Cliff Floyd speaks about the state of the Mets.
Ignorance, assumptions, and personal arrogance all wrapped into one.
about 2 years ago
Syler
112 comments
0 recs |
Comments
his tone was a bit off
but theres probably some grain of truth to some of the things he said. We know Cammy didn’t like being put in right field, having a veteran player the younger guys can learn from is valuable assuming that player is himself still of use to the team (which floyd was), and a bunt was probably the right call in that situation. Unfortunately he chose to state it all in a way that made him sound a bit pretentious. That said I always liked Cliff and won’t let this change my opinion of him any.
Yes, the bunt was the "by the book" call ...
and maybe it was the correct call in that situation … but, we had so many opportunities to score in that game and we didn’t take advantage. It’s hard to blame it all on that one play (I’m not saying that you are, in particular, just that many people point to that one play as being pivotal managerial call by Willie … ironic how it really turned out to be Manuel’s call). MLB network replayed that game and I sat down and watched the whole game. It was actually cathartic.
"Never throw a slider to The Glider."
- Ed Charles, No. 5
a baseball game doesn't usually come down to one managerial call
there are always lost opportunities to score every inning. The 9th is just a lot more memorable. And I find it hilarious that Jerry made the call NOT to bunt for once. Why did he have to choose that one time to not play Jerryball?
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
Mets lost game 6
when they left the bases loaded after Endy’s catch. I know: I was there.
Oh, the butcher and the baker and the people on the street: wheredotheygo?!?!?
that was one of many opportunities they squandered in order to lose for sure
but hardly the only scoring chance they gave up that game.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
I'm assuming he's talking about game 7
we won game 6
You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.
?
Ig
norance, assumptions, and personal arrogance all wrapped into one.
Please explain. Sounds like he was being pretty honest. He threw everybody who deserved it under the bus. It’s about time.
Oh and by the way, I believe everything J.J. Putz said yesterday.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
I believe Putz too
and agree with most of what Floyd said. I can see how his tone in this piece might ring abrasive to some though.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 3, 2010 6:56 PM EST up reply actions
Firstly, when he talked about himself in 2006
Kind of revionist history on his part, because he was essentially hurt the whole year, had the one huge homer off Lowe in Game 1 of the NLDS, and just took up space on the roster in the NLCS.
The whole “chemistry” crap. You don’t need chemistry to win, and it’s an inverse relationship; when you win, you have chemistry, and when you lose, you don’t.
And then the whole Perez thing. He thinks Perez stopped trying, when in reality, he got hurt and was honestly never that good in the 1st place.
It's not his fault he was kept on the active roster while hurt.
For that, you can blame Willie and Omar.
I will respectfully disagree on the chemistry thing. I don’t think it is the end all and be all of winning, but I think it plays a role. Of course, talent trumps chemistry, and those are two areas where Omar has failed. He has neither brought enough talent, nor assembled a team where the players truly fight for each other.
I agree with your point on Perez. He sucks.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
"Where players truly fight for each other"
What does that mean though? How can you actually quantify something like that, and does it really matter?
A loose team will undoubtedly play better than a tight team
So team chemistry is important.
----Warner----
-------13-------
by Scent of a Woman on Feb 3, 2010 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
That doesn't make much sense
Will, then a team that is tight (as I am understanding it, composed of players who don’t necessarily like each other) play worse than a team that is loose (as I am understanding it, composed of players who are buddy-buddy with each other)? Since when has there been a quantifiable formula for determining how good a player is when playing with players he likes and when he plays with players who he doesn’t like?
Is Billy Wagner going to tip a ball to Pat Burrell because he doesn’t like Lastings Milledge’s attitude?
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:22 PM EST up reply actions
Well....
Is Billy Wagner going to tip a ball to Pat Burrell because he doesn’t like Lastings Milledge’s attitude?
Yes, he is.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
yeah
maybe not the best example
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
I'm not getting it. Did Billy Wagner actually tip a ball to Pat Burrell because he didn't like Lastings Milledge's attitude?
That’s news to me.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
Far too many of the important things in life cannot be measured
for us to assume that that which cannot be measured is unimportant. The answer is probably, sometimes good chemistry leads to wins, and sometimes it doesn’t.
by SeanSchirmer on Feb 4, 2010 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
How does good chemistry lead to wins?
This is the question I want answered. Is Jose Reyes going to purposefully scuttle his season- and, by proxy, his income and his career numbers- because he doesn’t like Luis Castillo as his DP partner? Is being friends with David Wright going to cause Jeff Francoeur to suddenly develop prescience, allowing him to know what pitch the pitcher is throwing, and where it’s going to land, giving him the ability to be discerning when he swings?
I don’t question the existence of clubhouse chemistry. At work, there are people that I like, and don’t like. I do question the much-repeated mantra that positive clubhouse chemistry fuels wins, and negative clubhouse chemistry leads to losses. At work, even though there are people I don’t like that I have to work with, I don’t purposefully do less paperwork when I’m in the office, or I don’t purposefully walk around with my eyes closed when I’m on patrol. In the “real world”, if that doesn’t pan out, how/why does it pan out on a baseball field, which is, in effect, just another job?
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
lets look at it this way
if you work with a bunch of assholes, and have to see them for hours on end every day, it does tend to wear you down. No matter how capable of doing your job you may be, it is taxing to constantly be around people who frustrate or anger you. Throw in the feeling that your boss is totally incompetent to the point of destroying what you’re working for at every turn. Sustaining this kind of feeling over the course of a whole baseball season (over half a year) usually in close quarters and constant contact with these people, is an exhausting prospect. While physically chemistry has no impact on how well a player CAN play the game, it can have an impact on the mental portion of the game which affects how a player DOES play the game. If you’re constantly miserable because of the people around you, it is a lot harder to focus on the task at hand. Conversely, if you enjoy the company of the people around you, it will serve to make an incredibly taxing season easier by making the experience more pleasant. We like to think of baseball players as some sort of superhuman sports playing robot, but they deal with the same workplace issues we all do, except with the increased stress of constantly being away from their homes and families.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
This
if you work with a bunch of assholes, and have to see them for hours on end every day, it does tend to wear you down. No matter how capable of doing your job you may be, it is taxing to constantly be around people who frustrate or anger you. Throw in the feeling that your boss is totally incompetent to the point of destroying what you’re working for at every turn. Sustaining this kind of feeling over the course of a whole baseball season (over half a year) usually in close quarters and constant contact with these people, is an exhausting prospect.
Now, add the media putting a camera in your face every time you screw up, and you have a recipe for fail.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
AA ?
Conversely, if you enjoy the company of the people around you, it will serve to make an incredibly taxing season easier by making the experience more pleasant.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
for us yes
but it probably doesnt help the players much.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
true that should help console them
but it doesn’t make what they deal with to get them any easier, the reward for putting up with it is just higher.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
The money just turns their wives into Real Housewives and their children into brats
Making their lives even more difficult.
Yeah I know a lot of people
talked about how the mets completely turned around in 08 after Willie was fired. I don’t think it was because Willie was that bad, cause God knows Jerry is just as bad, but because they didn’t have the constant media speculation and questions and just overall feeling of impending doom over their heads.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
It still does not add up, however, how this is quantifiable to the degree that it generates wins and/or losses.
Like I said, I don’t question that it exists; it does. There are always people you like, and always people you don’t like. Unless the entire team is composed of people you can’t stand, or if the manager is always making stupid decisions (alright, with Jerry, this is possible), or the GM is constantly shooting the team- and, by proxy, you- in the foot by making bone headed moves (again, Omar, possible), I don’t see how the phenomenon has a meaningful impact on an entire game, and an entire season. Like Super Mario said, maybe it adds +0.1 WAR, or 0.1 WAR to a player’s performance, if even, in total. Add to the mix that personal feelings are variable and mutable I might not like you now, but might like you later, or he might like him, but not as much as he likes this other guy.
All in all, I see it akin to the butterfly effect.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:51 PM EST up reply actions
God damn strike out!
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:51 PM EST up reply actions
phantom strikethrough strikes again!
I agree the effect of chemistry probably isn’t huge, but lets say everyone is miserable and it knocks .1 WAR off of everyone on average, thats still -2.5 WAR right there. A decrease of .2 WAR for everyone and thats 5 off the top. A players WAR changing by that little doesn’t seem like much, but if it is endemic, it becomes a problem. Now in a situation where the ownership and management is inept, treats their players poorly (usually by forgetting they exist) this number could be larger. I don’t think it has a huge impact on any one player, but a subtle effect on each player that cumulatively hurts the team.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Not everyone is miserable, and not everyone is the same amount of miserable.
Those total amounts of misery are countered by those players who are happy, to varying degrees (take the Jeff Francoeur’s, or the Alex Cora’s of the team, with their lots of undeserved money). Everything is mutable to the nth degree, at all points in time- before the game, during the top of the 1st inning, during the bottom of the 4th, during the 7th inning stretch, after the game, the plane ride home- that’s where I feel saying that it has an impact (even a minute one) runs into problems.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
its immeasurable because it fluctuates so much
but its something i believe is there. I think if the net happiness of the team is negative, you’ll see a slight dip in WAR over most of the team. I don’t think it accounts for more than a win or two over the course of the season, but my guess is it does matter
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 5:27 PM EST up reply actions
I mean, if someone slides hard into your shortstop you drill him in the head when he comes to bat.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
Or if someone hits Wright in the head with a fastball, you empty the dugout.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
Yeah that worked really well on the last Saturday of 2007
by James Kannengieser on Feb 4, 2010 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
It sure did.
The Marlins came out and really kicked some ass on Sunday.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Feb 4, 2010 10:27 AM EST up reply actions
yeah we really got them fired up
it was inspirational
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
that wasn't really a brawl.
nobody threw a punch, plus there wasn’t any season left to build anything.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
Yeah, but...
Obviously Syler knows more about the Mets clubhouse than Cliff Floyd does.
I mean, they both lived through it, right?
How can Omar assemble a roster of players that will fight for eachother?
Give everyone personality tests? Request that all prospective Mets create a match.com profile?
Chemistry, IMO, is mostly a product of winning and not the other way around. I’m not saying it’s not important at all, but it’s pretty obvious the Mets problems go way beyond that.
lie detector tests?
scrap spring training and force them to do team exercises like climbing mountains and walking over hot coals?
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
The falling test where they have to catch each other!!!
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 10:05 PM EST up reply actions
"...but it’s pretty obvious the Mets problems go way beyond that."
This covers it. Good chemistry isn’t going to turn Daniel Murphy into a slugging 1Bman, make Luis castillo 28 again, make the medical staff adept at treating injuries, assemble a solid rotation, or render the FO capable of picking up fifth OFers and backup MIers who can actually contribute positive value to the club.
To me, if I were to make the lamest attempt ever at quantifying it,
a team of good chemistry would add like .1 WAR (arbitrary number) to some players and a team of bad chemistry will subtract .1 WAR from some players. It could be the difference between someone being super focused in the field and therefore just barely making a diving catching in the outfield one day, or it being a double (which would then add to his UZR rating). To throw out team chemistry as a factor at all seems a bit extreme, but to say it counts for everything seems extreme. I think it probably effects the peripheral/bench guys the most, more so than the guys that are going to be awesome no matter what.
Travis Hafner is made of gold
no matter what job it is
you will do it better if you’re loose, happy, and like the people you work with…
when people apply this to baseball though everyone gets all pissy for some reason
Goodbye Sir Dr. Sen. Brain SOCKS! D.D.S.R.S.V.P
That's not always the case.
Some people work better when they are mad or are just miserable. I tended to play better basketball when I was pissed off at something, even if it wasone of my teammates. I’ve also been on teams where everybody liked each other and had fun, but the general focus of the group was lacking. What they think of each other isn’t nearly as what type of environment is needed to get the most focused performance out of a player.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 2:21 PM EST up reply actions
It's true, there was a study a few years ago
that showed that depressed people were more productive. Obviously, it would have been mildly depressed people, not incapacitated people.
I’ll bet our mets qualify as mildly depressed right now, so maybe this is good news!
I disagree
There are people at work that I don’t get along with. That doesn’t change how I go about doing my job, however, nor does it change the way that other person goes about doing their job. If half of the team doesn’t like the other half of the team (arbitrary numbers), why is that going to affect how they go out and do their job?
You’re a student, so maybe this analogy is more easily agreeable: In class, you don’t like another student. You have to do a group project, and among the people in your group is that kid. Are you going to be antisocial, and contribute in a meaningless way, or even attempt to sabotage the group, because you don’t like that other kid?
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
not consciously
but honestly, if the two of you really have problems, your group’s project is almost definitely going to suffer as a result. A group where everyone in it is on the same page will produce a better work product than a group that has some tension. They don’t even necessarily have to “get along” or be best friends, but they have to be united in a common goal and really desire to help each other reach that goal.
Now, obviously, if you put 5 brilliant chemists together who had some problems and weren’t the best at working with each other, they’d probably still come up with a better chemical work product than 5 chemistry students at podunck community college who worked fantastically as a group. Talent outweighs chemistry.
But a group of 5 brilliant chemists who work well together will most likely put out a better work product than 5 similarly brilliant chemists who don’t work well together.
2009 Did Not Happen
The chemists part, that's a good analogy, I think.
These guys are professionals, like those world class chemists. Instead of decoding how the universe works, these guys are playing ball. Like those chemists, their livelihood is to play baseball. Like those chemists, their financial situation depends on how good they play and how good their team does (the second part, to a degree- see Alex Cora, for example). Like those chemists, how they are viewed in the annals of history depends on how good they play, and how good their team does (the second part, to a degree- see Phil Rizutto, for example). That a player consciously- I’ll give you unconsciously, to a degree- plays worse, or, at the very least, doesn’t give their personal game 100% just doesn’t compute in my mind.
Most people who bring up chemistry- and, I’m not accusing you, or anybody else here specifically of saying things like this- bring up the concept of chemistry as in some phenomenon that, because it is perceived that X doesn’t like Y, at some point in the season, X purposely sabotages his own production, and the team’s ability to win.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough - I've never believed players do things intentionally b/c of bad chemistry
outside of very, very rare circumstances maybe. I don’t know, whenever I talk about team chemistry, I always assume that it’s little things, like maybe if a guys teammates aren’t working out as hard, he won’t work out as hard and won’t reach his full potential. Or if his whole team sucks, he might press a bit and not do as well overall (coughDavidWright’s2009cough), and little things like that. And if guys don’t get along and don’t really want to be with each other, they won’t necessarily be worse, but they won’t help each other get better, if that makes sense.
Thousands of years of human history have shown that we’re better when working in groups than we are working alone. I think that has to have at least a small effect on a baseball team (albeit much smaller than on, say, a football or basketball team where teamwork is so much more essential.
2009 Did Not Happen
I agree
but when you’re talking about a team who missed the playoffs by one game on the last day of the season in back-to-back years, maybe the tiny negative impact of chemistry did play a role.
2009 Did Not Happen
not true, good chemistry turned the likes of Bonds into one of the most prolific sluggers ever
we just need better chemists and the possibilities are endless.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
As to his tone
It certainly didn’t help that Francessa was literally schoolgirl smitten for Floyd.
I wish he threw Jerry under the bus too.
It was Jerry’s decision to send him up there in Game 7 after all, right?
agree 100%
I still remember throwing shit around the house and screaming that we just lost the game.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
there's enough blame to go around
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
If someone went up to bunt, as is much bemoaned, we still would have lost, albeit by one run instead of two.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
you can't say that, because maybe Wainwright would have pitched different
fatass Molina would have called a different sequence.
you know what I'm sayin' ?
Wrong Molina; Yadier really isn't that fat.
He’s a dumbass, because of what he did to us, but not a fatass, I’ll give him that much.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
He's also really good at baseball related things
unlike the one we wanted
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
If there's ever a time I needed someone to win a hot dog eating contest
Bengie is the one I’d want. Sorry Yadier. Everything else, though, Yadier. Though, he’s the type of player that, if we acquired him, I wouldn’t cheer against him, but I wouldn’t like, just on principle of what he did to us. The same stance I took on Heilman- I didn’t want to root against him, and boo him, but I never saw him the same again.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:42 PM EST up reply actions
We could have sent somebody else with two good legs to the plate though, right?
There must have been someone on our bench besides Floyd and Anderson Hernandez.
by Andrew McCarthy on Feb 3, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
Michael Tucker?
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
Yeah, there really wasn't anyone else...
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
so was that the only time in Jerry's baseball career
he didn’t want a player to bunt?
2009 Did Not Happen
Does that explain why he always bunts now?
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
Totally agree with Syler
I loved Cliff as a player, but this is nothing more than a former player trying to get his name in the news because he’s looking for a job.
Self-serving? Check. "I got the guys to believe in what I was saying, and everything was positive… They bought in to it." OK, Cliff.
Passing the buck? Check. "And I thought about bunting anyway, it crossed my mind." First of all, what kind of player wants to bunt in a huge spot like that (even when it’s the right play)? I thought part of what makes players great and different from regular guys like us is their desire to/confidence in getting the job done. But because he didn’t come through there, it’s Willie’s fault.
Ignorance about baseball? Check. “Floyd told Omar Minaya – at the time – that Cameron and Carlos Beltran could not co-exist in the same outfield, because the two never communicated and played so aggressively” Yeah, what a terrible idea to have two great defensive outfielders playing together. I can’t see how that would work. Amazing how Cliff only points this out well after the fact, and points to some fluke collision as “proof” that he’s right.
see i read it differently
I never cared as much for Cliff of the glass body as everyone else (mostly bc of the injuries and the silly feud with Bobby V), but nothing he says here bothers me much.
Also, to other posters, there’s a difference between saying you can’t measure something and that it doesn’t exist. And saying that talent is more important and denying “chemistry” any effect at all. You can’t prove there is no such thing as chemistry. And since the players believe in it, denying it doesn’t seem like a strong position to take.
As for the “ignorance”: They were two great centerfielders playing together. Maybe the near collision and devastating collision are just data points, but they sure are big data points. This seems entirely plausible to me.
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
I don't have as much issue with him bringing up chemistry as much as him assuming things
He claims to know the Mets have chemistry issues, but he hasn’t been on the team in four years, so I really don’t see how he could know that.
well I dunno either
but maybe davie boy is using Floyd to communicate some of his thoughts about the chem from under that massive helmet.
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
He said he talk to current players
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
David Wright's his boy
Floyd groomed Wright when he came up and they are tight. I’m sure its Wright who says the club house has no chemistry. Maybe because they look at him to be the captain of a team he can’t communicate with? Or the added pressure of answering the Media everynight while others don’t.
Wouldn't it be up to the coaching staff
to make sure their OFers are communicating. To notice it’s any issue and correct it? Seems elementary.
that's assuming the Mets had a competent coaching staff
which, I believe the last 4 years have proven, they don’t
2009 Did Not Happen
I'm not sure that's entirely true
you can probably quantify the increase in hormone production that comes with it.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Nihilism, my friend.
Nothing exists (possibly)!
Love can very much be quantified by science, however. The sensation might change from person to person, but that reverts, then, to the argument of the inverted spectrum.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Geez
I read this too fast and thought you referred to an “inverted scrotum.”
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Feb 4, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
That'd be a messed up argument...
I know I, for one, would not feel comfortable talking about that one…
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
No, oxytocin, for example, is a bonding hormone, not an attraction hormone
Mole rats, who mate for life at like 99%, produce extremely high levels of oxytocin. And bonded people produce more oxytocin, though not at the rate of mole rats.
Ohhh!
someone just dropped some endocrinology knowledge on you all.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 8:35 PM EST up reply actions
We know the team, as a whole, produces low levels of grissitionium.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 10:31 PM EST up reply actions
Well he didn't say they couldn't play together because they were too good
but because they never communicated. That seems like a pretty big deal when you’re talking about guys who cover so much ground and go after so many balls. It seems like a perfectly justified concern.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Well he says he knew this before the Mets tried it
So how could he know they wouldn’t communicate before they ever played together?
by Bieser's Balk on Feb 3, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
that part could be kind of bs
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
If he was so concerned, he should've said something...
I know, when I see my sister doing stupid things that might result in some kind of physical/emotional pain, I speak up.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 3, 2010 9:27 PM EST up reply actions
I think this is my favorite part.
Floyd said it took him up until the last year or so to realize a team definitely needs veteran players to help show the team’s young players how to approach the game, every night, in the right way.
So once he was no longer good and only had value as a “veteran leader” he realized that that was important and that he deserved a spot on a major league roster.
I’m just joking, kind of. I still like Cliff.
cant we all just get along?
the man who stands up and says the chemistry of a team has zero effect on how they play is just as stupid as the man who stands up and says that statistics are irrelevant when putting a team together.
can also apply to women.
It was kind of dumb
He was telling Francesca what he wanted to hear. But arrogant and ignorant? I didn’t get that at all.
yup chicks dig statistics
or maybe thats the long ball… i never remember which it is. Also if you’re gathering yourself teams of women, I want to know your secret. Does WAR actually mean women against replacement?
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 5, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
This echoes my opinion.
I like Cliff, and still do. But…
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 4, 2010 4:23 PM EST up reply actions



























