Contest Time: Get Your Goosey On
April 20, 2010Twins 5 Indians 1: Cabrera’s Error The Game Changer
April 21, 2010While We’re Waiting serves as the early morning gathering of WFNY-esque information for your viewing pleasure. Have something you think we should see? Send it to our tips email at tips@waitingfornextyear.com
An ode to Rafy: “I’ve never felt the angst that others do about Raffy. This is one instance where I don’t feel “Why us?!?” but instead just shrug my shoulders. I don’t think Perez is all that unique in the context of baseball at large: many relievers, young and old, go from great to bad in short periods of time. Perez existed in some pretty elite company but it’s not a club that you’re not allowed to leave. He comps decently to Guillermo Mota, JJ Putz, and, especially, Brad Lidge. Relievers’ inherent volatility is well-trod territory: part of it’s the nature of the work and part of it’s the nature of the kind of pitcher that gets pulled into the job. By the former, I mean that relievers are constantly either benefiting from or being snakebit by the size of their samples. A reliever can have a horrible multi-year stretch because he loses his release point for a number of innings that would be a blip for a starter. What I mean by the type of pitchers that become relievers can be best expressed through the lens of Rafael Perez.” [Lets Go Tribe]
—
Mike Tirico can’t help but laugh when discussing the Browns, but he had some help. [Deadspin]
—
But how’s his motor? “Of course, a big part of [Eric] Mangini’s remarkable turnaround of the Browns’ locker room had a lot to do with his deposing personality disorders like Braylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow and Shaun Smith in favor of team-first guys in [Tim] Tebow’s mold. Here, we have to be at least intrigued by the chance that Tebow’s a game changer here, the kind of guy who can’t help but rub off on everyone around him in a positive way; a locker room anchor right out of Mangini’s wildest dreams.” [Cleveland Frowns]
—
Giving Noah a run for his money: “Over the last 15 years, there have been plenty of people that Clevelanders have disliked. Some of them are athletes and some of them are a former owner who moved the most beloved team in town to another city. They all have their arguments, but without further ado, here are the top ten most hated sports icons of the last 15 years…” [Cleveland Hope]
—
And finally, who provides the NFL with better professional football players: Michigan or Ohio State? [Thunder Treats]
**
A special congrats to “Wine and Gold” for winning the Cavaliers-Bulls Haiku contest from last night. Please email me your information (scott [at] waitingfornextyear [dot] com) and I will pass it along to the awesome guys at Fresh Brewed Tees. Thank you all for participating – we will have another one soon!
27 Comments
“Plight of Perez”
My first thought: ‘Which one?’
Dilfer dealt it. See how he used that lean to emphasize what he was saying about Holmgren, and then he stayed there once he was done? He was trying to squeeze it out quietly. Whoops!
I don’t know about that Cleveland Hope list, though. Most of them aren’t icons, and any list like that without Hines Ward isn’t legit in my opinion.
today honestly feels like x-mas eve…I can’t wait to kick back in my recliner with a beer and watch this draft. If they’re going to take Tebow fine, I’m not going to fight it anymore, I just want tomorrow to be here!
On Tebow – If there is one thing the Cavs from last year taught us it’s that locker room chemistry trumps talent every time! No? Oh.
@2
That Cleveland Hope list definitely skew a little too recent. As the commenter over there said, No Albert Belle?
How can Noah be that high after like two years of dumb comments, and yet there are zero Steelers on the list.
@Clown Baby: Nobody’s saying that talent isn’t important too, but it’s worth noting how different football and basketball are with respect to the talent/chemistry spectrum.
AS A CHEMIST IT IS CLEAR TO ME THAT BASEBALL PUTS THE BIGGEST EMPHASIS ON CHEMISTRY AND MORE SPECIFICALLY BIOCHEMISTRY OF STEROIDAL COMPOUNDS IN THE HUMAN BODY AND THEIR EFFECTS ON HOMERUN HITTABILITY.
Your argument is invalid.
The Browns don’t need any holy warriors the same way they don’t need distractions like Winslow and Edwards.
I didn’t know where this comment fit but felt obligated to make it, so I’m adding it here:
Does anybody else think it’s ridiculous that ESPN could fabricate the McNabb wanting TO in Washington story, just to break the story a few days later that McNabb never said anything like that and Washington has no interest in TO? Have some damn integrity for a change and check your sources before passing lies off as truth.
in favor of team-first guys in [Tim] Tebow’s mold … a locker room anchor
/throws up in mouth
I am going to explode with laughter if someone takes Tebow in the first 2 rounds – maybe even the third. Unless it is us…then I will explode with tears of unfathomable sadness.
@Denny, http://imgur.com/HkxnH.jpg
YOUR argument is invalid
I’m only going on the WFNY excerpt, here, but team chemistry cannot be undersold on account of the Cavs. Without team chemistry, they might not have made it to the ECF.
funny article by the UM fan trying to “prove” UM is better in the NFL by putting subjective rankings on players and cherry picking 30 guys to match up between the schools.
he really should have broken it down into a few draft classes where we pretty much know what they will be in the NFL (for instance the 2000-2005 classes). But, that wouldn’t have supported his argument.
hey, if it worked for Al Gore to throw propaganda out there and hope it sticked, then he probably figured it would for him too. and one of these days they might win another game against those “inferior” buckeyes too.
Frowns – I know. What I’m saying is that a in basketball, chemistry is important and it still isn’t enough to overcome a discrepancy in talent. For a QB, talent is EVERYTHING.
Wasting a first day draft pick on a guy who’ll never play in the NFL because you like his attitude and work ethic is right out of the Eric Wedge mold.
You can find plenty of inspiring guys to hold the clipboard without burning a high draft pick on them.
If we want Tebow in the locker room, maybe we can hire him as a trainer.
Clown Baby and jcm,
I am open to the possibility that you have a basis for your bold positions on Tebow.
Do you know whether Tebow has the talent to play in the NFL? Identify and cite the credentials of a single person (or of yourself) who says that Tebow does not have the talent to play in the NFL.
Do you have the skill to distill a player’s leadership, team-mindedness, holier-than-thou-ness and other “intangibles” – both positive and negative – in a way that what is left behind will reliably result in performance on or success for the team that drafts him?
Identify and cite the credentials of a single person (or of yourself) who claims to have the skill to do that.
Do you have the experience to state that, for a starting QB’s impact on a team, it is faster or easier to overcome his shortfalls in leadership than his shortfalls in mechanics?
Identify and cite…
I could go on and on, not that I haven’t a little already.
/worn out by bombastic negativity about Tim Tebow
Hines Ward is a good thought but Albert Belle was right on the fringe of the time period I was using. John Elway was too long ago though. The list was meant to be the last 15 years.
Do any of you think Tebow’s positive “intangibles,” if there are any, would translate well through a role as locker-room guy or as clip-board guy? I don’t get that.
Matt#2 – Seriously? Wouldn’t it be easier for you to cite ALL the people that think Tebow is going to be good based on his abilities and not the over-hyped aspects of his character. I couldn’t care less about his beliefs…they don’t offend me nor do they make me think he’d be a good quarterback. His slow delivery, awkward motion and lack of pro-style offense do however concern me.
Matt#2, your TeBow defense has all the same flaws that you are using to attack his detractors. You are basically saying God exists because I can not prove he does not exist.
To form a credible argument you provide logical arguments, you gain little by attempting to undermine the opposition’s arguments, especially when it is all opinion based.
Swig, if you re=read my comment you will see that I am not making a claim or defense about Tebow. I see bold, take it to the bank, statements and I ask for the basis. The request is normal argumentation, and it is logical. Opinions are supposed to be based on something credible. (Had Clown Baby or jcm backed up their statements, it would not have been the first time. I took Alex to task, and Alex took me to SCHOOL on St. Patty’s day about the seemingly chronic problem Tebow has had with his motion.)
Clown Baby, “His slow delivery, awkward motion and lack of pro-style offense do however concern me.” I take it that you have no credible basis that talent is “EVERYTHING.” As I said to Swig, I am not making claims about Tebow. My observation is that you fail to support your claim. Of course, I wouldn’t make the observation if your claim wasn’t so emphatic.
Matt#2, I can only offer my opinion…and I did. For the reasons I (and many others) mentioned, I don’t want Tebow. Can I prove that my opinion is more accurate then your opinion? Well, I stated specifics and as far as I can tell your opinion seems to rest on the fact that Tebow is a good guy. So be it.
Make no mistake though, my opinion of Tebow is 100% based on Tim Tebow the football player. I have a strong suspicion that you are taking my views as some sort of veiled swipe against religion. It is sad that their are people out there (and presumably you’re one) that seem to gauge another’s moral compass on their thoughts regarding Tim Tebow. I offered up my thoughts on why I don’t want to take him (at least not in the 1st 3 rounds). If your of a different mind then so be it. But please, cool it with the inquisition.
Clown Baby,
I don’t know what I did to earn your suspicion (“a strong suspicion,” “presumably you’re one”) about what and how I think about you and others (“taking my views as some sort of veiled swipe against religion,” “gauge another’s moral compass on their thoughts regarding Tim Tebow”). That, too, is a strong opinion offered without a basis.
So far as Tebow goes, I asked you to credibly substantiate your opinion, is that an “inquisition”? Should I “cool it”? I thought your statements were strong. How about a basis besides what other people here are saying?
I have, where I have seen someone dump on Tebow the QB with reference to the publicity about his beliefs, directly questioned that commenter for clarification. And each time they responded directly back about it. Nothing veiled.
I did not think you wrote anything about his purported beliefs or the publicity about them, and I did not think your statements were based on an objection to those things.
The scouts that are getting paid to professionally evaluate Tebow and his own acknowledgment of mechanical issues (at the Senior Bowl) are good enough enough for me. I guess your opinion that he is going to be good (that flies in the face of many evaluations that I’ve seen)is much more solid and requires no citations is much more credible then mine. Fine. People’s opinions are their opinions…you can agree or disagree. I’m not changing mine because you say I’m wrong. You can not change yours because I didn’t provide enough proof where no actual proof exists (because neither of us can tell the future). Personally, I think you’re more interested in the argument than the discussion.
“The scouts” – Name one (that’s all I asked).
“your opinion that he is going to be good” – I have no such opinion.
“You can not change yours because I didn’t provide enough proof where no actual proof exists (because neither of us can tell the future)” I asked you to “Identify and cite the credentials of a single person(or of yourself)” who supports your statements. I did not ask you to do some kind of Nostradamus thing.
“Personally, I think you’re more interested in the argument than the discussion.” – I am interested in the discussion supporting a good conclusion about a topic that interests me. Thus, I am interested in separating unreliable statements from reliable statements; argumentation is a normal verbal method of doing that.
If it did not appear to me that you had intelligence and a sense of integrity, then I would not have scratched at this. There are oodles of silly things said that seem to me to be clearly jokes, simple hyperbole, or tending to betray simple prejudice or bias. I don’t bother with them.
For what it’s worth, I take you seriously.
I am content to let this rest.
From your statement “Fine. People’s opinions are their opinions…you can agree or disagree,” I take it you are content to let it rest, too.