Judging Sosa Deal (New Baltimore-based article added p.5)

[GaryWoods]

I'm one who believes he Sosa trade was addition by subtraction. The Cubs could have gotten a box of Cracker Jack still benefited the team with the deal.

 

I'm two.

 

You type well for your age. :wink:

[badger1679666666]

I saw "Sammy has a selfish swing", and I was done reading the article.

 

Well they make a good comparison to Raffy's swing vs. Sosa's.

 

No they don't actually. That article is a piece of drivel worthy of wrapping fish and not much else.

 

Sammy is not getting the job done, end of the story. I don't know why people feel the need to vilify the man too.

 

Same goes with Patterson. It wasn't enough that he was mired in a season long slump, people had to make him out to be a terrible person too.

 

But hey, if it makes you happy....

 

This was a Baltimore based article, not Chicago. Just because you still like Sammy, doesn't mean THEY do.

 

If you don't rip, Dusty, Macias, Perez, or haven't RIPPED Hawkins, Hundley etc. Then what you say makes sense. Otherwise you're just being selective.

 

Sammy has done nothing good for them at all. It's one thing to expect Cubs fans to not vilify him, it's another to expect his new team to do the same.

[Chris]

In fact, after the 8-2 whipping the Mariners put on the Orioles yesterday, when three errors and a lack of offensive production crushed their chances of winning this road series, the organization ought to ratchet up its sense of urgency.

 

But Sammy didn't even play in that game so I don't see the point of that thought.

 

In the series Sammy went 1-5 on the 16th with 5 LOB but that's certainly not as bad as Mora going 0-5 with 6 LOB.

 

Sammy was 3-5 (July 15th). I didn't see it mentioned, but I didn't pay much attention to the article. Was there a calling out of Tejada's errors in the series? Whay about when Tejada went 0-5 on the 14th and stranded 4? Is there an article appreciating the fact that Sosa was responsible for 2 of their 3 runs last night.

 

If someone wants to discuss Sammy then they have all right to. However, putting the line "Sosa hurting the O's updated" is where I personally draw the line.

[badger1679666666]

In fact, after the 8-2 whipping the Mariners put on the Orioles yesterday, when three errors and a lack of offensive production crushed their chances of winning this road series, the organization ought to ratchet up its sense of urgency.

 

But Sammy didn't even play in that game so I don't see the point of that thought.

 

In the series Sammy went 1-5 on the 16th with 5 LOB but that's certainly not as bad as Mora going 0-5 with 6 LOB.

 

Sammy was 3-5 (July 15th). I didn't see it mentioned, but I didn't pay much attention to the article. Was there a calling out of Tejada's errors in the series? Whay about when Tejada went 0-5 on the 14th and stranded 4? Is there an article appreciating the fact that Sosa was responsible for 2 of their 3 runs last night.

 

If someone wants to discuss Sammy then they have all right to. However, putting the line "Sosa hurting the O's updated" is where I personally draw the line.

 

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

[Chris]

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

 

I appreciate your concern in regards to creating a new thread for a similar discussion, I really do. My only concern was the line about Sosa. There are many posters on this site that love still love Sosa and will back him regardless of how he plays. With that being said, a line of "Sammy hurting the O's updated" (IMHO) makes this a thread not to discuss the deal but a place to rip on Sammy.

[The Voice of Reason]

This was a Baltimore based article, not Chicago. Just because you still like Sammy, doesn't mean THEY do.

 

If you don't rip, Dusty, Macias, Perez, or haven't RIPPED Hawkins, Hundley etc. Then what you say makes sense. Otherwise you're just being selective.

 

Sammy has done nothing good for them at all. It's one thing to expect Cubs fans to not vilify him, it's another to expect his new team to do the same.

 

 

Badger - Thanks for posting the article. It was interesting to hear how the view in Baltimore has changed so much in just 1/2 a season. Some people in Chicago will defend the Gladiator no matter what - so be it.

[badger1679666666]

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

 

I appreciate your concern in regards to creating a new thread for a similar discussion, I really do. My only concern was the line about Sosa. There are many posters on this site that love still love Sosa and will back him regardless of how he plays. With that being said, a line of "Sammy hurting the O's updated" (IMHO) makes this a thread not to discuss the deal but a place to rip on Sammy.

 

I understand your concern, I will relabel the the thread to not be so inflammatory?

[Electron Blue]

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

 

I appreciate your concern in regards to creating a new thread for a similar discussion, I really do. My only concern was the line about Sosa. There are many posters on this site that love still love Sosa and will back him regardless of how he plays. With that being said, a line of "Sammy hurting the O's updated" (IMHO) makes this a thread not to discuss the deal but a place to rip on Sammy.

 

I understand your concern, I will relabel the the thread to not be so inflammatory?

 

I don't know if that question mark is unintentional or subtly sarcastic, because either way makes sense. This is a message board for discussion. We aren't professional owners and managers who have to carefully choose our criticisms. We're fans. And if you (badger), or anyone, wants to bring forth a negative article about Sosa and then label it as such, where's the problem? We have no reason to try and seperate the praising and the complaining. A messageboard works best with discussion. To seperate these two types of opinions creates one Love-fest and one Hate-fest -- neither being truthful, fair, or interesting.

 

Sorry for the rant, but that's just my $ .02 on bashing/defending players.

[Chris]

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

 

I appreciate your concern in regards to creating a new thread for a similar discussion, I really do. My only concern was the line about Sosa. There are many posters on this site that love still love Sosa and will back him regardless of how he plays. With that being said, a line of "Sammy hurting the O's updated" (IMHO) makes this a thread not to discuss the deal but a place to rip on Sammy.

 

I understand your concern, I will relabel the the thread to not be so inflammatory?

 

I don't know if that question mark is unintentional or subtly sarcastic, because either way makes sense. This is a message board for discussion. We aren't professional owners and managers who have to carefully choose our criticisms. We're fans. And if you (badger), or anyone, wants to bring forth a negative article about Sosa and then label it as such, where's the problem? We have no reason to try and seperate the praising and the complaining. A messageboard works best with discussion. To seperate these two types of opinions creates one Love-fest and one Hate-fest -- neither being truthful, fair, or interesting.

 

Sorry for the rant, but that's just my $ .02 on bashing/defending players.

 

In regards to your point I agree 100%. However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing? Why not label it, "Sosa continues hurting the O's?"?

[Balsa]

I think a lot of people are leaving out how important Hairston has been this year. First with Todd Walker gone, and now with CPatt in the minors.

 

I can't imagine seeing Macias out there so often...I think I would have broken something.

 

In retrospect, it was a killer deal.

[Electron Blue]

I had no other way of describing the article that I added on to the thread. I could have created a new one, but I didn't want to create a new thread solely for that article. Know what I mean?? I just wanted to link a piece from the Baltimore press. If I just would have topped it with the old name no one would have known there was another article linked.

 

I appreciate your concern in regards to creating a new thread for a similar discussion, I really do. My only concern was the line about Sosa. There are many posters on this site that love still love Sosa and will back him regardless of how he plays. With that being said, a line of "Sammy hurting the O's updated" (IMHO) makes this a thread not to discuss the deal but a place to rip on Sammy.

 

I understand your concern, I will relabel the the thread to not be so inflammatory?

 

I don't know if that question mark is unintentional or subtly sarcastic, because either way makes sense. This is a message board for discussion. We aren't professional owners and managers who have to carefully choose our criticisms. We're fans. And if you (badger), or anyone, wants to bring forth a negative article about Sosa and then label it as such, where's the problem? We have no reason to try and seperate the praising and the complaining. A messageboard works best with discussion. To seperate these two types of opinions creates one Love-fest and one Hate-fest -- neither being truthful, fair, or interesting.

 

Sorry for the rant, but that's just my $ .02 on bashing/defending players.

 

In regards to your point I agree 100%. However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing? Why not label it, "Sosa continues hurting the O's?"?

 

Good point. Sorry I wasn't very clear about that. My perception of your request was that you felt badger was being too harshly critical of Sammy. This didn't seem right sense it was relevantly related to the content of the article he was linking. Though, now that I'm thinking at the same speed as typing, I actually see you point quite clearly: the (now changed) title of the thread didn't reflect some of the other (i.e. supportive) opinions contained in it. Now we're on the same page :)

[Connor McConnor]

SOME of the content of the article is accurate. Namely....he's a slugger who can no longer slug. That's both sad and true.

 

It's also fair to say that the article is poorly written by someone trying her best to make it sound like she knows what she's talking about....which is doubtful. She doesnt even make the points herself....she defers to "Bob." Bob says he has a "selfish swing" (baseball lingo there) so it must be true....and Sammys hurting the team.

 

Did someone say drivel? I agree.

[Mark_R]

In regards to your point I agree 100%. However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing? Why not label it, "Sosa continues hurting the O's?"?

 

DJaxx, I agree with you about this. There doesn't seem to be much basis for conversation when the thread is inflammatory.

 

However, there's many threads with inflammatory subjects such as: "Buck and McCarver= Cruelest form of torture."

 

And while I agree that they are bad, this offers no objective viewpoint to what (and like I said, I agree with) your stating with: "

However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing

 

How is the line drawn on certain topics?

[slicknickshady]

so far this year BURNITZ >>>>>>>>>>>> SOSA

[scs_paradise]

I for one will never understand the loyalty that some fans feel toward this guy. Yes he put up some fantastic numbers, but that is what he is paid to do. He had a lot to do with reviving baseball in alot of peoples minds and for that he was and will be rewarded (with a place in the hall). But I'm sure he didn't feel any loyalty toward us in his final season (let alone his final game), to most players this is a business, maybe I'm too cynical but the Ron Santos of the world just don't exist anymore..... (please don't make the point that Santo does in fact still exist....you know what I mean... :P )

[Chris]

In regards to your point I agree 100%. However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing? Why not label it, "Sosa continues hurting the O's?"?

 

DJaxx, I agree with you about this. There doesn't seem to be much basis for conversation when the thread is inflammatory.

 

However, there's many threads with inflammatory subjects such as: "Buck and McCarver= Cruelest form of torture."

 

And while I agree that they are bad, this offers no objective viewpoint to what (and like I said, I agree with) your stating with: "

However, where is a discussion when the title of the thread expressly lets you know that the intent of the thread is to talk about how "bad" someone is doing

 

How is the line drawn on certain topics?

 

Being the new guy on the Mod scene I can't say how long the topic has been discussed. However, I do know how sensitive the Sosa subject has been on several different levels, which is why I specifically made it a point to talk about the title line. The Sosa situation is definitely a topic that posters are divided and I personally felt that it was worth bringing up.

 

In regards to your question it is a very valid point and it will be brought up. I appreciate your thought process and I encourage you to feel free to ask questions at any point in the future. Take care!

[Huskercub]

I honestly do not see how anyone could say this team would be better with Sosa here. Not only would he demand to start in left field, but he would demand to be the 3rd or 4th spot in the order. Right now that looks like it would be a pretty stupid move.

 

The management might have made some mistakes in handling the deal. BUT, when you are working with someones ego the size of Sosa's and his ability to say anything he wants to the media, you are kind of in a no win situation.