpoint, (he's a) very intricate, nice fellow, and brings kind of a different feel to the clubhouse.

"(He's) someone I would welcome with open arms, not because I've known him for a long time, but he brings a 'Scott Eyre feel' to the clubhouse -- a light, funny, keep-everyone-on-their-toes type of feeling."

 

I just don't see a problem with a player being asked a question and answering it.

Edited January 18, 2010 by dew

[Derwood]

I keep seeing this thread with more posts and get my hopes up that the Cubs have signed Sheets. Instead, it's part 37 of the "clubhouse chemistry" argument

 

:banghead:

[WilcoFan]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

[Rob]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

[Guest]

If someone asked about Milton, fine, comment on how he became a distraction, but that had nothing to do with how the team failed to perform the way they expected to perform. That's a much classier way of dealing with that stuff. Instead, he comes off looking like a jackass.

I asked this at the time Tim wrote his Theriot article, but I'll ask it again now.

 

Does anyone have a link to the quotes that have gotten so many folks fired up? Because I don't ever recall reading anything particularly noteworthy. In fact I seem to recall that he responded more or less the way you said he should have.

1) It's really hard to link to radio shows Theriot was on or tv / radio interviews he did.

2) It's not the best source, but even his own teammates were giving Theriot a hard time during the convention about his wanting to discuss chemistry:

 

# Theriot spent the bulk of his time behind a microphone talking about how important team chemistry is, and my desire to see him set on fire grew exponentially as he spoke.

# After his obligatory Harry Caray impression, Ryan Dempster said to Kaplan, "I appreciate you giving Theriot a microphone so he doesn't have to chase around a reporter to interview him."

source

[Guest]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

There's always the movie thread, too.

[Soul]

You could just refresh the thread list over & over. Once the thread title changes to "Ben Sheets signs with Cubs" you'll know it's safe to open again :mrgreen:

[Bruno7481]

Theriot has been discussed quite a bit on this board for his relatively short career. A couple of years ago the big debate was between Theriot and Cedeno. Many thought the wrong choice was made going with Theriot, but so far it has seemed to be the right one.

 

I don't think he's said anything that inflammatory. He's a light hitting SS, always will be. But I still think he's a good enough player to be better than a lot of the other options around the league at SS.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Bruno7481

[CUBZ99]

If someone asked about Milton, fine, comment on how he became a distraction, but that had nothing to do with how the team failed to perform the way they expected to perform. That's a much classier way of dealing with that stuff. Instead, he comes off looking like a jackass.

I asked this at the time Tim wrote his Theriot article, but I'll ask it again now.

 

Does anyone have a link to the quotes that have gotten so many folks fired up? Because I don't ever recall reading anything particularly noteworthy. In fact I seem to recall that he responded more or less the way you said he should have.

1) It's really hard to link to radio shows Theriot was on or tv / radio interviews he did.

2) It's not the best source, but even his own teammates were giving Theriot a hard time during the convention about his wanting to discuss chemistry:

 

# Theriot spent the bulk of his time behind a microphone talking about how important team chemistry is, and my desire to see him set on fire grew exponentially as he spoke.

# After his obligatory Harry Caray impression, Ryan Dempster said to Kaplan, "I appreciate you giving Theriot a microphone so he doesn't have to chase around a reporter to interview him."

source

 

I think what he was asking you for, were specific quotes from Theriot and not generalized impressions of what other people thought. I listened to at least one panel with Theriot and didn't remember him mentioning team chemistry at all. Of course, I don't get offended every time some players mentions team chemistry, so maybe I missed it.

 

Even though its difficult to link to those media, it would be easy enough to type out one of his quotes.

 

But, back to my original point, why is every one so wrapped up on Theriot's supposed comments? Theriot doesn't impact management decisions on which players to acquire. Theriot wasn't the person that traded Bradley.

 

For people that are upset over Bradley being demonized over alleged team character issues and claiming that he should have been kept, it would be odd for them to try to manufacture problems with Theriot and try to run him out of town for speaking his mind. I could understand the hatred if he played like A. Miles did last year, but for the money he is a fairly decent SS and cheap.

[CUBZ99]

You could just refresh the thread list over & over. Once the thread title changes to "Ben Sheets signs with Cubs" you'll know it's safe to open again :mrgreen:

 

I like your optimism! :D

[Guest]

I think what he was asking you for, were specific quotes from Theriot and not generalized impressions of what other people thought. I listened to at least one panel with Theriot and didn't remember him mentioning team chemistry at all. Of course, I don't get offended every time some players mentions team chemistry, so maybe I missed it.

 

Even though its difficult to link to those media, it would be easy enough to type out one of his quotes.

 

But, back to my original point, why is every one so wrapped up on Theriot's supposed comments? Theriot doesn't impact management decisions on which players to acquire. Theriot wasn't the person that traded Bradley.

 

For people that are upset over Bradley being demonized over alleged team character issues and claiming that he should have been kept, it would be odd for them to try to manufacture problems with Theriot and try to run him out of town for speaking his mind. I could understand the hatred if he played like A. Miles did last year, but for the money he is a fairly decent SS and cheap.

I understand what he was asking for, but again, it is hard to provide links to Theriot's appearances on radio.

 

I'm pretty sure nobody is blaming Theriot specifically for Bradley being traded.

 

I'm personally not behind trading Theriot because he gets on talk shows and sells out his former teammate. I'm on board with selling Theriot because while he currently has value to other teams, that value diminishes as time marches forward and he becomes more expensive. Also because SS is the deepest position in the organization right now.

[Guest]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

There's always the movie thread, too.

I understand UZR just fine.

 

Rob, put me on ignore.

[SouthSideRyan]

Being a baseball player is hardly the same thing as sitting in a bland cubicle struggling to merely stay awake all day, let alone do real work. Those of you assuming your real life experience can translate to them are every bit as mistaken as those you chastise.

 

And I make this challenge every time I hear these arguments pop up, but once more can't hurt.

 

I'm willing to concede that one player's attitude can affect the clubhouse chemistry. I'll also concede that chemistry may affect performance.

 

Now I'd like to hear a compelling case that negative chemistry causes all players to perform negatively. Don't forget to explain how greats like Barry Bonds, Albert Belle, Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, and countless others through the years have seemed to perform at their best when everybody turns against them.

 

I don't think I need to spell this out, but I will anyways. When faced with a negative clubhouse, some players will perform poorly, while others will rise above it. Every player is different, and so by definition is every clubhouse. It's hardly unreasonable to suggest that none of us know the personalities of our team well enough to figure how each player will respond, and to what degree.

 

How many World Series did your 4 examples win? Absolutely ZERO. Interesting argument there. So what you are saying is players that are noted as being the cause of negativity may create good careers for themselves but poor team (or group) success.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Haha, the Red Sox didn't win a world series because of Ted Williams. That's one hell of a point.

[SouthSideRyan]

You're not serious about pursuing an argument that poor chemistry actually improves on-the-field performance, are you?

 

Prove that Derrek Lee didn't have a great year due to Milton Bradley's presence.

[Rob]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

There's always the movie thread, too.

I understand UZR just fine.

 

Rob, put me on ignore.

 

My ignore list is approximately 5-10 people long and is generally reserved for people whose stupidity is so over the top it offends me... do you really think you belong on that list?

[17 Seconds]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

There's always the movie thread, too.

I understand UZR just fine.

 

Rob, put me on ignore.

 

but then he wouldn't be able to insult you and then run away

[davearm2]

You're not serious about pursuing an argument that poor chemistry actually improves on-the-field performance, are you?

 

Prove that Derrek Lee didn't have a great year due to Milton Bradley's presence.

Oh my lord. So now we've reached a point where anything at all that can't be disproven must consequently be true.

 

Actually scratch we, and replace with you. I don't think I'd throw that blanket over anyone else here.

[SouthSideRyan]

You're not serious about pursuing an argument that poor chemistry actually improves on-the-field performance, are you?

 

Prove that Derrek Lee didn't have a great year due to Milton Bradley's presence.

Oh my lord. So now we've reached a point where anything at all that can't be disproven must consequently be true.

 

Actually scratch we, and replace with you. I don't think I'd throw that blanket over anyone else here.

 

How is this a less likely scenario than the Cubs losing because Milton Bradley is a jerk?

 

Why can't a player channel his anger towards some guy positively? It seems just as likely as explaining Soriano and Ramirez's injuries being due to Milton Bradley's mere presence.

[Rob]

You're not serious about pursuing an argument that poor chemistry actually improves on-the-field performance, are you?

 

Prove that Derrek Lee didn't have a great year due to Milton Bradley's presence.

Oh my lord. So now we've reached a point where anything at all that can't be disproven must consequently be true.

 

Actually scratch we, and replace with you. I don't think I'd throw that blanket over anyone else here.

 

You're confusing yourself, I think.

 

Nobody here, even myself and SSR are making the claim that negative chemistry leads (on the whole) to positive performances. We are playing Devil's Advocate in an attempt to show that claims that negative chemistry leads to negative performances aren't a slam dunk. Here's the crux of it though, summed up as best I can.

 

Nobody here (and likely not even the players themselves) has a [expletive] clue what effect a negative player in the clubhouse has on team performance.

[Rob]

Looking for decent info on Sheets and/or a discussion of his merits and this is what I get.

 

Could someone please point me to the threads on the board that don't end in an argument over (a) the value of clubhouse chemistry, (b) the relative importance of strikeouts versus other types of outs for a hitter, or © a donut-related joke about Jim Hendry.

 

Is there a hidden forum where this happens? Because that would be worth reading.

 

I could point you at a few where CubinNY bashes UZR without understanding it or davearm acts contrary and gets upset at the board calling him obtuse (showing they don't know the meaning of the word) if you'd like.

There's always the movie thread, too.

I understand UZR just fine.

 

Rob, put me on ignore.

 

but then he wouldn't be able to insult you and then run away

 

You were acting dumb. I called you on it. You got pissed off and snapped back at me. I didn't care to embarrass myself by playing a game of dirty dozens with you.

 

Get over it.

[Little Slide Rooter]

clubhouse cancer my ass. If I was getting paid millions to play baseball for 7-8 months a year, for all I care they could put me on a team with Hitler, Bin Laden, and Miley Cyrus. It shouldnt make a difference. If you dont like a team mate, for a few hours a day, you put up with the guy and then you go home. Nobody said you have to be friends.

[davearm2]

Why do you need to hear a compelling case that negative chemistry causes *all* players to perform negatively?

 

Because in order to prove that all clubhouses will react negatively to a negative chemistry, it must be proven that you don't have a team full of guys who thrive under the discord. As long as you admit that some will react positively, there's always a chance (and one that neither you nor I has any way of quantifying) that the full clubhouse will have enough of that type of player to get a net positive effect from negative chemistry.

 

You said it yourself: when faced with a negative clubhouse, *some* players will perform poorly. That's enough to have a problem, no?

 

Only if it isn't helping the team more than hurting it.

 

I'd like to hear a compelling argument that a negative clubhouse has a net zero or net positive impact on the group as a whole.

 

I've you've already conceded that some players perform better under those circumstances, that's the same as conceding that in all likelihood there have already been teams where that negative clubhouse translated positively on the field, and that there are likely to be teams in that same vein going forward.

 

I think my purpose in that previous post are being confused by some. I'm not trying to say anything about chemistry except that none of us are in any position to judge what is going on. Chemistry may have helped our team, hurt our team, or made no difference whatsoever. And unfortunately, guys like Ryan Theriot who actually have to live through it are probably a little too close to the action for their opinions about the effects of chemistry to be unbiased.

 

We don't know. And we wont know. Those pretending to have any idea are only fooling themselves.

If I'm confused, then it's easy to see why by looking at the bolded above. Sure seems like you're suggesting poor chemistry might improve a team's on-field performance.