2020 Red Sox Thread

[Donoghus]

Manfred had to strip the Astros title and if the Sox did similar things, needs to strip that one as well.  You can't have teams sitting there with a title that was earned in a season that they knowingly and blatantly cheated especially in the post season.  Just not a good look.

Also, not a great look dropping the penalty the morning of the College Football National Championship game.  Trying to bury the story never goes well.

Do we strip the titles of all teams with players who used steroids?

No.  Not anywhere near the same thing.

'89 A's win the World Series without steroids?

Steroids weren't actually banned in 1989 by the MLB.  They didn't hit the banned substance list until 1991, but weren't actually tested until 2003 and weren't actually a suspendable offense until 2005 after the 2003 and 2004 testing showed greater than a certain level of players were using them.  So even assuming that the A's were the only team using steroids in 1989 (which is an absolutely ridiculous assumption), the answer to your question is who cares, they weren't banned.

That's wonderful.  Now do the '09 Yankees.

Kidding aside, the larger point of the matter is the absolute silliness of trying to "strip" team titles after the fact by coming up with some arbitrary line of what constitutes serious enough cheating to strip.

Punish the team in the present.  "Stripping" titles doesn't do anything.  Is the team going to have to give back all the "economic benefit" they received from the title run?  Are we going to have to retroactively remember what happened in a different way?  Of course not, its a absolute joke.

MLB though this was a serious enough offense to suspend the GM and Manager for a year, strip 1st and 2nd round draft picks in consecutive years, and fine them 5 million dollars.  That isn't just a slap on the wrist.  It isn't the death penalty, but it is serious.  They should have stripped the title as well.  Still happened, but no banners, can't refer to themselves as champs, etc.  They didn't suspend the players involved at all, which to me says because it was team sponsored it was thought of as a much bigger deal.  If a team was running a team sponsored steroid program, I'd put that on a similar level, though I do think that "cheating" is less because I do think it has much less correlation to actual on field results.  I guarantee you that a player would get far more benefit out of knowing what pitch was coming then taking steroids.  And to be clear I'm not suggesting that steroids don't help, they do, but their help is much more off the field than on (in both recovery and strength training).  Now that gets a player on the field faster, longer, and with more power, but they still have to put in the work.  Knowing what pitch is coming has way more on field benefit than being a bit stronger/faster or recovering from an injury quicker.

And why keep mentioning teams like the A's or Yankees and not the Red Sox.  I mean David Ortiz tested positive in 2003.  Why not rule out every Red Sox championship team he was on?  Or are those exceptions because it was Boston?  So between Ortiz (and I'm sure others on those teams) and Cora's sign stealing, Boston still hasn't won a WS title since 1918 by those requirements.

As with all things the level and degree matter.  I just don't see steroids as anywhere near the same level of benefit as illegal sign stealing.  You can feel free to disagree, I just don't think they are similar at all.

Because I'm actually not worked up about the '89 A's or the '09 Yankees nor the Red Sox or anyone else about this.  Although, now I'd love to know where David Ortiz hurt you.

It's the ridiculousness of stripping titles after the fact.  It's silly and doesn't really solve anything.  Absolutely hammer them in the present & going forward. Punish them.  Trying to change the past doesn't really solve anything, though.  You gonna hand the '17 title to the Dodgers? Then, what, they'll have a parade and banner raising ceremony?  It's a joke. 

[Moranis]

Manfred had to strip the Astros title and if the Sox did similar things, needs to strip that one as well.  You can't have teams sitting there with a title that was earned in a season that they knowingly and blatantly cheated especially in the post season.  Just not a good look.

Also, not a great look dropping the penalty the morning of the College Football National Championship game.  Trying to bury the story never goes well.

Do we strip the titles of all teams with players who used steroids?

No.  Not anywhere near the same thing.

'89 A's win the World Series without steroids?

Steroids weren't actually banned in 1989 by the MLB.  They didn't hit the banned substance list until 1991, but weren't actually tested until 2003 and weren't actually a suspendable offense until 2005 after the 2003 and 2004 testing showed greater than a certain level of players were using them.  So even assuming that the A's were the only team using steroids in 1989 (which is an absolutely ridiculous assumption), the answer to your question is who cares, they weren't banned.

That's wonderful.  Now do the '09 Yankees.

Kidding aside, the larger point of the matter is the absolute silliness of trying to "strip" team titles after the fact by coming up with some arbitrary line of what constitutes serious enough cheating to strip.

Punish the team in the present.  "Stripping" titles doesn't do anything.  Is the team going to have to give back all the "economic benefit" they received from the title run?  Are we going to have to retroactively remember what happened in a different way?  Of course not, its a absolute joke.

MLB though this was a serious enough offense to suspend the GM and Manager for a year, strip 1st and 2nd round draft picks in consecutive years, and fine them 5 million dollars.  That isn't just a slap on the wrist.  It isn't the death penalty, but it is serious.  They should have stripped the title as well.  Still happened, but no banners, can't refer to themselves as champs, etc.  They didn't suspend the players involved at all, which to me says because it was team sponsored it was thought of as a much bigger deal.  If a team was running a team sponsored steroid program, I'd put that on a similar level, though I do think that "cheating" is less because I do think it has much less correlation to actual on field results.  I guarantee you that a player would get far more benefit out of knowing what pitch was coming then taking steroids.  And to be clear I'm not suggesting that steroids don't help, they do, but their help is much more off the field than on (in both recovery and strength training).  Now that gets a player on the field faster, longer, and with more power, but they still have to put in the work.  Knowing what pitch is coming has way more on field benefit than being a bit stronger/faster or recovering from an injury quicker.

And why keep mentioning teams like the A's or Yankees and not the Red Sox.  I mean David Ortiz tested positive in 2003.  Why not rule out every Red Sox championship team he was on?  Or are those exceptions because it was Boston?  So between Ortiz (and I'm sure others on those teams) and Cora's sign stealing, Boston still hasn't won a WS title since 1918 by those requirements.

As with all things the level and degree matter.  I just don't see steroids as anywhere near the same level of benefit as illegal sign stealing.  You can feel free to disagree, I just don't think they are similar at all.

Because I'm actually not worked up about the '89 A's or the '09 Yankees nor the Red Sox or anyone else about this.  Although, now I'd love to know where David Ortiz hurt you.

It's the ridiculousness of stripping titles after the fact.  It's silly and doesn't really solve anything.  Absolutely hammer them in the present & going forward. Punish them.  Trying to change the past doesn't really solve anything, though.  You gonna hand the '17 title to the Dodgers? Then, what, they'll have a parade and banner raising ceremony?  It's a joke.

No, I wouldn't give the title to the Dodgers.  I just would have no listed champion for that year or the following year if the Red Sox had similar conduct.   

[ozgod]

The Houston cheating was described as "player driven" act and yet MLB gave complete immunity to the players and only went after the coaches because they were supposed to know better and stop what was going on. In truth, many on the Houston player roster deserved to be punished as much as the team and it's managers.

My guess is it is the same across the league with player's pushing the stealing of signs, in all sorts of different manners but MLB can't put their national television contracts or exceptional attendence in major television markets at risk by also suspending players, so the players slide even though the cheating originates and is driven by the players.

I guess the other reason is that some of the players are now with other teams and the owners of those teams probably made it very clear to Manfred they wouldn't appreciate losing players for offenses those players committed while with Houston. So in a way they're getting off scot free.

[Donoghus]

The Houston cheating was described as "player driven" act and yet MLB gave complete immunity to the players and only went after the coaches because they were supposed to know better and stop what was going on. In truth, many on the Houston player roster deserved to be punished as much as the team and it's managers.

My guess is it is the same across the league with player's pushing the stealing of signs, in all sorts of different manners but MLB can't put their national television contracts or exceptional attendence in major television markets at risk by also suspending players, so the players slide even though the cheating originates and is driven by the players.

I guess the other reason is that some of the players are now with other teams and the owners of those teams probably made it very clear to Manfred they wouldn't appreciate losing players for offenses those players committed while with Houston.

CBA is up after 2021.  Things already are pretty contentious.  p---ing off the player's union with a bunch of suspensions certainly wouldn't help matters.

[ozgod]

Will be interesting to see what the Mets do with Beltran. Imagine having to fire your new manager a month from spring training and you didn't even benefit from what he did 

[Donoghus]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

[Fafnir]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

They're going to have to get secure headsets for pitchers and catchers in the end, same sort of stuff the NFL did.

[Donoghus]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

They're going to have to get secure headsets for pitchers and catchers in the end, same sort of stuff the NFL did.

I wouldn't want to be working in advertising for MLB right now trying to sell the game.

[nickagneta]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

They're going to have to get secure headsets for pitchers and catchers in the end, same sort of stuff the NFL did.

Does that mean managers have to call every pitch and pitchers do not get to wave off pitches called because how does the catcher verbally alert the pitcher of what pitch to throw without the batter hearing?

If technology is used for the pitcher and defense, does that mean that the opposing team gets to communicate directly to the batter and players on base? Gotta be fair to both sides after all.

I don't know. I think it best to keep technology out of the game, with the exceptions being replay and maybe in the future, a computer calling balls and strikes with a set strike zone.

[Donoghus]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

They're going to have to get secure headsets for pitchers and catchers in the end, same sort of stuff the NFL did.

Does that mean managers have to call every pitch and pitchers do not get to wave off pitches called because how does the catcher verbally alert the pitcher of what pitch to throw without the batter hearing?

If technology is used for the pitcher and defense, does that mean that the opposing team gets to communicate directly to the batter and players on base? Gotta be fair to both sides after all.

I don't know. I think it best to keep technology out of the game, with the exceptions being replay and maybe in the future, a computer calling balls and strikes with a set strike zone.

They're gonna need an MLB security force to monitor clubhouses and hallways during games. Heck,  they're gonna have to pat down these players & run them through detectors the rate this is going

[nickagneta]

So Beltran steps down as Mets manager in another domino.

Also, some crazy reports that Astros players were wearing buzzers as part of their scheme. Wild stuff.

They're going to have to get secure headsets for pitchers and catchers in the end, same sort of stuff the NFL did.

Does that mean managers have to call every pitch and pitchers do not get to wave off pitches called because how does the catcher verbally alert the pitcher of what pitch to throw without the batter hearing?

If technology is used for the pitcher and defense, does that mean that the opposing team gets to communicate directly to the batter and players on base? Gotta be fair to both sides after all.

I don't know. I think it best to keep technology out of the game, with the exceptions being replay and maybe in the future, a computer calling balls and strikes with a set strike zone.

They're gonna need an MLB security force to monitor clubhouses and hallways during games. Heck,  they're gonna have to pat down these players & run them through detectors the rate this is going

Baseball, more than any other sport, has ingrained in it's game, a culture of cheating that is encouraged to get ahead.

Corking bats. Doctoring balls. Stealing signs. Steroids. Greenies. Spiking players with slides(technically not cheating but kinda is and is seriously frowned upon as "dirty").

And that cheating culture has caused two of the biggest betting scandals in all of sports with the BlackSox and Pete Rose incidents.

The MLB might be able to limit technology sign stealing and PED cheating but the culture of cheating in the game is still going to try to find other ways of getting that advantage. It's, sadly, a part of the game.

[Roy H.]

I totally buy the “buzzer” conspiracy theory.  I mean, Altuve was hyper-aware of not taking his jersey off due to being “shy”?

https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2020/1/16/21069254/astros-buzzers-sign-stealing-accusations-mlb-scandal



He doesn’t seem all that shy, but what do I know?

[johnnygreen]

There is a big difference between stealing signs through natural observation, but it’s a totally different thing when you add technology to the equation. Now that we know how the Houston Astros were cheating, I’m seeing all these Youtube videos highlighting at bats, where we hear the cans being hit for off speed pitches and nothing for fastballs. How did the home plate umpire or the opposing teams catcher, pitcher or manager not pick up on this during games? I guess I could see the opposing team not saying anything, if their doing the same thing or a variation of it, and don’t want to also lose that competitive advantage. However, there is no excuse for the home plate umpire, who should know the difference between a fastball and off speed pitch. In addition, I believe umpires are part of a crew that calls games together, but will rotate positions. Don’t these guys talk to each other and pick on cues? Or was it simply everyone involved in MLB knew what was happening but didn’t do anything until now because it wasn’t made public?

[libermaniac]

I totally buy the “buzzer” conspiracy theory.  I mean, Altuve was hyper-aware of not taking his jersey off due to being “shy”?

https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2020/1/16/21069254/astros-buzzers-sign-stealing-accusations-mlb-scandal



He doesn’t seem all that shy, but what do I know?

Dude, that's not Altuve.  But, I agree that his excuse is laughable.