What?
Posted by hankscorpio on August 3, 2007
This post, I don’t care for so much. Sure as a Cubs fan I don’t like seeing them criticized; but mostly I don’t like it because its a piss poor argument. The idea that the Brewers are some how a more authentic team because they don’t have big name free agents, is at best a joke.
Claim One: The Cubs are a collection of big name free agents assembled to win at any cost.
Analysis: Bullshit. Three starting pitchers (Zambrano, Hill, and Marshall) all came up through the farm system. As did most of the bullpen, of the 12 pitchers the Cubs carry 7 are farm grown; and none classify as big name acquisitions. Theriot, Fontenot, Cedeno, Pagan, and Murton are all fielders who came through the farm system, and most of the rest were acquired by trade; years ago. Ramirez has spent 5 of 7 complete season in the Majors as a Cub.
Yeah, they’ve picked up free agents, who hasn’t? Are you telling me that Ted Lilly is different then picking up Craig Counsell? That Mark DeRosa is better know then Damian Miller (yes, the Brewers have players who didn’t come up through their farm system OMG!!!!!!) Yes, they picked up Soriano, that’s what you’re supposed to do, go out identify the best players available and get them. Equating picking up one superstar in Soriano with the Yankees buying Clemens, and A-Rod, and Giambi, and… just don’t hold water.
Claim Two: The Brewers have better chemistry.
Analysis: Bullshit since June 19th. That’s the day the Cubs traded Barrett, and they started their hot streak. They play well together and shots of the bench show guys who seem to enjoy playing on the same team.
The Brewers? Nothing says togetherness like getting in a fight with the manager.
I can handle homerism, but Jesus at least think it through first. How can you claim a team has better chemistry the same week they have a fight after the game? For that matter how can you claim they have better chemistry when they’re 3-7 in the last 10? When they’ve blown what was a very sizable lead? The Cubs winning this is no sure shot; but let’s not turn the Brewers into the MLB version of Hoosiers.
Addendum: Can the author say that the Brewers have always been homegrown? Free agency has been around a long time, what was the make up of these two team 5, 10 or 15 years ago? Would the facts support his argument?
Curt Flood himself has been dead for 10 years now, free agency is probably older then a good percentage of the readers of this blog; the Brewers may symbolize the past but its an idealized past, one that may not even be true.
Tim said
Wow and your talking about homerism? How about mentioning that 7 of 8 players that start for them didn’t come up in their farm. and try mentioning that nine out of 25 are homegrown, but how many actually contribute to them really winning games? 3? When you talk shit about a biased opinion dont shoot back with one of your own… you’ll lose your creditibility in the process.
hankscorpio said
How exactly do you categorize contributing to winning games? Zambrano leading the league in wins? Fontenot hitting .308? Marmol having a 1.78 era in 35 appearances? Theroit taking over at 2nd? Oh wait that’s 4. And I’m pretty sure Marshall and Hill have won games.
Who said shit about creditability? I admitted my bias in the first sentence. Second, you don’t see me pontificating on the sad state of blah blah blah… his argument was bullshit, I called it bullshit and backed it with numbers you conveniently dismiss because they don’t fit your frame. I didn’t claim to be some great prophet of baseball, and I said nothing about the Brewer’s talent, just that they do the same thing everybody else does (pick up players from other team) and they aren’t all sitting around making s’mores and braiding each other’s hair (Estrada going after Yost) which supposedly was the whole point of his post. My point is they’re no different, just not as high profile. If he wants to talk about inequity in small vs large market teams or the lack of a salary cap that’s different, but that isn’t what he’s arguing; he’s arguing that because the Brewers aren’t as successful in the free agent market they’re somehow more pure.
P.S. You want to talk some more about creditability? I left your comment up, he won’t even post mine. How creditable is that?
Tim said
i think you missed it out on the whole thing. im not here to argue authors. im here to argue posts. he mentioned the cubs in paragraph one and the last one. the whole hting was a commentary on the state of baseball with the cubs and brewers used as symbolism and metaphors. its about how the game has changed ie bird dogs becoming extinct. you cub fans roasted him, i saw the post yesturday submitted it to deadspin and then they carried it. the cubs roster and money spending parts were only added after you guys attacked him and misinterpreted the whole post. and how are the brewers at all like the cubs, they can make a lineup with all homegrown talent on any given night except at catcher? Your argument is bullshit because it doesn’t exist. your post states that the cubs and brewers are the same? how are they at all? take that little number and omit it in your reply because if you acknowledge it your whole post here is bullshit.
Tim said
and you left the post up because you don’t have to approve it first. check out his latest article, he big ups kerry wood, but a cub hater wouldn’t do that would he? http://www.imwritingsports.com/?p=96 don’t be mad because he is better writer than you and his articles get carried by deadspin and you can’t even buy a banner for your little “blog”
hankscorpio said
All teams play the free agency market. The fact that the Cubs went after and got Soriano and the Brewers didn’t doesn’t make them white knights protecting the purity of mom baseball and apple pie. It means they didn’t go after Soriano or other high profile players, they went after Craig Counsell.
And the Brewers should have talent coming up through the farm system, God knows they’ve spent enough time at the top of the draft (alongside the Cubs, who by the way have quite a bit of talent in Iowa.) This guy uses a snapshot in time to make an argument that may have been completely false 5 or 10 years ago. What would he say then, what if 10 years ago most of the Brewers were hired guns, and most of the Cubs were off the farm? Free agency have been going on for years; its a cyclical process free agency fills in gaps that you can’t fill with your farm system, three years the roles here could be reversed again.
And answer me this, would this argument even be occurring if they had been successful in getting Gagne this week? Would Brewer fans be so hung up on the importance of home grown talent if they could have picked him up? What if after next season Santana says he’s dreamed of playing in Milwaukee?
hankscorpio said
1. I don’t approve them first, but I can delete your comments.
2. I don’t blog for attention, I don’t need Will to validate me.
3. I could give a fuck about a banner, I wasn’t aware they were required to be an official blogger. I’ll have to go find a venture capitalist on Monday to finance my banner since clearly they’re the key to international blog stardom and getting money and girls.
4. I really don’t care what he thinks about Kerry Wood; I care that he makes weak arguments.
Holly said
You have to “buy” banners? The fuck?
hankscorpio said
Damn, and I was sure you’d have connections in the underground banner industry.
jebushchrist said
I’m sorry, I didn’t read the article here, I only read blogs with banners. I do know this though, I think Tim needs to look into an above ground life. I get a kick out of random people trying to program other people’s blogs. Hey Tim? You lose. Again.
Tim said
You don’t blog for attention, ok so why do you blog. You made a post off a post that was extremely popular, if that isn’t a cry for attention I don’t know what is. That’s alright though buddy. Your cubs keep losing so I can totally understand your frustration, it’s gotta be hard. I’m here for ya little buddy, have a coke and smile, it’s not good to get all stressed out.
hankscorpio said
Since I get the feeling this is the only post you look at here, this explains it http://globexcorp.wordpress.com/2007/08/06/why-do-i-blog/
Besides if I wanted attention I wouldn’t blog about F1, I’d blog about NASCAR. If I wanted attention I would have done a Simpsons post when the movie came out, I didn’t.
jebushchrist said
Tim – So by following your reasoning, if I build a comment off of your comment it’s a cry for me to be completely insignificant and utterly superfluous?
Cool.