OT. Great night Red Sox win World Series and UCONN Men's win!!!

[Husky25]

I'm shocked anyone is arguing against the Yankees being the best organization is sports. Besides winning at an alarming rate the Yankees are just iconic from the pinstripes to the NY hat, they've made movies about them, a disease was named after one of their players and they have the some of the most legendary players in the history of sports. The Celtics are no doubt a great organization but the Lakers are on equal footing with them and have had better players throughout their history than the Celtics have. As for the Canadiens, nobody cares about hockey.

Your premises were faulty and you dared someone to argue them. I did and succeeded.

ALS was named after Lou Gehrig, the man, not the Yankee because it was so rare. It's like Parkinsons or Hodgkins. Given the situation, I'm pretty sure he would have foregone the notoriety in order t o lived 30 more years.

 

[mauconnfan]

Well, I guess you're right, they did name a disease after one of their players. Christ, can there be a thread that doesn't become some sort of "I got sand in my vagina" whining?

I'm geeked about the Red Sox. Three rings in my lifetime when I thought maybe I'd never see one. I don't really give a about the '27 Yankees right now. The Red Sox are the 2013 champs of baseball. All the "if only Detroit was healthy" and "this other team is better on paper" means squadoosh and is just sour grapes. On to basketball season.

As a Yankee fan I don't really give a rats a** about the 27 either. In my lifetime I have 7 (8 if you count '61 when I was 3) but I have 77, 78, 96, 98, 99, 00, 09 which I am very aware of. The biggest misconception of Yankee fans is they use the "We have 27 how many you have?"........As I became a LLer the Yankees sucked, awful 60-70 wins often. I had hero's like Horace Clark, Jake Gibbs, Stan Bahnsen and Steve Whitaker. It took until I was 19 to get a WS title so for the most part during our younger years all of the neighborhood kids came up empty for as title chasers, Yanks rarely were in it after the all star break. I think since I moved to WesMass that perception is something that has bothered me, especially since 2004 when, whether you like it or not, Sox Nation came out of the woodwork. Yankee fans aren't cocky about having 27 but if you call the a**holes they have that to lean on but that's all it is, a crutch and an answer. Why not, they do have them?

Back to this season.......Detroit was probably as close as it got to answering the Sox game to game but you know what, they didn't. With a healthy Cabrera maybe but ultimately as someone mentioned above the Sox bullpen was tons better and help on tight to win that series. Ultimately they were in control all year and while allowing a couple teams to close a little they ran away and hid again leaving even the rays well behind. Hate them as much as i do by looking at their ugly mugs and beards but man, they did play baseball the way it was supposed to be played. Good for them........doubt they could do it again though!! (couldn't help it)

 

[mauconnfan]

Your premises were faulty and you dared someone to argue them. I did and succeeded.

ALS was named after Lou Gehrig, the man, not the Yankee because it was so rare. It's like Parkinsons or Hodgkins. Given the situation, I'm pretty sure he would have foregone the notoriety in order t o lived 30 more years.

You're really arguing that? Wow............

Oh I'm sorry on to UConn!!

 

[Husky25]

Putting the Celtics on par with the Yankees is laughable. They've won one title in the last 27 years. They aren't even the best franchise in their own sport.

You missed the point.

 

[superjohn]

Your premises were faulty and you dared someone to argue them. I did and succeeded.

ALS was named after Lou Gehrig, the man, not the Yankee because it was so rare. It's like Parkinsons or Hodgkins. Given the situation, I'm pretty sure he would have foregone the notoriety in order t o lived 30 more years.

My premise wasn't faulty and all you succeeded at was proving you are clueless. ALS was renamed Lou Gehrig's disease, because it's Lou Gehrig. That's precisely the point the guy was "The Iron Horse" a Yankee legend and one of the biggest legends of the timeperiod. Shows how big the Yankees are when he wasn't even the most legendary player on his own team. Your last sentence I'm not even going to comment on, it's too stupid.

 

[Husky25]

Your premise was that it is inarguable that the Yankees are the best organization in sports. The point of my diatribe was merely to prove that it is indeed arguable. The Yankees may in fact be the best organization. But it is not by any stretch inarguable.

End of discussion.

 

[Sportsman5]

That's hilarious coming from a Boston fan. It's almost as if one of the biggest cheaters in the history of the sport (right up there with A-Rod) didn't hit cleanup for you during your 2004 and 2007 championships. The beloved David Ortiz isn't exactly a model of honor, either - enjoy your championship, but dismissing the accomplishments of the 90's Yankees is ignorant.

Dismissing it is not ignorant. It just so happens that in the mid to late 90s when PED use was rampant in certain club houses that the yankees win 4 out of 5 championships. it is not about singling out one person it is about looking at an organization. the yankees had a chemical competitive advantage unseen before that time and unlikely to be seen again.

 

[superjohn]

Dismissing it is not ignorant. It just so happens that in the mid to late 90s when PED use was rampant in certain club houses that the yankees win 4 out of 5 championships. it is not about singling out one person it is about looking at an organization. the yankees had a chemical competitive advantage unseen before that time and unlikely to be seen again.

Good lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.

 

[Husky25]

Good lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.

It is impossible to dismiss what the Yankees did on the field in the mid-late 90's

It is also quite impossible to dismiss what the Red Sox did on the field between April and October 30, 2013.

2013 is not about the Yankees.

 

[Sportsman5]

Good lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.

you didn't read my post. I blatantly said that it is not about an individual player, but about an organization during a certain time period in comparison to other entire organizations during that same time period. look at the 15 years before and after that time period in comparison to the mid to late 90s. A lot of organizations across baseball and lot of different world series winners from year to year. then look at the mid to late 90s. The original poster I responded to disregarded the redsox win this year saying that the late 90s yankees teams were so dominant that they would have crushed this years redsox team. just explaining to him why they appeared so dominant.

 

[upstater]

There is no arguing who the best team was this year. I kept waiting for this band of beards to fall apart and run into a stretch I thought was more like their potential. Instead they started pitching and hitting a little better at years end and despite not hitting too well in the playoffs, pitched their butts off and proved to be the best from start to finish. No argument here........

Now the GG's and the potential HOF enshrinement of Papster that's yet another story.......but that is one for later. The Huskies are NOW....ten toes in, no Sox/Yanks BS (unless I see something I need to respond to LOL)

On numbers, not HOF, but when you are clutch at the most important moments of the year, when 2 WS titles are largely due to you, then that is BETTER than Ortiz's career regular season. You tack that onto the numbers he put up, and what do you have? I would have said no prior to this postseason, but when you've done it 3 times, it's no fluke.

 

[superjohn]

you didn't read my post. I blatantly said that it is not about an individual player, but about an organization during a certain time period in comparison to other entire organizations during that same time period. look at the 15 years before and after that time period in comparison to the mid to late 90s. A lot of organizations across baseball and lot of different world series winners from year to year. then look at the mid to late 90s. The original poster I responded to disregarded the redsox win this year saying that the late 90s yankees teams were so dominant that they would have crushed this years redsox team. just explaining to him why they appeared so dominant.

Okay so you're not saying the Yankees World Series teams of the 90's had an advantage over the other teams they were playing during that timeperiod? I just want to get this straight, you don't think the Yankees had a chemical competitive advantage over the other teams in the league at that time?

 

[Sportsman5]

Okay so you're not saying the Yankees World Series teams of the 90's had an advantage over the other teams they were playing during that timeperiod? I just want to get this straight, you don't think the Yankees had a chemical competitive advantage over the other teams in the league at that time?

i have been extremely clear about what I am saying. Only a diehard Yankees fan would disagree with me. It is as much of a factor as the fact that the celtics won a ton of championships when there were like 8 teams in the NBA. clearly it is a factor. No way a team wins like the celtics with 30 teams in the league.

 

[Husky25]

i have been extremely clear about what I am saying. Only a diehard Yankees fan would disagree with me. It is as much of a factor as the fact that the celtics won a ton of championships when there were like 8 teams in the NBA. clearly it is a factor. No way a team wins like the celtics with 30 teams in the league.

How dare you make an argument against a Yankee fan's "logic?"

Congratulations to the 2013 Red Sox and Good Luck to the 2013-2014 UConn Huskies.

 

[Sportsman5]

How dare you make an argument against a Yankee fan's "logic?"

Congratulations to the 2013 Red Sox and Good Luck to the 2013-2014 UConn Huskies.

basketball is much more exciting than baseball. We are in for a treat this year.

 

[superjohn]

i have been extremely clear about what I am saying. Only a diehard Yankees fan would disagree with me. It is as much of a factor as the fact that the celtics won a ton of championships when there were like 8 teams in the NBA. clearly it is a factor. No way a team wins like the celtics with 30 teams in the league.

Well then I'm not understanding your point at all. So you do think the Yankees had a chemical advantage over the other teams in the league during their run in the 90's? That's utter nonsense if that's what you are trying to say. I would never contend that the Red Sox had a chemical advantage in 2004 and 2007.

 

[Chin Diesel]

At least the Sox/UConn Football fans have something to cheer about.

Imagine the misery of UConn football, Yankee, Giants/Jets fans.

miserable bunch.

 

[mauconnfan]

On numbers, not HOF, but when you are clutch at the most important moments of the year, when 2 WS titles are largely due to you, then that is BETTER than Ortiz's career regular season. You tack that onto the numbers he put up, and what do you have? I would have said no prior to this postseason, but when you've done it 3 times, it's no fluke.

Nope!

 

[John]

The Boston Celtics say hi.

The Yankees have been in existence since 1903, which is 110 years. they have 27 championships, which is 24.5% of their leagues' championships.
The Celtics formed in 1946 which is 66 years ago and have won 17 championships 25.8%.
The Montreal Canadiens have been in existence since 1909 and have 24 Stanley Cups, which is only 23.1%, but they operate at a disadvantage under the Canadian dollar which is worth less than the American Dollar.

Secondly, the rules are different today than they were in 1993, 1970, 1940, 1927, and 1903.

Ownership? How did the Yankees do under the watchful stewardship of the Columbia Broadcasting System?

Value? The Yankees are valued at over $1.5 Billion, but that is not a real number. It's on paper, determined by finance guys and accountants pouring over balance sheets. Would the Yanks fetch the $2.1 Billion that the Dodgers just actually sold for in 2012? Perhaps, but who knows until they are actually put up for sale, which is probably not happening in my lifetime.

Recent performance? 1 World Series title in the last 5 years. 1 World Series Title in the last 10 years. 1 World Series title in the last 13 years. Here's the thing...it's the same title. (Disclaimer: Won in 96 and 98-00, widely believed to be no thanks to their owner and managing partner who was banned from day to day management when the foundation of those teams were developed.)

Operations? Six years ago, the Yankees signed a 32 year old to a 10 year contract guaranteeing him $275 million...and are now trying desperately trying to find a loophole to get out of it (Where have you gone Howie Spira? Our Empire turns it's lonely eyes to you. whoo, whoo, whoo.). The Yankees' farm system has taken a huge hit over the years for signing Grade A free agents as prior to the current CBA, they gave up draft picks for the privilege of signing said FAs.

The Yankees have some talent in their lower farm system, but AA is the weed out level. Most personnel in the know (including their own) will tell you that the AA and AAA levels are lacking.

Bottom line...It's pretty arguable...

Again this is not about the Yankees.

Huzzah!!! Well Said!!!!

 

[Sportsman5]

Well then I'm not understanding your point at all. So you do think the Yankees had a chemical advantage over the other teams in the league during their run in the 90's? That's utter nonsense if that's what you are trying to say. I would never contend that the Red Sox had a chemical advantage in 2004 and 2007.

you can't compare different decades. Every period of time is unique. there were different cultures in baseball and sports in general about drugs at different times. different types of drugs, strength of drugs, cost of drugs, access to drugs etc. there isn't just one generic "steroid" that players have taken over the years. access to different ones at different times with different strengths and different side effects etc. To say that what I am saying is utter nonsense means you are uneducated about performance enhancing drugs and its use over time.

 

[The Viking]

Every 90's Yankee title team would blow this Boston team off the field. Even the mediocre hangover 1999 one.

Congrats, you're crazier than mau.
Oh wait he liked this post.
Ok you're both on the same level of insanity.

 

[superjohn]

you can't compare different decades. Every period of time is unique. there were different cultures in baseball and sports in general about drugs at different times. different types of drugs, strength of drugs, cost of drugs, access to drugs etc. there isn't just one generic "steroid" that players have taken over the years. access to different ones at different times with different strengths and different side effects etc. To say that what I am saying is utter nonsense means you are uneducated about performance enhancing drugs and its use over time.

It sounds like you were saying the 90's Yankees teams had a chemical advantage over the other teams in the 90's and that is utter nonsense. You can stop with your I'm an expert stuff, I've been lifting for close to 20 years and have a couple of friends who are professional bodybuilders, I know all about steroids and supplements. For the fifth time are your trying to say the Yankees of the 90's had a chemical advantage over the other MLB teams of the 90's?

 

[Sportsman5]

It sounds like you were saying the 90's Yankees teams had a chemical advantage over the other teams in the 90's and that is utter nonsense. You can stop with your I'm an expert stuff, I've been lifting for close to 20 years and have a couple of friends who are professional bodybuilders, I know all about steroids and supplements. For the fifth time are your trying to say the Yankees of the 90's had a chemical advantage over the other MLB teams of the 90's?

lifting weights and knowing pro bodybuilders. so that automatically means you know what you are talking about when it comes to chemical enhancement and the history of it in professional sports?

I'll give you an analogy. Performance enhancement in pro sports is like the economy. 5-10 years difference, and in some cases even shorter, can mean a drastic difference. Look at the economy in 1995 vs 2000 vs 2005 vs 2010. I am saying that I do not think the phillies in 2008 had a statistically significant advantage. I am saying there are major red flags that would point towards that the yankees did. You seem to not understand how that is possible. That is like someone saying you don't understand why it would be easier or harder to get a job in 2000 vs 2005. Things change fast.

obviously I don't know what every single player in the MLB was taking at every given point in time. However, it just so happened that the only time in the last 40 years a team showed championship dominance was at a time when chemical enhancement was in it's most significant transformation to becoming main stream in MLB. Mild orals have been experimented with since the 60s, but in the 90s the price of growth hormone started to go down and designer steroids came in. At the same time salaries started to go up with the yankees leading this push in salaries. Certain athletes got in in the mid to late 90s. Pretty quickly everyone caught on.

I'll say it one last time. I was responding to the original post about a person saying that the yankees of the 90s were so dominant compared to their competition that they would crush the redsox of this year because the redsox showed so little dominance over the rest of the league. I was explaining to him an extremely plausible explanation why there was such a discrepancy.

 

[Waquoit]

It sounds like you were saying the 90's Yankees teams had a chemical advantage over the other teams in the 90's

Don't know about that. I do know the 1986 Mets had a chemical advantage over the Red Sox.

 

[mauconnfan]

Congrats, you're crazier than mau.
Oh wait he liked this post.
Ok you're both on the same level of insanity.

Guessing the players and managers already voted this Sox team to be the greatest of all time and how dare anyone even throw an opinion out there right Vike? I love the fact you aren't that predictable of a d**k!!............