Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Junior's 6:15 Cliff Lee HSO Was, as Always, Trenchant, but I Like My Cliff Lee Theory Better

Which is that Cliff Lee went to the Phillies because what he really wants to do, really, is hit.

13 comments:

Scott said...

Hmm, Junior had a decent thought, and, Plainsman, he may want to hit, I would.

But, with that lineup, I think it is more that he wants to win championships. With his ability, potentially reduced spotlight stress, and the support around him, he could make a very good name for himself, big record book potential.

I know I would have no interest in playing that team in a playoff series. But, I am glad we did not go that deep to get him.

BUT, I have great fear that we could lose prospects to get someone else. That has been my one thought that overpaying may be ok. IMHO, spending the extra money may have been worth it to keep prospects.

P1 Steven said...

Lets remember. The Rangers get two compensation picks for Cliff Lee signing elsewhere. I have no problem trading prospects for proven talent. People almost always over rate their team's prospects.

Anonymous said...

What was Junior's HSO regarding Cliff Lee? I wasn't able to tune in this morning.

The Plainsman said...

Craig opined that Cliff Lee pulled a LeBron -- going to a team where he would not be the primary hope of the franchise, but where he would be one of several certified superstars.

He also made a dollars-and-cents point: At five years, he'd be finishing his contract at a time where he might have the opportunity for one more payday.

I still like my theory that he really wants to be a slugger.

I've read that Dizzy Dean, when he was doing the Saturday game of the week with Pee Wee Reese, used to talk about what great hitters pitchers were.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the recap, Plainsman.

Anonymous said...

The 5 years point definitely doesn't stand up since he easily could have gotten 5 years from TX or NY (in fact he was demanding quite the opposite, 7 years, for them to stay in the game). Either of these organizations would have preferred a 5 year deal.

Christy said...

I think the 5 years theory is plausible. Cliff wouldn't sign with the Rangers for 5 years, but he would sign with the Phillys for 5 years. Philadelphia has something (a good specialist for his kid that has leukemia, the team itself, being able to hit, etc) that made up for the lack of years. Texas (and NY) would have had to make up for their lack of those qualities with guranteed years (7 in Texas's case), and the team wouldn't commit to those terms.

We'll see in 5 years if he's still a dominant pitcher. If he's rocking at age 39 like Andy Petite is at age 38, he'll get to play this free agency game again, and he might actually get paid this time.

Christy said...

Off topic.

I wish Mike Sirois was a better debator to offset Norm's points. One of the reasons why I miss Friedo (or even Bacsik) is that he was such a strong arguer. Sirois's delivery and persona seem similar to a Corby (or a Ben and Skin) in that he's more emotional when presenting his points and sorta slangy when he delivers them. He doesn't always have the eloquence to present his points although the idea itself is valid. But Norm can tear someone down for not being specific enough any day.

Part of the appeal of Norm's show is arguing with him. I don't mean making him go off on a caller. But sometimes Norm comes off as an antagonist with odd sports points that he's ridiculously passionate about and it's easy to root for someone - his producer - to come up with a good, solid, and valid argument to battle him.

Anonymous said...

Christy,

I couldn't agree more. Norm has the annoying habit of playing amateur lawyer. And he does it rather poorly too boot. For example, when he is out-argued, he'll continue to change his argument until he can get the caller or whomever to "agree" with him--that is he'll say something to the effect of "see you're saying what I'm saying." That's poor form and inconsistent. I like Norm, a lot. But the lawyer act does get to be a bit much at times. It's opinions about sports; stats or not, it's a very subjective enterprise--and not nearly as objective as Norm seems to think.

ap said...

I couldn't agree with you more, Anonymous. Norm's habit of changing an argument in an attempt to devalue a caller's original point is infuriating to the point where I often hit fast-forward. In its purest form, I find that this song and dance follows either one of two paths:

1) The caller refuses to be moved off of his platform, in which case a 'Norm Blowup' occurs and I run to repost it

2) The caller attempts to argue his point semi-logically with Norm, at which point Norm uses extreme examples of the callers' original argument that back him/her into a logical corner, and if they refuse to give in, they get hung up on. Attempts by the caller to prevent this from occurring are usually talked/yelled over by Norm.

I enjoy the addition of Mike Sirois to the show because (a) Norm can't hang up on or talk over him, (b) Mike tends to gravitate towards and argue for opposing viewpoints that line up with my own, (c) Mike will prevent Norm from going on long, rehearsed soliloquies, and (d) Mike is funny and draws the rest of the crew (Sean, Jer, Mike Marshall) into the show.

I've also heard Norm vehemently argue specific sports points at the beginning of a season (i.e. why the Cowboys should stop trying to involve Tashard Choice in the RB rotation), and later in this season, he'll completely change his stance on the matter. Of course, it's his prerogative to change his mind, but he'll conveniently forget that he held the opposite viewpoint only months earlier, especially when dealing with callers.

All that said, I find the man is at his finest during the postgame show, and one cannot dispute the work he does for his charitable causes. Which is why I'll be tuned into the Norm-a-thon.

The Plainsman said...

This has been an interesting thread, even if off topic.

I posted some time ago that Norm's position on the Cowboys/Wade Phillips was incomprehensible -- I mean that literally. It could not be understood. If a caller criticized Phillips, Norm would say "Was he a bad coach when they were 13-3?" (Two answers: Either "yes, and the 13-3 was momentum from Parcells," or "no, but he got worse as time went by." Norm seems to think that the only answer was: "No, so therefore he's not bad now." He would say that you can't coach turnovers and you can't coach avlidance of penalties -- but of course, you can, as became immediately apparent when there was a coaching change.

You guys take the position that Norm likes to argue, which I hadn't considered and which I think I like better than the position I was starting to come to, which was:. Norm is encyclopedically knowledgeable, but is really is not that perceptive a sports analyst. Which is why I've asked how he does with his gambling. Maybe slightly better than darts, but not much, I'll bet.

P1 Steven said...

Norm has been a staple for me for YEARS. When he was on KLIF in the early mornings, my father was (and still is) a loyal listener. So, I was raised listening to Norm, but I doubt that I would be as loyal IF I had just recently discovered him. He just rakes on you, it seems like he beats a dead horse on a variety of topics. Steriods, A College FB playoff, horse racing. I tend to listen to only 1/2 of Norm's shows. I will say, he (or his intern) is great at returning emails.

Christy said...

Still haven't read the actual topic, and I was scanning through again (I'll comment on your post idea as soon as I re-read it. HAHA on the being POSITIVE jab. I know, I know.) and had to respond:

I actually don't like WTDS (said so here). I agree it's a lot of noise. I'm one of those P1s who listen to almost everything because it's on The Ticket and what's on is almost always better than what else is on (although I'll at some point want to post something about lately enjoying The Ben and Skin show right before Norm gets going).

HOWEVER, I'm still waiting on this much-teased about STD (Scorching Ticket Dish - your own catchphrase) on WTDS that you've promised since at least this summer.