« The tickled pinkest [Was: "On hold ..."] | Main | With a rebel yell she cried- "more, more, more" »

Oh noz. Paps gets hax'd

Well, the only sure thing is that there is no sure thing.


Yep, just when you think you've got everything locked down, here comes Travis Buck in the 9th with a little 09-F9-11-02-9D-74-E3-5B-D8-41-56-C5-63-56-88-C0.


And, bang, just like that, Papelbon's encryption is blown open up like a papier-mâché, donkey at Mexican birthday pahty.


But, really, why wait 'til then? In Boston, it's nevah too early to worry.



Nice job working in the HD-DVD encryption key.

Best medicine would be ... good outing by Beckett today and bats avoid the save situation, good outing by Matz tomorrow and Papelbon gets the save.

Ecce homo.

Papelbon is entitled to a few bad innings here and there. The ship will right itself.


Eh. One blown save. Yeah, I'm scared to death.

At least Pap's hammy is intact.

Could be worst, could be raining.

At least Paps did not blow out a hamstring. The gods must be toying with the MFY this season.

Just a moment. Baseball season's still on? I thought the season was decided on April 30th and we were discussing Moss's ability to fit in to the Patriots' Puritan, straight-and-narrow culture....

...where the head coach bangs a married woman and is now involved in divorce court proceedings.

But that's great to hear that baseball's still on because I just assumed that they give you the trophy with a 6.5 game lead with 139 games remaining.

(Or is it 5.5 with 138? I can never keep these things straight.)


That sarcasm seems totally out of place.

If anything, the daily strips of the past couple weeks along with the comments have made a very conscious effort to concede that it is still very early in the season.

Indeed, the character Arturo spent Friday basically saying the Yankees will come crashing back at some point.

So stop your fucking whining already and toughen up.

Yeah, the Patriots got Moss. Yeah, the Yankees are in last place.

Deal, dude.

Amazes me sometimes, after the years of futility and disappointment that Red Sox fans have dealt with, just how effete you Yankees fans are when things don't go your way just for a brief few weeks of a season, let alone 86 years.

//...where the head coach bangs a married woman and is now involved in divorce court proceedings.//

Jason, at least you're usually accurate.

Not in this case. Do a Google before you do a babble.

There will be five or six more of these blown saves still to come from Papelbon this year. All closers basically have the same record. They blow about 15 to 25 % of all save opportunities. The only exception is Eric Gagne, who closed 96% of all opportunities successfully. You can check the stats if you like. Rivera has blown more critical games than anyone in the history of the game. 1997 - crucial home run allowed to Sandy Alomar. Yankees lose. 2001 - throws the ball away at 2B, choking away W.S. Yankees lose. 2004 - gives Red Sox a boost in confidence allowing grand slam to Mueller, then chokes away LCS. 2007 - puts Yankees in a bind by allowing 0-2 three-run homer to a feeble Marcus Scutaro, who was 1 for 23 on the season. That's why when you have a guy that clearly could be a great starter, you don't waste him in a role that's a big crapshoot. Closers are reclamation projects. Eckersley and Gossage were both failed starters (I realize The Eck was great many years before as a starter). A few more bad games like last night and Papelbon will be ineffective in both roles. As a starter, with that kind of stuff, every time he would have taken the ball, except against Johan and maybe five other starters, you would have to think "we're gonna win tonight". This is a total waste of talent. - Paddy

I'm with paddyon this one. You can't win them all. And I'm not mad about having my ad pulled, though it hints at the same kind of censorship you refer to on the DVD code.


Stick a sock in your Pats bashing. You sound like a Dolphins fan for crying out loud. Moss will be just fine. You are just jealous.

And I believe the BB issue was settled out of court so get your story straight.

Someone please explain to me how it is better to think "the other team's starter is better, we're gonna lose tonight" 35 times, rather than "Paps is dominant, we're gonna win this game" 35 times. You're talking about a swing of probably seven games, right off the bat. Let's say the team goes 16-19 with fifth starters, instead of 22-13 in those 35 games. That's six games. So when Paps blows six games this year, are you saying that had we signed a mediocre closer with some sort of track record at all, he would then blow 12 saves? How can it be a smart decision to substitute a journeyman #5 starter (who hasn't started in basically ten years) for an ace #1 or #2 starter? How do we know what the ceiling was for Papelbon? What if some manager had decided to make Clemens a closer in 1985? What is the difference? Had Clemens been made a closer in 1985, would that have been the correct move? Why not make Tom Seaver or Nolan Ryan a closer in 1968? 300 saves out of 350 save opportunities would have been better than 300 wins, right? Wrong!! There is no difference. That would have been a disaster, just as this is a disaster, even if Papelbon has a great career as a closer. 300 saves is not as good as even 200 wins. The sky is no longer the limit for this young man. 65 inning per year is now the best we can hope for. - Paddy

BTW, a few days ago I kind of bashed Cafe Press for a totally messed-up order on sme "Let Jim In" shirts.

I must make amends to the Kintees folks. First of all, they have nothing to do with Cafe Press. Second, Sean at Kintees was extremely helpful in resolving the issue. Finally, the Let Jim In shirts are very cool.

pink hats
Phil Hughes
last place
New York Yankees

Make up your own comment with the above ingredients.


Paddy, so any random closer is interchangeable with Rivera? (chortle, guffaw)

Since you're looking exclusively at blown saves and not other statistics, then one would reasonably look at important successful pitching performances (1998, 1999, 2000, 2003 ALCS Game 7, and nearly countless saves in key regular season games) and ask "Do they balance out?"

Your contradiction is interesting...Rivera "choked" the ALCS in 2004, and yet the closer role is a "crapshoot" when discussing Buck wild's last victim.

Scott: Highlighting a little fan-base hypocrisy isn't bashing.

Can you imagine Theo scouting Clemens back in 1983 at a University of Texas game? U. of Texas manager: "You're getting a tremendous talent if you take Roger. Great stuff. Wouldn't be surprised if there's a Cy Young award or a few 20 win seasons in that arm". Theo: "Skip, acually, we have BIG plans for Roger. We're gonna make him a closer. Gotta have the best out there when the game's on the line, even if it's only for 65 innings. I don't care if he goes on to win seven Cy Youngs, wins 340 games, and strikes out 4,500 batters. I gotta get those crucial 65 innings out him. That's what it's all about. When the game's on the line, we gotta have Roger out there." U. of Texas Manager: "But Theo, this guy can eat up 250 innings. He'll be a big time winner." Theo: "Doesn't matter. Saves will be the craze of the future. Getting two batters out with a two run lead in the 9th is the future of the game. That's what Tony Larussa has been telling me." U. of Texas manager: "But shouldn't you at least see what he's got? What if he's a 20 game winner?" Theo: "Saves. Saves are what it's all about. We've made our decision".

Paddy24, while I don't necessarily disagree with you, let's hear from someone who may be more informed:

"Having that lights out guy at the back end of the bullpen changes everything. From the way the game is played in the middle innings, to the way it’s managed. Basically, each ’shut down’ guy in a bullpen shortens the game by an inning. The Angels are a great example. The Twins too. Having 2-3 guys in the bullpen that are ‘closers’ almost, means you better have the lead on them before the 7th, instead of thinking you have 9 turns at a team, you sometimes can manage or play as if there are only 21 outs before the game is over. The Reds in the late 80’s had that kind of bullpen. Managers on both sides will sometimes manage a game differently considering who the other team might bring in. Rivera for the Yanks has been the best example. If you don’t get a lead on them before the 8th or 9th, depending on how much rest he’s had, there’s a better than 90% chance they are winning the game. The numbers don’t lie, when he comes in with a lead, it’s pretty much a lock they are winning. Paps has absolutely given this team that same feeling the last two years."

-Curt Schilling

Yes, Jason O. Throwing the ball away, when he simply only had to make a good throw for another World Series title, is a choke job. Walking Kevin Millar also qualifies as a choke job, considering Millar looked terrible that series.

I'm not mad about having my ad pulled, though it hints at the same kind of censorship you refer to on the DVD code.

Just a couple points on the above, RedSake.

1) The HD-DVD crack code wasn't meant to be any sort of statement on censorship. Instead, it's emblematic of the basic Soxaholix ethos -- Bring a current topic from popular culture and merge it to the Red Sox all the while trying to make it amusing.

2) The "censorship" tag related to the rejection of your BlogAd is, in my mind, an overreach. Censorship typically is the withholding of information by a controlling body, e.g., the government, religious groups, etc. I'm flattered by the idea of The Soxaholix being a "controlling body" so I'm fine with that, but I think the censorship label fails with respect to keeping information from the public. Is a BlogAd really information in that sense?

What's really going on here, in my mind, is the free market at work. There is a monetary incentive for me to take ads. The more people who visit the site, the more ad revenue I (and the advertiser and the middleman, BlogAds, makes). There is also in this the notion of brand and customer/reader. In order to maximize the brand and maximize the readership and, consequently (though not primary) maximize the ad revenue, it is helpful to have so called "customer evangelists" who spread the word about The Soxaholix site. Kaz, who complained about your ad, is just such a brand evangelist for the Soxaholix.

Bottom line, the cost of annoying one of my core readers/evangelists was greater than the monetary gain in accepting your ad.

Simple economics.

But no hard feelings, I hope, all around.


So you'd be happy with, say, Ryan Dempster closing? Or maybe we should just continue with Keith Foulke closing?

You think, essentially, that Riveria has wasted his career?

I can't point to anything other than speculation but don't you think having a dominant closer has a positive effect on the starters? Don't you think that Schilling doesn't feel as if he has to pitch into the 9th every time out to get the win? Yes, this has to do with trusting all of the bullpen, but knowing that Papelbon is anchoring it has to be a good feeling.

Closers' stats are fairly self-selecting for any group that includes only players that have held that job for two seasons or more. If you stink, you don't continue with in that role.

Sure, Okajima could close, and be really, really good at it. But then, by your logic, shouldn't that mean he should be starting?

Ryan, Rivera never was a starter, and never would have excelled as a starter. He's probably the greatest closer ever. But yeah, had he been Ron Guidry in 1976, and the Yanks hadn't gotten the 1977, 1978 and 1985 seasons out of him as a starter, that would have been a waste. Same goes for Jim Palmer, Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Tom Glavine and many others. Making any of them a closer, even if they saved 400 games like John Franco, would be a tremendous waste of talent. I'm not putting Papelbon in their company, but certainly the potential is there. Now, we'll never know, and that's a shame.

Interesting take on the closer situation, Paddy. I have been a fan of Paps in the pen, but you do make a sound points, though I'm still not convinced. Paps is going to make somebody pay for the pain he felt last night, I'm quite sure.

The main problem with your scenario is that there's no way in hell Theo would ever try to tell Cliff Gustafson, the winningest baseball coach in NCAA Division 1 baseball at the time (who relinquished his title to the NEXT UT baseball coach, Augie Garrido) what's what with a rotation plan. Those two are baseball gods and Theo is smart enought to recognize that, imho.

Hook 'em.

Yeah, I agree that Paddy makes great points.

Papelbon is definitely a gamble/risk.

But that's what Theo is paid to do. Weigh the risks and take the gamble.

It's what makes sports so enjoyable to me, i.e., it's rarely black/white or some sort of closed off Garden of Eden. There are variables, risks, rewards etc. and we never know what's going to happen until it does.

And at the risk of bringing up the scorn of many readers for invoking Rumsfeld, I think his "you go to war with the army you have" quote is apropos here.

The Sox didn't have a reliable closer, but they had Paps. In a perfect world, they'd have kept him a starter as Paddy suggests and indeed that was the plan, but shit happens.

I find it exciting, myself. But I'm weird that way. I love more than anything the "holy fuck what is going to happen next!?!?" nature of baseball more than anything else.

First off I love Paps and look forward to watching him dominate in the future, in any role. That being said comparing him to Clemens is entirely premature and borderline ludicrous. First of all Paps has NEVER shown that he can be a dominant starter. Secondly he said he wanted to close, as he did in college. I understand the premise of wanting to see his dominant ninth inning stuff through 6-7 innings, but that doesn't allways happen. He struggled in ST the second time through the lineup. I know it's a small sample size but that combined with his dominance as a closer has to count for something. I for one was happy to hear that he wanted to close. At the time there was simply no better option. When all is said and done I believe the team is better with him as the closer.


In his first season with New York, Rivera appeared in nineteen games, starting ten, and although he finished with a 5.51 ERA he showed flashes of his burgeoning talent. His most impressive start of the season came against Chicago on July 4, when he struck out eleven White Sox (the most by a Yankee rookie since Al Leiter in 1988) in a two-hit shutout at Comiskey Park.

from baseballlibrary.com

An important followup to h.b.'s comment on Red Sake:

I am honestly flattered that h.b. considers me such a loyal fan. I am, but to be recognized as such is pretty cool in my mind.

With the gushing out of the way, let me point out that in my first comments on the Blogad, I specifically pointed out that I would gladly compense h.b. for the lost ad revenue if he were to remove the ad (if I could reasonably afford to do so not knowing how much was paid for the ad). I didn't want h.b. to feel like he was having to chose a fan vs. the money. I can appreciate Sake's desire to grow his site's popularity by buying links/adspace on this site, but I found the site borderline offensive and wanted to know if h.b. had truly checked out the ad (not even knowing at the time if Blogads were push- or pull-style purchases).

Finally, the removal of the Blogad is hardly censorship. Observe the fact that you link to it through your username/URL in the comments and your comments are not removed or signature changed, etc.

Also note that I have been back to your site to review my judgement of your content because I am not a knee-jerk reactionary. I gave it a second chance (and may even give it a third or fourth in a while from now too...I'm a sucker for new content on the web) and even on the second chance, I did not find anything more compelling or funny about the most recent additional videos that has given me a reason to change my mind about the "flied lice" (my phrase) level of asian-english parody that you're banking the show's concept around.

Schilling is entitled to his opinion, but perhaps HE would have liked to have exchanged his soon-to-be 3,000 strikeouts and his 200 wins for a closing role. Just off the top of my head, did a fantastic starter like Jack Morris in 1984 contribute mightily to a Tigers championship? How about:
1985 - Royals - Saberhagen
1986 - Mets - Doc Gooden
1987 - Twins - Frank Viola
1988 - Dodgers - Hershiser (oh my god)
1989 - A's - Bob Welch (25 wins)
1990 - Reds - Jose Rijo
1991 - Twins - Jack Morris
1992 - Jays - Jack Morris (10 inning shutout)
1995 - Braves - Maddux/Glavine
1996 - Yankees - Pettitte (Wetteland, NOT Rivera closing)
1997 - Marlins - Kevin Brown
2001 - Dbacks - Randy Johnson
2003 - Marlins - Beckett (lights out)
2004 - Red Sox - Pedro/Schilling
2005 - White Sox - tons of great starting pitching.
Now you tell me, in how many of those years was it the bulldog starter that deserves most of the accolades, and in how many was it the closer? The common denominator in all of these seasons is that the team had one standout bulldog starter at least. Other than Rivera, these teams had a mixture of closers, some really good, some run of the mill guys who happened to step up that year (Willie Hernandez, Keith Foulke, The Nasty Boys, etc.) - which is further proof that you don't need to turn to your best prospect. Also, many of these guys NEVER could have started, so good for them that they made something out of themselves. But why weren't Morris, Gooden, Brown, Beckett, Maddux, Hershiser, etc. turned into relievers?

There is more to the closer / starter question that simple baseball talent. Personality and mental make up go into too. Could Paps maintain that level of intensity for 7+ innings every 5th day? I'm not sure anybody could. Starters need to be able to roll with the punches because shit happens just about every game when the sample size is 90+ pitches. Paps only has to deal with it once in a while. Trying to maintain the intensity that seems to be important to his success as a starter could drive him batshiat crazy.

And we already have one of those.


Your Soxaholix evangelist label is well-earned. I appreciate it.

As for the offer to reimburse for lost ad revenue, I also really appreciate that gesture. But I won't take you up on it.

At least Paps did not blow out a hamstring. The gods must be toying with the MFY this season.

The deal with the devil ended after the 2006 season. Now he's just taking his due.

I think the issue is less about individual pitchers and their stats, experience, potential, whatever. It's about the makeup of a particular team. On the whole, the Sox tend to win on team effort and team makeup, not individual performances. (ask Wake.) Maybe that's true for all baseball teams, I don't know, I don't like to watch any others consistently enought to know. But it does seem the Yankees cannot bank on individual performances, be it starter or closer or shortstop. They lack the entire team vision. I would hate for Sox mgmt. to adopt an attitude of maximizing a particular talent at the expense of what's needed at the time teamwise.


While you're in a generous mood, can you reasonably afford to replace a bottle of Suntory Yamazaki 12 year that I finished off last night?

Poor Jason. He's probably been waiting to break out that sake since the first Yankees Red Sox series at Fenway.

Then he had to postpone that until the series in the Bronx.

Then, alas, he had to postpone it again and finally, last night, lowered his celebratory standards such that beating up the AL worst Rangers was Suntory Yamazaki 12 year worthy.


(BTW: It's still early yet, of this I am aware. But fun as fuck to bust your balls in the meantime.)

hb-ouch :D

h.b. -- Yankee fans are hardly effete, and Red Sox Nation doesn't have the monopoly on suffering to which you guys aspire. We lived through Bill Mazeroski (our Bucky Dent), Luis Gonzalez (our Aaron Boone) and the `04 ALCS. For the 26 rings we've won since `18 (yeah, just had to throw that in), that apparently means there are 62 (if my arithmetic serves me correctly) that we haven't. We carry our own A-Rod albatross. We just don't make a culture out of angst and victimization. The Thunder has spoken.

Omens & Protents:

The 2006 slide began the day before the All Star break when Pap blew a save and the Sox lost in extra innings...

I got the feeling then that the Sox spent the break reading their press clippings, and came out flat for the second half, even before the injury bug hit. Now I have the feeling they spent the day off on Monday doing the same. I certainly hope Tito puts that straight ASAP!

Steve in MD

Interesting point hb, last night was somewhat of a roller coaster. The Yamazaki is in my regular rotation: (how the Japanese make excellent single malt is beyond me)

I have about 1/2 of the bottle left, I'm sipping, smoking, enjoyed the Hughes cruise.

bang- injury to the kid, consumption pace quickens due to unfortunate circumstance.

boom- Travis Buck, Once again drinking a bit more contentedly, and suddenly the bottle's empty. Damn.

No worries on Rumsfeld, btw, he has some excellent advice independent of his last Defense Dept. stint. His popularization of the concept of known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns when framing a problem is very valuable.

[I]Can you imagine Theo scouting Clemens back in 1983 at a University of Texas game?[/I]
Ummm, no. I couldn't help but think it would be silly for a 9 year old to be scouting a college game. Sorry, but that immediately to mind.

Pinstripe, the new BigBri.

Or perhaps, BigBri him/herself?

As for paddy and Papelbon, I'm not going to go nuts about last night at all. One bad idea led to the homerun. Why he thought to groove that third pitch...it was an 0-2 count. That pitch should have been totally junk (outside the zone, setup for next pitch in, etc) and he tried to get a third strike by the guy. Just a dumb idea to throw that strike in that situation and it ended up barely leaving the park anyways. As pointed out, it happens to the best of them.

BUT let's be straight that it happens to the best of them. Paddy's "every closer gives up a few boners in a year" is judged on what great closers do every year. On bad teams with closer "committees" and simply bad closers, you get more than the 8 or so per year blown saves. And now you're starting to get into that "who cares who started the game if you can't get the outs at the end when it matters" territory.

If Tavarez (and/or Lester) give us a combined 16-19 and Papelbon would have given us a 22-13 instead (and there's no proof of this being the case), then we're talking about 6 wins difference. 6 wins is the difference between having an ace as your closer vs. a closer-by-committee approach.

Look at the 2003 Red Sox (the year of the infamous closer by committee with Grady) closer statistics. We were 22nd in save%...that's out of 30 teams! Or 2005 where we had hobbled Foulke and hobbled Schilling and Timlin closing where we ended up 19th in save%.

Compare that to 2004 where we were 8th best in the majors and Foulke was our ace in the pen.

Hell, look at 2006 where Papelbon didn't start the season saving and had his late season injury. Papelbon: 41 save oportunities, 6 blown saves. Without Papelbon: 28 save opportunities, 17 blown saves.

Finally, look at the numbers put out by Ken Rosenthal from 2003 (particularly concerning the Red Sox closer-by-committee approach) just before the season started:

Since 1996, the first full season of three-division play, 44 of the 56 postseason teams have featured a 30-save closer. Since '93, 14 of the 16 World Series participants in non-strike seasons have featured a 35-save closer. The exceptions were the 2001 Diamondbacks and 1997 Indians, both of whom experienced significant problems closing games in the Series.

Sorry, J.O. Your whiskey is your whiskey, but maybe I can find you a good price (not knowing what you're currently paying per bottle or what age you like).

Just to complete my closer argument...if we play 2006 with Papelbon as our sole closer and he puts up the same save percentage (35/41) on the other 28 opportunities that he didn't end up taking for one reason or another (24/28), then we gain 13 wins...twice as many as the 6 being given as the reason to start Papelbon instead of Tavarez. He would have only needed to take 7 extra save opportunities last year to get the 6 win differential we're "losing" by starting Tavarez instead according to Paddy (still at the 85% save percentage as he was for the rest of the season).

//Can you imagine Theo scouting Clemens back in 1983 at a University of Texas game?//

Just one little problem - Papelbon was a closer in college. Clemens wasn't.

//Why he thought to groove that third pitch...it was an 0-2 count. That pitch should have been totally junk (outside the zone, setup for next pitch in, etc)//

He didn't "think to groove that third pitch" - he said after the game (and Varitek had set up for it) that he meant to throw it high out of the strike zone (he's done that several times, often getting batters to chase). I highly doubt that Papelbon EVER means to "groove a pitch."

Pinstripe, the new BigBri.
Or perhaps, BigBri him/herself?

I don't think so, Bob. There certainly is the Yankee snark factor in play, but PT seems capable of a multi-syllabic vocabulary (or at least he has a better dictionary than BB) and I don't think he's breathing through his mouth the way BigBri used to. Hell, I counted several four-syllable words in his last post (if you count last names like Mazeroski); even one five syllable.

"Thunder has spoken" -- Heh. Perhaps more like "Drippy Little Cloud has drizzled." Most likely on himself.

Thanks for that info, Griffin. I haven't had time today to chase down post-game comments from Papelbon. Not every pitch is perfect. It's the ones that aren't perfect...and end up getting drilled for runs that suck the most, of course. I guess I see an 0-2 pitch as a "if I miss my placement, I want to miss by a mile, so let's make sure this pitch isn't even close to a strike."

Don't throw an 0-2 "hey, this might be a strike I better swing" pitch. Save that for 1-2 or 2-2. 0-2 should be well out of the zone. A batter should almost expect to take an 0-2 pitch for a ball...and then get baffled by the difference in speed/placement for the 1-2 strike.

I'm still not mad at Papelbon over the one pitch, it just confused me watching it last night where it was placed given the count.

Oh, and Not Torre got fired. "Director of Performance Enhancement", huh? Do you think Giambi was sad to see him go? Was he known around the clubhouse as "Steroid Guy"? Does Piazza have his own Director of Performance Enhancement to get his Viagra? The mind boggles how you could let someone create a title in the organization like Director of Performance Enhancement especially in this day and age of baseball.

very interesting back and forth with 38pitches at bradfordfiles.com

Is pinstripe thunder any relation to Chocolate Thunder?

On contemplating Pinstripe Thunder
A thought sprang to mind here downunder
We agree here with Rob
(S)he's not enough of a slob
To be Bri, but (s)he still makes me chunder.*

*Cultural note. To chunder is a verb meaning to throw up, vomit.

Kaz...there's little principle difference between the language parody we're doing and the sublime "Nevah" and "Pahty" parody on this site, except video is more visceral than a comic strip, and that this site is several years more mature. We're just a week old, and we're definately not ready for prime time, but The Red Sake Show will be skewering all of our favorite Red Sox characters, their personalities, the different languages, quirks-anything we can think of that's funny!-and of course, everybody's favorite demographic and frequent butt of jokes in this fine strip, how did Bill Simmons put it?.... MAWBM (Middle Aged White Boston Media)

soxdownunder (a metaphorically fitting name in all respects) -- I will cheerfully take your cultural notes when you learn the correct words for TWL (see post a few days ago), not the version edited by the homophobic neo-Nazi Pound. I know it's tougher going than Sweet Caroline, but I have faith in you. I thought the angst endemic to Red Sox Nation was usually the province of the intellectually gifted... apparently Boston still doesn't have enough universities to feed your heads.

The Thunder has spoken. Go off and chunder downunder.

P.T. - fair enough! TWL was off the top of my head actually but it would definately have been the Pound version.

Jason O. -

Way too much vitrol here today. It is way too early for anyone on either side to have bragging rights and even reserved exchanges like this amount to so many wasted words. As students of the game who can appreciate the relative strengths and weaknesses of each side, it is important that we be above petty bickering and enjoy the spirit the of rivalry in a friendly manner until one team demonstrates a clear dominance for this year.

I, for one, am reserving my words for June 2, 2007, the day the Red Sox officially beat the Yankees in the season series. Then all those m0th3rf~kk3rz can kiss my @$$ when I go strolling through the Bronx singing Tessie over a loudspeaker for all the pathetic Yankees fans to hear. Your team still sucks until then, and probably will long after.

While you're counting on Rivera to keep this friggin' one game winning streak alive, all our side is watching the bats heat up and counting the victories as they get piled on. Pathetic millionaires who can't get their act together if they tried, Cashman and Torre sold you guys a bill of goods shipped with a waybill from SOL Express. There is nothing for you anymore, those contracts are too big to be picked up by other teams, and eventually the team from the Bronx is going to have trouble getting JV high school players to fit into it's budget.

Excellence can be defined in many ways, and the Yankees are an excellent team of losers. Get out of there while you still can, having Papi come out in the 9th with the bases loaded is much more satisfying than watching Rivera drag his sorry carcas over that mound everyday. Torre is going to waste the bullpen, just like he does every year, and Rivera will soon be the least of your worries.

Despair ye mighty and look upon my works!


SDU -- you already rise above the pack of Red Sox Nation by nobly admitting the error of your ways. Who knows what sins you will confess to next -- perhaps your choice of teams to admire? In any case, Thunder claps for you. Watch how tomorrow's column will be aglow with talk of Beckett's sizzling 6-0 start; watch how Thunder will deflate and demolish with two simple words: Don Schwall.

Mike -- Thunder is growing weary of correcting the misquotes of Red Sox philistines. The quote in question is actually, "Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair." That's why it's called iambic pentameter. Thank you, at least, for acknowledging our mightiness. However, you are hardly the king of kings -- I doubt if you are even the king of queens. Perhaps you were the Harvard boy in the bar in Good Will Hunting. Once again, the Thunder has spoken.

Huston Street -- I'm all zen and shit about respecting one's opponent but are the Red Sox so fuqqin' cheap that they don't bother scouting the bedraggled teams of the AL West? I mean how is it that this punkass bitch Street takes just enough off to flummox Big Papi & gobsmack Manny game in and game out? I mean what the fuq?!?

The comments to this entry are closed.

The Soxaholix eBook Spinoff

The captivating and long awaited Soxaholix eBook spinoff is finally available!

There's No Crying in Pocket Pool


Purchase at Amazon.


Logo t-shirts now available, several colors, even pink.

'Soxaholix logo t-shirt