All of the top four teams in the East won today. Sorry, Tampa Bay.
The Red Sox bats came alive: doubles from Coco (2), Youkilis, Lugo, Cora, Pedroia; a triple from Drew; and a home run from Manny. Eight of the 13 hits were extra-base hits -- or, as they used to call them, long hits. The Mariners staff also doled out eight walks.
Beckett (6.2-8-1-2-9, 107) pitched out of several minor jams, before Jeemer, MDC and Synder finished up.
***
Josh Beckett (3.41, 133 ERA+) / Miguel Batista (4.23, 100 ERA+)
Batista has allowed three or fewer earned runs in 15 of 21 starts this season. He has not started against the Red Sox since August 24, 2004; his last appearance against Boston was on September 29, 2005. Both Manny Ramirez (8-for-20, 1 HR, 4 RBI) and David Ortiz (6-for-16, 2 HR, 7 RBI) have hit him well.
The Red Sox (67-43) are the only team playing .600+ ball. They have also lost the fewest road games of any team (23).
224 comments:
1 – 200 of 224 Newer› Newest»Look for Mirabelli and Cora to play also since the two of them are hitting .302 (13 for 42 / Doug 4/11) with two doubles and 1 home run.
Can the Sox win two in a row at Safeco? You would think so with this pitcher.
Einstein, but no Stud.
Crisp, CF
Youkilis, 1B
Ortiz, DH
Ramirez, LF
Drew, RF
Lowell, 3B
Varitek, C
Cora, 2B
Lugo, SS
Suzuki, DH
Vidrfo, 2B
Guillen, RF
Broussard, 1B
Beltre, 3B
Ibanez, LF
Jones, CF
Burke, C
Betancourt, SS
A day game after a night game and he is playing Tek!
Moss will join the team in Anaheim as Hinske goes on some inactive list?
Moss will join the team in Anaheim as Hinske goes on some inactive list?
Something like that. I guess.
...
FSN a-fucking-gain! Boooooooooooo!
L-girl, to reply to your post from Friday night's game thread...
Ironically, I was DDing for the specific purpose of setting an example for the other person in the car, who has a habit of having a few then driving. My "time to smarten up" remark was just more a reflection on the way my life has been going...
Anyway time to watch this!
ococ shows bunt twice then blasts a double into the rf corner. nice start.
Well that's your problem, Tim, you forgot to drink first! ;-)
Glad you're ok.
Let's see if my computer at work will let me follow on Gameday and post on the thread at the same time...
No work for hours, then the game starts ... work arrives!
Bah. Murphy's Law again.
In play, run(s)... yes... yes???? Helloooo?
It's good not to have Ichiro out there today!
Will take the error, lets hope Lowell can bust this game open!
BBI Drew to face Lowell???
Dr. Doubles may have to make a house call.
Gameday says Manny hit a sac fly but is on 2nd. Someone want to field that one for me?
E -8 as he dropped. No rbi for Manny though doesn't make sense.
Thanks. I haven't used Gameday in so long. I forgot how slow it is.
It hit off the CF's glove as he ran back to the track. Manny gets a sac (no ab), but also reaches on the E8.
Sock, did the scorer change it to sac fly? Remy was going ape about Manny not getting an RBI by the official scorer.
True. If the ball is caught, he would get an RBI. Why not here? The guy would score anyway.
Gameday has an RBI for Manny.
And he went to 2nd? I'm having trouble imagining this.
Good for MBM, cause he hit that ball hard.
35 pitches for Batista? What we need is a quick 1-2-3 from Josh.
L-girl, Manny hit it to deep center he dropped the ball right at the wall. He hit it like 400 ft.
Ok, thanks. I won't keep at it for every play. I'll just pretend I know what's going on. :)
Last night, ball hit to same spot, Manny on second, plays it halfway, ball caught, can't get to third. Remy says it's the right play by Manny. On today's ball, I take it Ortiz was tagging at second, because he didn't make it home. But they don't say that it's the wrong play. So which is it?
"Ok, thanks. I won't keep at it for every play. I'll just pretend I know what's going on. :) "
Feel free--we love describing stuff! And you will have more questions, as long as you're watching on Gameday....
Crap. I hate when that happens.
Oh, and did anyone else think if Coco goes further down the line, and then sees the bad throw, he has a chance to score on that WP/PB in the first?
Jere- difference is Ichirio has an arm.
Ortiz was tagging but held at third since they got the ball back in quickly.
Remy being Remy
Thanks Jere :)
But even Ichiro isn't throwing someone out at third from the wall...
Sometimes I think Ichirio can do just about anything.
I think he's an amazing player. Allan tries to argue me out of it, but to me he's a very exciting player to watch.
btw, chokers won 8-5.
No debating for me that he's an incredible player. I'll never forget that time he bunted against us with the bases loaded, and I think two outs. And I was totally surprised.
I would have loved to have seen him play for the Sox. He just seems so effortless when playing but is sound sound in the basics.
MFY 8 - Royals 5 final
I would have loved to have seen him play for the Sox.
Same here. I was hoping.
KC gave 'em 7 walks and a HBP.
He's very good, but overrated as a hitter. However, he broke one of the record I thought woudn't be broken: Sisler's hits in a season.
Manny: Time for #21.
Did they BBI Papi?
He's very good, but overrated as a hitter.
He hits, he's fast, he has a great arm and he's a creative, thinking player.
I know he doesn't walk much, but that's not the only measurement of a good player. Not everyone does everything.
What they say about Jeter--"only his hustle made the fielder rush and therefore make a bad throw" actually IS true about Ichiro.
I can't believe we only have 2 runs in this game. One more inning like this and I'm gonna give it the old "we don't deserve to win this game" label.
Sisler had 257 hits in 1920.
Ichiro got 262 in 2004.
Well this sucks ass.
groan - another escape for the mariners as manny hits into his 17th dp.
Ack, too early for that label. But Manny GDP'ing drives me nuts.
Sisler had 257 hits in 1920.
Ichiro got 262 in 2004.
Very cool. Everything in 2004 is cool.
Um, I mean everything baseball.
So is everyone keeping tabs on Lampy, the lampshade dog that lives behind the plate? (Actually a microphone-type thing.)
NESN just showed Manny's tied for league lead in GIDP.
No BBI for Papi, to answer your question.
Regular BB.
Walking is not a measure of a great hitter. But if you don't walk, your on-base % is coming from your batting average only, so that has to be really really high.
Ichiro's career batting average is .332, but his OBP is only .378.
So for his career, he's getting on base a bit more often than Varitek is this year (.368).
You don't talk about Varitek when you talk about great players who get on base.
If all Ichiro did was what Varitek does, nobody would be talking about him at all. But that is not the case.
Josh a Beckett lookin' good today.
Come on -- you know what I'm talking about.
If he wanted to come play for us, I'd be thrilled. Speed, arm, hits for average.
He simply doesn't get on base as often as he should. And that's what a baseball player is supposed to do, first and foremost.
Beckett's cruising.
Josh a Beckett
Nice literary touch there.
for some reason, I have an image of 'Tek hitting into lots of double plays. no idea what the actual numbers are.
Fiiiiiiiiiive Ks through two - lookin good.
Come on -- you know what I'm talking about.
I do. And I disagree, and I'm sick of discussing it. :)
A very racist inning for Beckett: KKK.
I have an image of 'Tek hitting into lots of double plays.
Change that to pop-ups and swing-and-miss at high fastballs and you're right on.
A very racist inning for Beckett: KKK.
To say nothing of Fathead's kids.
GIDP
Manny 17
Ortiz 13
Lowell 13
Crisp 9
Lugo 8
Drew 7
Varitek 7
Youkilis 7
Pedroia 7
Actually I agree with Sock, that is the only thing wrong with Ichirio, he doesn't walk enough. Still, he can play for me any day.
Between manny's GDP's and 3rd strikes looking it has been a strange year for MBM.
There's no doubt he's right in terms of Ichiro's OBP. But I'm looking at the whole player, rather than obsessing on one aspect of his game.
Varitek GIDP for last 5 full seasons (02-06):
13, 10, 11, 10, 10
7 so far this year
But when he does walk, it's a double.
lmao, great call on FSN on that one.
"A base hit - NO NOT A BASE HIT! A DOUBLE PLAY! MAYBE NOPE NOT A DOUBLE PLAY!"
Redsock on Varitek:
"...swinging at shit around his eyes again..."
However, Vartiek does lead all of MLB in SASAHE.
L-girl said...
Redsock on Varitek:
"...swinging at shit around his eyes again..."
redsock said...
However, Vartiek does lead all of MLB in SASAHE.
Scary!
Scary!
But easy.
5 runners left in scoring position (out of a possible 6) through 3.
I've certainly noticed Veritek SASAHE. As for my other observation, apparently I was also SASAHE. go fig.
Nick, that just points to why we need stats. Even if you watch every game, you never know if it is that way, or just seems that way.
Gameday has Beckett's strike 1 to Broussard at 100.
"that just points to why we need stats. Even if you watch every game, you never know if it is that way, or just seems that way."
I agree 100%. But there's a flip side to that coin--we need to watch the games, or you end up thinking the Yanks "should be" tied with the Sox (see post above this one).
Looks like Gameday is about 2-3 mph faster than FSN.
K to Broussard was 100 on Gameday and 97 on FSN. Another pitch in that Ab was 81 and 79.
I agree 100%. But there's a flip side to that coin--we need to watch the games, or you end up thinking the Yanks "should be" tied with the Sox (see post above this one).
A - I don't think many people follow things like Pythagorean Whateveritis without watching at least some share of games
and
B - That stat doesn't really say the teams should be tied. It shows what you could expect based on certain numbers. It's not a summation of a whole season, it's just one measure.
a Beckett's not missing by much when he misses.
no, not "should be". their actual record is their record.
but it's what you would expect historically from teams with the same rs and ra.
the mfy were outperforming their pythag anyway, but their many blowouts have skewed the # a bit.
over a season, though, it will mostly even out.
The only thing that tells you how teams stand in relation to each other is numbers. No one can watch all the games of every team.
why the F is espn classic showing game 6 of the 86 world series right now?
why the F is espn classic showing game 6 of the 86 world series right now?
It is a classic.
"- I don't think many people follow things like Pythagorean Whateveritis without watching at least some share of games"
But that measurement comes only from the runs scored/allowed. You could score 500 runs in one game, then lose all your others, and that "theory" will say "you should be a .500 team, but incredibly, you're 1-161." Also doesn't consider how good a team "should" be based on what players they have, nor does it take into consideration that all teams don't have the same amount of $ to work with. Nor does it account for tack-on runs.
Can you tell I'm not a fan of that whole thing?
Note: maybe they do account for some of this stuff, I have no idea.
classicly heartbreaking
Classically heartbreaking, classic baseball, little doubt there.
If you go here and see the Luck column, it will show you how teams are doing vs their expected record.
9 of the 14 AL teams are within 3 games. In the NL, it's 12 of 16.
Arizona is 10 games over its expected. Wow! They are allowing more runs (4.4) per game than they are scoring (4.1) yet they are 12 games over .500!
"The only thing that tells you how teams stand in relation to each other is numbers. "
Yeah, the number of wins and losses! But if you do want to say "this team should have more/less wins," shouldn't you be looking at stats AND actually have seen that team play, be familiar with who's injured, etc, etc?
Also doesn't consider how good a team "should" be based on what players they have, nor does it take into consideration that all teams don't have the same amount of $ to work with. Nor does it account for tack-on runs.
That measure does not purport to do any of those things. Jere, you're spouting irrelevancies.
You don't have to like using those measures. You can completely ignore them. They're just there to use if you want to.
Just some little ole numbers. Not hurting nobody.
But if you do want to say "this team should have more/less wins," shouldn't you be looking at stats AND actually have seen that team play, be familiar with who's injured, etc, etc?
You are smarter than this. You must know you're talking about something completely different.
I think if you're going to judge it by runs scored, it's not irrelevant that some of your runs come when you're already up 15-1, and therefore don't help you win at all.
No one can watch and remember every play of every game. And you physically can't watch of all two games at one time, never mind 30 games. So numbers give us a way to measure certain things. They don't measure everything, and no one says that they do.
You could score 500 runs in one game, then lose all your others, and that "theory" will say "you should be a .500 team, but incredibly, you're 1-161."
Now you're being silly. But if that actually happened, it would certainly be an outlier. The Dbacks so far would be an example of one this year.
Generally, the RS/RA formula is pretty accurate. And generally, you would expect a team like Arizona to look like they are slumping in the second half when really their good luck ran out.
Also doesn't consider how good a team "should" be based on what players they have
There are other metrics for that.
nor does it take into consideration that all teams don't have the same amount of $ to work with
And that.
I just hate the fact that people are trying to "figure out" who the best team is, when what matters is who wins the World Series, and the teams are playing in such a way to get that done.
I think if you're going to judge it by runs scored, it's not irrelevant that some of your runs come when you're already up 15-1, and therefore don't help you win at all.
But over the course of 162 games, most of those extremes will level off.
But again, it's just one measure of one thing. If you don't like it, don't use it.
I just hate the fact that people are trying to "figure out" who the best team is, when what matters is who wins the World Series, and the teams are playing in such a way to get that done.
That is complete apples and oranges. You must know that.
Some people enjoy looking at these numbers. It doesn't change anything about the standings.
"No one can watch and remember every play of every game. And you physically can't watch of all two games at one time, never mind 30 games. So numbers give us a way to measure certain things. They don't measure everything, and no one says that they do."
But I said I agree with you about that. I'm just saying, if you only look at that, how is that different from looking at the stats of a dice-rolling baseball league. Stuff in dice rolling can be "random," but it's different when it's actual people.
Also, how do they get the formula to calculate the expected w/l?
When the Yankees finished with the 9th (? - might be wrong, but something like that) best record in baseball but won the World Series, Yankee haters were all about how they didn't deserve to win, how fucked up it was that a team with that record could win the WS. But the fact is they did win, and they did it under the system as presently set-up.
I bet I can guess which side of that argument you were on at the time, Jere.
I actually looked at the season ending results. The range for the last five years goes from a team being 25 games under (Indians) to the Reds being 17 over.
This year the Devil Rays have consistently been 1 or 2 games above their Pythag, and the Sox were as much as two above their Pythag. While the Yankees since May have been like 5 or 6 under.
1 run games have been the difference. Yankees are 9-15 in 1 runs while the Sox are 17-16
"Some people enjoy looking at these numbers. It doesn't change anything about the standings."
I enjoy looking at the real numbers.
"nice grab by cor-er"
Also, how do they get the formula to calculate the expected w/l?
Bill James came up with it. Not sure exactly how -- I'm sure one of his '80s Abstracts deals with it. He found that the rato between RS and RA corresponded very closely with winning percentage.
"I enjoy looking at the real numbers."
But you're not content to look at the "real" numbers and leave these supposedly "fake" numbers to those who care about them. You have some kind of problem with other people talking about Pythag.
It doesn't take away any Sox wins, you know, or give the Yankees any extras.
25?????????????????????
Can it corer a apple?
Btw, I don't pay any attention to the Pythag. I just don't have a problem with other people measuring these things.
"
I bet I can guess which side of that argument you were on at the time, Jere."
When the Cards won, people were pised about it, cuz they had a not-that-great record. I didn't care at all. They won the World Series. Believe me, it makes just as mad when the Yanks have the best record and dominate and win the WS than when they're not as good and still win. What season are you talking about, though?
(Note: My "expected" record of the 98 Yanks is 81-81! I still can't believe they kept winning and winning.... worst 118-win team in baseball history!)
I enjoy looking at the real numbers.
But many of those real numbers are essentially meaningless for judging how good a player is. Fielding percentage or a pitcher's W-L record, for example.
"But many of those real numbers are essentially meaningless for judging how good a player is. Fielding percentage or a pitcher's W-L record, for example."
It's just so weird! Everyone talks about W/L and how everything contributes to it, and then they go and tell me "Oh, here's how many wins they "should" have."
Pickoff?!
yes
"When the Cards won, people were pised about it, cuz they had a not-that-great record. I didn't care at all. They won the World Series."
Cool. You didn't answer the question, but then, I already know the answer.
! Everyone talks about W/L and how everything contributes to it, and then they go and tell me "Oh, here's how many wins they "should" have."
Once again, it's not "should have". It's what a team might be expected to do, based on RS and RA. It's just a measure. Get over it.
Stats are for contracts and baseball cards...you can never truly tell the worth of any one ballplayer based on any one stat....
Thats why it is a team game...
Pythagorena theory crap gives me nightmares......
Being!
You didn't answer my question as to what year that was. I guarantee I wasn't happy about it, but, like I said, I know I was equally mad about that as I would about any other Yankee WS win.
The Baby Bull charge!
you can never truly tell the worth of any one ballplayer based on any one stat....
No one says you can. No one in their right mind, anyway.
Like, in '98, I didn't say, Well, it's okay, they really should've won anyway.
Let me clarify that was a cumulative 25 for the five years. They were 12 under in 2006 which was the high in one year for being under the pythag.
Pretty sure she's talking about 2000.
NY's 87-74 (Pthag: 85-76) record was worse than 4 AL teams and 4 NL teams. So 9th best MLB record. And they went on to win the WS.
The reason why I moaned about it was everyone and his mediot brother saying how great the team was. They won the WS, but they were far from the "best" team in baseball.
...
YAY MBM!
You didn't answer my question as to what year that was.
I know! I've been typing, reading and following the friggin game on slower-than-molasses Gameday.
I don't know off the top of my head. I have to look it up, and can't now, don't want to miss that much game. I'd guess 1999, but I'm not sure.
you can never truly tell the worth of any one ballplayer based on any one stat
If anyone ever tells you that, they are completely full of poop.
What's wrong with realizing that batting average, RBI, fielding percentage, picther record (to name four) are significantly flawed ways to measure a player's contributions and trying to come up with a better, more accurate way?
Why rely on the same counting stats they did back in the 1870s?
The reason why I moaned about it was everyone and his mediot brother saying how great the team was. They won the WS, but they were far from the "best" team in baseball.
I wasn't talking about you. I heard it everywhere. I had a big argument about it with Eric Neel. His whole argument boiled down to Jeter Sucks.
(Yes, I know it's true, but it's irrelevant! :) )
Well, they won the division every year they won the WS. I honestly don't remember in any of those years thinking "they didn't have enough wins, they don't deserve to win." (I just ALWAYS think they don't "deserve" to win. Ha.)
If you mean when the Ms had that huge year and then laid down and died for the Yanks, yes, I was totally pissed. Totally. But I never said, "the system's unfair" about that. In fact, I've always said how much I hate the Wild Card, and 2004 didn't change my mind on my feelings on it--though I wouldn't trade the WS win for anything, of course.
Our dugout is yelling at a Moose. I bet Gameday's not telling you that.
a cumulative 25
whew. ... that would be the mostly unlucky team ever, i would think.
Our dugout is yelling at a Moose.
:-o
Its the Indians!
Coco got practically run over by the Moose on his golf cart. And the dugout was really pissed, yelling at him. Coco went flippin' over the thing!
You also didn't see Manny doing a baby bull charge in the dugout after his homer.
I'm pretty sure it was 1999 but I can't look for it now. I'm barely watching the game as it is.
In fact, I've always said how much I hate the Wild Card, and 2004 didn't change my mind on my feelings on it
We're in 100% agreement on this.
CActually one of the luckier teams would be the Sox as they have out performed the pythag 3 of the last 5 years (06, 05, and 02). The other two years they were exactly at the pythag. Cumulative score of 13.
I hope Papelbon didn't see the Moose try to kill Coco.
You also didn't see Manny doing a baby bull charge in the dugout after his homer.
I didn't see anything. Can't hear anything either.
If this job continues, I should sign up for MLB audio. Radio would be better than this.
Hey NESN, no need for specific A-Rod updates any more! Especially telling us he went 0-4. Nobody cares about his 501st homer!!!!!
Hey NESN, no need for specific A-Rod updates any more! Especially telling us he went 0-4.
Maybe they think it will make you happy to hear that.
I hate the Wild Card, and 2004 didn't change my mind on my feelings on it
I think it's so funny when Allan says that. It obviously can't be true. They can't both be true at once.
I hate the perceptions put out by the media, which most fans simply take as fact with thinking.
Jeter is a very good player, but he's not the Second Coming. He has flaws, though watching ESPN and Fox you'd never know it.
Ichiro is a very good player, but he's not as good as many people claim.
The 99 MFY won the East, AL and WS, but don't go telling me they are a bunch of baseball dynasty gods. They won only 87 games. Four more than the often maligned Twins team that won 83 (1987?).
Slugo!
(Sorry Jere, I say it every time he hits.)
I hate the perceptions put out by the media, which most fans simply take as fact with thinking.
Well sure, me too. But exaggerating in the complete opposite direction doesn't help.
Now that you wrote that, I know it was 99.
Terrible job by Lugo as usual. Note: NESN still thought he was on second, graphic-wise, for the remainder of Coco's at bat.
Okay, just to clarify on Slugo. I always thought of Slaught's nickname to be spelled like that. I should've known, though, it was really spelled "Sluggo," as the pronunciation would suggest.
So, your Slugo is pronounced like Lugo with an S, right? If so, they're two different words with totally different pronunciations, and I have no right to be upset about it. ha.
They should tell Lugo he has to play by LL rules, where his foot has to be on the bag until the ball is hit.
NESN often gets the count wrong, missing balls or strikes, or putting up a ball as a strike. (How hard is that? It's like a pitch every 30 seconds.) But most networks we watch can't keep up.
How about the S at the end? Lugos. Legos?
J-Lug?
Those nachos look good.
My nickname for Lugo is pronounced Sloogo.
Don Slaught, a complete nobody, was occasionally called Slugo, never saw it spelled anywhere but it was also pronounced Sloogo. A sarcastic nickname if ever there was one.
I was a Yankees fan for 28 years and I wouldn't know Don Slaught if I fell over him in the street.
whew, glad that one stayed in the yard.
Isn't there a comic strip character called Sluggo? (Nancy?) Maybe Slaught looked like him?
It was Nancy. God I hope Don Slaught didn't look like that guy!
I always thought it was just a sarcastic nickname based on his last name and his not-hitting-ness.
You are correct - Sluggo is in nancy comics.
No, no, Slaught was pronounced Sluggo. Like, he's a slugger. Which he wasn't. So, I'm sayin, I can be fine with Slugo if it's pronounced "Slew-go."
Wait, wasn't there a Sluggo in Gumby, too?
Nancy and Sluggo
A Sluggo in Gumby? I don't think so. I'm a big Gumby fan.
I never heard anyone call him Sluggo, just Sloogo, the same way I am saying my nickname for Lugo. Hopefully you'll be able to live with it anyway.
Look on Baseball Almanac, Reference, etc, they all spell it Sluggo. I can hear Scooter saying it now....
Also, maybe the other Sluggo I was thinking of was in Mr. Bill??
Yes, Sluggo from Mr. Bill: http://www.mrbill.com/mbsynop.html
Maybe. Dunno. Dunno why they spell it that way either. Everyone at the Stadium said Sloogo. Everyone that bothered to say something about Don Slaught, that is.
The announcers always said Sluggo. Just sayin'.
boy, am I glad rem set us straight on the path of air travel.
Just sayin'.
Yes. You sure are.
Remy complaining about his travel arrangements again?
Tiz shows his blazing speed!!!!
Flo has Wheels!!!
ortiz steals second and catcher throws to second, but no one covers the bag. ball into center, but no advance. then ortiz gives the double point to someone.
And Manny caught looking, bah.
remy: "whaaaa! whaaa! we get into the hotel at 4am. whaa!! i get paid to watch the red sox and hawk my fucking t-shirts. whaa! whaaa! my tv is only 72 inches wide! maybe if i kiss the ass of another sponsor, they'll give me a bigger one! whaa! whaa! my life sucks!"
I am sick of all announcers complaining about the weather, the travel, the lack of sleep, the whatever. Remy's one of the worst, since he only goes to the games and other than that never leaves his hotel room.
The latest thing I hate about Remy's sponsor-mania: When Don's saying the sponsors of the game, and he says "Sovereign Bank," and Rem, who does ads for them, chimes in with "great bank!" Funny once, maybe, but we get the picture. No need to do it eevry time.
Nice, DJ Drew!!! An RBI B3.
DJ Werd!!
Rem, who does ads for them, chimes in with "great bank!" Funny once, maybe
He did that last season with some other crap he shilled for. I hate it too.
I think it was the plumbing company, FW Webb. They must have remodeled Remy's bathroom for free or something.
L-girl said...
Remy complaining about his travel arrangements again?
It's the same map of the away games that they showed the last couple of nights. Remy had to note that the plane doesn't actually fly in that straight line.
(daughter just spilled her drink. we cleaned it up. she knocked her plate off the table. we cleaned it up. she stubbed her toe on the chair. oy.)
If they have to talk about it, they should talk about how it affects the players. We don't give one shit if Jerry is tired or yawns between innings.
If it's that bad, quit. And if you're not going to quit, stfu.
Someone explain to me why everyone loves "the Rem Dawg" (ugh) so much.
He would also say "Good call!" after Don mentions a beer company. Bud?
He's such a sponsor whore.
If they have to talk about it, they should talk about how it affects the players. We don't give one shit if Jerry is tired or yawns between innings.
If it's that bad, quit. And if you're not going to quit, stfu.
I agree. Most announcers do it, but Remy is particularly whiny.
(daughter just spilled her drink. we cleaned it up. she knocked her plate off the table. we cleaned it up. she stubbed her toe on the chair. oy.)
Ouch. Poor kid. :)
"Someone explain to me why everyone loves "the Rem Dawg" (ugh) so much. "
I still like him, despite....
It's worth it for all the genuinely funny moments.
Plus, of course, his incessant blather about all wonderful NESN programs and how you should just get up, turn on NESN and watch it all day long.
Dr Singles
It's worth it for all the genuinely funny moments.
There is a lot of that, very true. They're a good team in that respect.
Remy just gets on my nerves, massively.
Just imagine how much more good there could be if he cut his ads by about a thousand percent.
But, hey, every so often he says something about the game, how the htter got a pitch "middle in" and whacked it.
good kid, but even klutzier than I am. and that's saying something (my little league career was less than impressive).
good kid, but even klutzier than I am
Do her a favour and don't tell her so. I was told that all my life. It doesn't help the coordination.
Remy Drinking Game:
"middle in"
...
That's it. You'll be wasted in no time.
If you want alcohol poisoning:
"t-shirts"
"wally"
"CSI"
Remy Drinking Game:
You forgot the biggest one: membership in rem dawg / red sox nation.
Remy is maddening, but compared to what I hear on other stations, I end up giving him some leeway. Having said that (whoah..what a cath!) I could use with a little less of the relentless productwhoring.
Jeemer on the way in?
Gotta go transcribe a tape.
I hate when they want you to work for your pay.
btw, that shoulda been "catch". I was not refering to the Dawg's catheter (though I'm sure he'd tell us what brand he uses).
Pitcher double-clutches on throw to first, so Lugo safe on bunt.
Hey, I like this guy Green.
6-1. Nice job by Lugo getting to second.
Pitcher double-clutches on throw to first, so Lugo safe on bunt.
Ha! Seems like he reaches on a lot of stuff like that.
Post a Comment