It's October

[TBLfan 25]

1) You know what's interesting? I had always thought they used to be the Pilgrims, then they became the Red Stockings, before finally the Red Sox. But according to Wikipedia, those weren't official names. Apparently, they had no name until the owner gave them the name "Red Sox" after the 1907 season, although that had become the common name they were referred to by the fans and papers. Actually, I've always felt "Red Sox" is a bland name and not indicative of the area. I always like when teams try to find a name that expresses something for which the area is renowned. And "Red Sox" just doesn't conjure the image of an infestation of drunk skunks at a ball park......

2) Particularly since the company no longer exists, don't you think it's better that I post under my actual name? I think it adds a level of honesty and intimacy to a message board. I actually didn't like it when people would refer to me in the past as Salming, even though they knew my name was Jason.

3) If they had changed their name to the Sunsets, I wouldn't have cared. But when they shorten their name to appeal to a minority of people who take offense to a commonly used term by botanists, I lose respect. The name change was obviously economically driven; i.e., the team had been lousy until this year, so they felt they had no "political" strength to stand up to a boycott.

4) The (Mighty) Ducks I go back and forth on.

Yet, since the team the "Devil Rays" no longer exists, you still insist on calling them the D-Rays.

Also, the term "Devil Rays" is an older term that isn't commonly used. My father is a marine biochemist and he has never referred to any Ray as a "Devil Ray," in fact he barely considers it a nickname for the creatures. Remove "Devil" and that's the name that is spoken between those in the industry.

...And I don't even know where you get this reason they changed the name. I live in Tampa, it was highly publicized that the reason they changed the name(logo and colors) was to show that the team is changing direction... this was to get funding for a new ballpark.

[dalebert 8]

It also opens up more logo oppurtunities. They aren't set on having to use a fish.

[mrusse01 0]

mrusse, Manny forced them to trade him, so as much as all of us wanted his bat in that lineup, what could they do? In 2006 he shut it down for the last 5-6 weeks of the season, without any structural damage found to his knees, so they were concerned he might pull the same ploy this year. Given Boras would only be paid if the Sox agreed to drop the options from his contract, I think it's a guarantee that Manny would have bailed on them this season if they hadn't traded him. I'm just glad he wasn't rewarded with a trip to the WS as a result of that charade.

There were definitely missed opportunities in the 8th inning. If Coco had slid trying to beat the throw, versus a takeout slide, that would have turned Iwamura's throw into another defensive mistake by the D-Rays and would have left the Sox one run down with bases loaded and one out, assuming Youk still walks. At that point, who knows who Maddon would have pitched because, outside of Wheeler in Game 2, their bullpen looked shaky throughout the series.

By the way, that seemed to be a bad call against Drew. Based on PitchTrax to Kotsay in the next inning, the Drew pitch appeared to be four to five inches outside and he appeared to check his swing easily, but the ump never called to third for confirmation. It was only Ball Two, however, so he could have struck out on the next swing.

I think we've had the Manny discussion before, but I still think the Sox handled it poorly. Manny isn't going to ruin his market value by tanking for 6 weeks. The Red Sox could pick up both his options and potentially cost him tens of millions of dollars plus completely job his agent. What, is Manny going to sulk for two full years? Everyone just acts like Manny had them by the balls, but I think that's a cop-out, the team had a few hammers of their own to play.

The Drew strikeout was swinging, that ball was well off the plate, but he went around. I thought the replays were very clear, it was so obvious the home plate ump didn't need to check down to third.

[Jason Harris 31]

Yet, since the team the "Devil Rays" no longer exists, you still insist on calling them the D-Rays.

Also, the term "Devil Rays" is an older term that isn't commonly used. My father is a marine biochemist and he has never referred to any Ray as a "Devil Ray," in fact he barely considers it a nickname for the creatures. Remove "Devil" and that's the name that is spoken between those in the industry.

...And I don't even know where you get this reason they changed the name. I live in Tampa, it was highly publicized that the reason they changed the name(logo and colors) was to show that the team is changing direction... this was to get funding for a new ballpark.

[Mack, you're right. I don't know what I was thinking and still didn't catch it after two posts.....]

1) You're too smart to use that argument. That's like saying Prince didn't exist because he became a hieroglyphic.

2) Pygmy devil ray, Mobula eregoodootenkee

Lesser devil ray, Mobula hypostoma

Shortfin devil ray, Mobula kuhlii

Devil fish, Mobula mobular

Munk's devil ray, Mobula munkiana

Lesser Guinean devil ray, Mobula rochebrunei

Chilean devil ray, Mobula tarapacana

Bentfin devil ray, Mobula thurstoni

3) I will preface this by saying we all know the news is sensationalistic, so it's quite possible that the stories I read in the Denver and Boston papers were much smaller in reality in Tampa. However, years before the name change, there were articles that obviously hit national news -- since I don't read the Tampa papers -- about a Christian pastor threatening a protest unless the D-Rays took "Devil" out of their name. That led to focus groups in which people said they realized that must have been why they had been avoiding going to the games, since "Devil" is subliminally bad. That finally led to the new owner kowtowing to this perceived threat to his hope to get a new stadium by changing the name.

Again, that was the national perception of the events, but it's quite fair if you say, "No way, man. That pastor made a stink for a week in 2004 and was never heard from again."

So, if you're right -- that the issue of "Devil" wasn't a religious protest -- then I've made much ado about nothing. But if I'm right -- that the threat of a protest over the use of "Devil" led to the change -- then it irritates me that the fundamentalists are able to instill so much fear into our society.

[Jason Harris 31]

The Drew strikeout was swinging, that ball was well off the plate, but he went around. I thought the replays were very clear, it was so obvious the home plate ump didn't need to check down to third.

The only replays were on my Tivo. TBS didn't show any. To me it looked like he easily held up and he told the media that he was disappointed the home umpire didn't ask for confirmation. Again, that was only Ball Two, so it doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different.

Regarding Manny, you really are ignoring his history. It's well believed that he bailed on the team for about 5-6 weeks at the end of 2006, to the point that quotes leaked in the press from some players referring to it as "disgusting." I have no idea what the split was, but it was apparent it caused a divided clubhouse.

Skip forward to this year, when he has a new agent who won't get paid for two years if the Manny of Boston played like the Manny of LA. He has a variety of incidents, from fighting with Youk to shoving the travel secretary to telling ESPNdeportes the Sox don't deserve him. We also have to assume conversations had been ongoing between Boras, Manny and the team, but it wouldn't appear they were to Manny's liking.

Given all that history, as well as the pressure to field a champion caliber team (compare them to Maple Leaf fans) do really think the Sox felt secure that they could trust Manny to be on his best behavior for the rest of the season. Remember, if he tanks it, he hurts his chances when the options aren't picked up, but if he plays well, he feels he just cheated himself out of millions because he'll be stuck playing for $20 million.

[troy 12]

The Phils can't afford to lose Game 1 and waste a Hamels start, heading back to Philly 1-1 at worst would be ideal. However, if the Rays' power surge continues at CBP and the full Phillies offense isn't flowing the series may not last that long.

n of the events, but it's quite fair if you say, "No way, man. That pastor made a stink for a week in 2004 and was never heard from again."

So, if you're right -- that the issue of "Devil" wasn't a religious protest -- then I've made much ado about nothing. But if I'm right -- that the threat of a protest over the use of "Devil" led to the change -- then it irritates me that the fundamentalists are able to instill so much fear into our society.

And, not to derail the thread, I think the PC-obsessed left is just as culpable for circumstances similar to your proposed reasoning for the Rays' name change.

[TBLfan 25]

Your source is wikipedia, I can make a page talking about a Jason Harris Devil Ray. It has never and will never will be a reliable source of information. I'd rather go with the biologists at the Mote Marine Laboratory that I've seen and talked with then rely on a website that has information donated by people with too much time and an outdated textbook.

I'm sure that "Devil Rays" changed their name because of religious reasons. I mean Tampa is the religious hub of the world... Really, it had nothing to do with it. People have made many more of these claims against the NJ Devils, Duke Blue Devils, etc... Tampa has always blown it off as "This is the nickname of a sea creature." The reason behind the name change was to change the image of the team, there was a big marketing campaign over the past year to get people into the stadium. Last season it was "college nights" at the Trop and other promos. This season was all about "the new look Rays."

[Jason Harris 31]

And, not to derail the thread, I think the PC-obsessed left is just as culpable for circumstances similar to your proposed reasoning for the Rays' name change.

I agree. I wish people could have more of backbone in this country. Now, I admit I could fit into the same category with this latest issue, but "Devils Rays" came first!

Your source is wikipedia, I can make a page talking about a Jason Harris Devil Ray. It has never and will never will be a reliable source of information. I'd rather go with the biologists at the Mote Marine Laboratory that I've seen and talked with then rely on a website that has information donated by people with too much time and an outdated textbook.

If you Google "devil ray" "Mobula", there are 3880 entries, only one of which on the first page is wikipedia. You have to accept that "Devil Ray" is a common usage to describe that creature -- even if it's wrong.

It's similar to "Buffalo." There are about 50 buffalo a mile from my house. Actually, they are bison. There is a sign at the lookout that says they were misnamed by white settlers who thought they were related to the water buffalo of Africa. Yet the CU sports teams are all named "Buffalo" with Ralphie the mascot, when they should be the CU Bison.

I don't see how that's different from "Devil Rays." Maybe they shouldn't be referred to as devil rays, but they are by the majority of people.

[chippa13 1844]

Who cares what the team is called? They've proven themselves to be legit and I'll tip my cap to the Rays. Their pitching was better than the Sox in the series and so was their hitting. I believe that Ortiz was still bothered by his wrist and it opened up a big hole in his swing.

[Chadd 916]

I'm sure that "Devil Rays" changed their name because of religious reasons. I mean Tampa is the religious hub of the world... Really, it had nothing to do with it. People have made many more of these claims against the NJ Devils, Duke Blue Devils, etc... Tampa has always blown it off as "This is the nickname of a sea creature." The reason behind the name change was to change the image of the team, there was a big marketing campaign over the past year to get people into the stadium. Last season it was "college nights" at the Trop and other promos. This season was all about "the new look Rays."

Actually it had something to do with changing the name and there have been a couple campaigns in recent memory to change the name in NJ.

"There are some that don't have a positive reaction to the word devil," Devil Rays president Matt Silverman said. "There are some who don't have a positive reaction to a devil ray. What is a devil ray? If we make a change, it will be something that will be more accessible and appeal to everyone . . . or at least not drive people away."

And for what it's worth I was in the national aquarium in Baltimore last week. One of the signs over the ray tank says "spotted devil ray". Correct or not, that sign has been there for as long as I can remember.

Time to get back on topic and stop picking fights.

[kovalchuk71 212]

I'm a little bit concerned about the same thing with Papi as we go forward, but he obviously gets a pass because of the wrist. Still, he doesn't seem to be the best at taking care of his body, so I think his skills will disappear quickly when they do.

Two words for you:

Mo Vaughn

Good call. Don't forget guys like Cecil Fielder(2 year stint with the Yankees in the twilight of his career), hell, I think his whole family is a bunch of fatasses. Cecil was probably the least fit player in the history of baseball.

... and come on, they are the Rays. Drop the "D" guys, I think they've earned the respect to call them by their name.

His son is on Milwalkee and is large as well. The most out of shape player ever? Babe Ruth much?

[trevor13478 1]

the babe was definitely a pudger, but cecil fielder looked like a beach ball

[ponty 0]

the babe was definitely a pudger, but cecil fielder looked like a beach ball

Cecil had childbearing hips. He wins hands down.

[trevor13478 1]

two words, el guapo

[mack 44]

the babe was definitely a pudger, but cecil fielder looked like a beach ball

Cecil had childbearing hips. He wins hands down.

Barry Zito has the most curvaceous hips ever. Hourglaaaaaaass.

[mrusse01 0]

The Drew strikeout was swinging, that ball was well off the plate, but he went around. I thought the replays were very clear, it was so obvious the home plate ump didn't need to check down to third.

The only replays were on my Tivo. TBS didn't show any. To me it looked like he easily held up and he told the media that he was disappointed the home umpire didn't ask for confirmation. Again, that was only Ball Two, so it doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different.

Regarding Manny, you really are ignoring his history. It's well believed that he bailed on the team for about 5-6 weeks at the end of 2006, to the point that quotes leaked in the press from some players referring to it as "disgusting." I have no idea what the split was, but it was apparent it caused a divided clubhouse.

Skip forward to this year, when he has a new agent who won't get paid for two years if the Manny of Boston played like the Manny of LA. He has a variety of incidents, from fighting with Youk to shoving the travel secretary to telling ESPNdeportes the Sox don't deserve him. We also have to assume conversations had been ongoing between Boras, Manny and the team, but it wouldn't appear they were to Manny's liking.

Given all that history, as well as the pressure to field a champion caliber team (compare them to Maple Leaf fans) do really think the Sox felt secure that they could trust Manny to be on his best behavior for the rest of the season. Remember, if he tanks it, he hurts his chances when the options aren't picked up, but if he plays well, he feels he just cheated himself out of millions because he'll be stuck playing for $20 million.

Really? I could have sworn I saw a replay, I must be thinking of the Bay AB. Still, I agree, it was pretty brass balls for the ump not to go down to third there, but I think he would have been punched out. Poor form on TBS for not showing a replay there, arguably the biggest AB of the season so far.

I still disagree with the Manny situation. We'll never know exactly what went on, but I've got to believe that as Theo Epstein your job is to figure out a way to keep that guy in the line-up and keep him productive and motivated. Seems like there was a lot of hurt feelings and 'pride' on the line here, rather than just two sides sitting down and working it out to put the best team on the field.

The bottom line is the guy is an all-time great post-season hitter, the team traded him, and they just lost 3-1 in a Game 7.

His son is on Milwalkee and is large as well. The most out of shape player ever? Babe Ruth much?

Babe Ruth wasn't a human being though, he is allowed to be 'out of shape'.

[Jason Harris 31]

Here's a relatively measured article by Nick Cafardo in today's Boston Globe. He tries to present both sides of the argument fairly.

The more I think about this, it seems you are ignoring that it takes two to tango. The Sox could have kept Manny as long as they did everything to his satisfaction, even though he didn't do everything to their satisfaction. Put in terms of a marriage, Manny was one of the prettiest wives in town, but an insecure one who wanted special treatment. Whenever the special treatment didn't meet the wife's satisfaction, the spigot was turned off. When it became apparent the husband had finally grown tired of the antics, the wife fluctuated between wanting the marriage to continue or saying the husband didn't deserve her. The divorce finally happened and the wife got into killer shape overnight to dazzle the nightclub crowds. The husband wishes he was still married to that knockout, but he remembers all the angst along the way.

The bottom line is if the Sox had told Manny last November that they'd rip up his two options and give him a new three or four year contract, they'd get the Manny of old (who did not look great in 2007 until the playoffs), warts and all. When they decided they finally wanted the marriage to die a slow death or, at the very least, wait to see whether he'd truly changed, Manny accelerated the process.

So, again, Manny had to be a partner in this marriage not fizzling, and that wasn't going to happen due to his insecurities and with the most onerous of all baseball agents wanting to get paid.

[mrusse01 0]

Here's a relatively measured article by Nick Cafardo in today's Boston Globe. He tries to present both sides of the argument fairly.

I don't know, that is pretty wishy washy...they traded Manny to "do something for the greater good"?

[Jason Harris 31]

You are disregarding the fact that there were teammates of Manny who wanted him gone.

I've often tried to guess who was on Manny's side in the clubhouse and who wasn't. All the articles suggest it split down the "professionalism" line. Schilling has been vocal since the trade, so we have to assume he was in the anti-Manny camp. Varitek was the captain and is considered the consummate pro, so I can't believe he'd appreciate Manny's antics. Youk and Manny fought over Youk's intensity, so I suspect he was in the anti-Manny camp. I don't know about Lowell or Pedroia. Lowell speaks Spanish, so that may have allowed him to know Manny in a different light than the other players, while Pedey seems more loose than the other guys, so maybe he'd give Manny a pass. But even Papi last year made a comment to the press that he wasn't going to speak for Manny any more; the implication was he was growing tired of Manny's act.

This July, there was a quote from one of the veterans that Tito would lose the clubhouse unless something was done about Manny. The implication was the other players were tired of Manny being allowed to pull his antics and the situation had reached it boiling point. If Manny wasn't traded or suspended, Tito was going to have a clubhouse divided.

Your response could be they should have suspended him without pay, because then they'd still have him for the playoffs, but it's obvious they were worried he'd bail on them for the last third of the season. Obviously, they decided it was better to get some talent back and hope the improved chemistry would make up for the lost power.

[mrusse01 0]

The more I think about this, it seems you are ignoring that it takes two to tango. The Sox could have kept Manny as long as they did everything to his satisfaction, even though he didn't do everything to their satisfaction. .

So, again, Manny had to be a partner in this marriage not fizzling, and that wasn't going to happen due to his insecurities and with the most onerous of all baseball agents wanting to get paid.

I don't get that because Manny had already won TWO World Series for the team, and despite being one of the highest paid players in all of baseball for his entire Red Sox tenure, I don't think you'd find a single reasonable person who wouldn't say he was worth every penny.

The Red Sox jobbed him by making him go into this season basically having to prove his worth (probably not a good idea with a fraglie personality who also happens to be a sure-fire Hall of Famer). I can hear Boras now, 'Why should you have to prove anything to them, Manny?" And he's entirely right.

I know it's cliche, but Manny is Manny. He's been the exact same personality ever since he entered the league, only this year the Red Sox got cheap and thought 'maybe Manny is slipping a bit, we'll hang him out to dry a bit this season, and see how he does before we make a decision on his options'. That is obviously well within their rights to do so, but taking into account 'Manny being Manny', it was an error in judgement. Boras capitalized on that error, and the Red Sox made a mistake again by capitulating to Manny, sending him off the LA where he hits like 1927 Babe Ruth, and Boston ends up missing out on the World Series by two runs.

You are disregarding the fact that there were teammates of Manny who wanted him gone.

Who cares? Teammates have probably wanted him gone at some point during every season his entire career.

[Jason Harris 31]

I added to my previous post regarding the other players.

[Jason Harris 31]

While agreeing that EVERYBODY would want to have the LA Manny is Boston, particularly during the playoffs, compare the records before and after Manny. 55-43 (.561) before and 40-24 (.625) after. I think it's safe to assume the Manny saga was a distraction.

By the way, the previous ownership signed Manny. The current ownership would much prefer a Pujols over a Manny, so they endured Manny until he hurt the team. This year, come July, he was hurting the team.

[chippa13 1844]

The more I think about this, it seems you are ignoring that it takes two to tango. The Sox could have kept Manny as long as they did everything to his satisfaction, even though he didn't do everything to their satisfaction. .

So, again, Manny had to be a partner in this marriage not fizzling, and that wasn't going to happen due to his insecurities and with the most onerous of all baseball agents wanting to get paid.

I don't get that because Manny had already won TWO World Series for the team, and despite being one of the highest paid players in all of baseball for his entire Red Sox tenure, I don't think you'd find a single reasonable person who wouldn't say he was worth every penny.

The Red Sox jobbed him by making him go into this season basically having to prove his worth (probably not a good idea with a fraglie personality who also happens to be a sure-fire Hall of Famer). I can hear Boras now, 'Why should you have to prove anything to them, Manny?" And he's entirely right.

I know it's cliche, but Manny is Manny. He's been the exact same personality ever since he entered the league, only this year the Red Sox got cheap and thought 'maybe Manny is slipping a bit, we'll hang him out to dry a bit this season, and see how he does before we make a decision on his options'. That is obviously well within their rights to do so, but taking into account 'Manny being Manny', it was an error in judgement. Boras capitalized on that error, and the Red Sox made a mistake again by capitulating to Manny, sending him off the LA where he hits like 1927 Babe Ruth, and Boston ends up missing out on the World Series by two runs.

You are disregarding the fact that there were teammates of Manny who wanted him gone.

Who cares? Teammates have probably wanted him gone at some point during every season his entire career.

I think I've found the only person taking Manny's side in the Manny-Red Sox squabble. Manny wanted out of Boston since he got there. He requested to be traded every single season. He also was worse than the normal Manny being Manny this season. Scrapping with teammates, legging out even fewer ground balls than usual, shining up long singles, assaulting a 60 year old team employee.......on and on. He reached a point where his antics were being detrimental to the team and he was doing it on purpose to get shipped out. Manny wasn't going to hit in Boston like he hit in LA for the last two months. The Sox made no mistake by dealing him.

Before the trade, the Sox winning percentage in the 2008 season was 55.6%, after 64.8%. The Sox were a better team after shipping him out.

As for the Sox being cheap. They paid to get rid of him. The condition of any trade was that the acquiring team didn't pick up the team options for $20 million for each of the next two seasons. Two options, by the way, that Boras wouldn't have earned a cent on.

[mrusse01 0]

While agreeing that EVERYBODY would want to have the LA Manny is Boston, particularly during the playoffs, compare the records before and after Manny. 55-43 (.561) before and 40-24 (.625) after. I think it's safe to assume the Manny saga was a distraction.

Oh come on, you and I both know that doesn't wash because their schedule was much much easier towards the end of the season.

That article you linked is making the case that by trading Manny the Red Sox were in effect not putting the best team on the field (and that includes whatever gains you see from other players who are apparently now happier that Manny is gone), the author there argues that the Red Sox had to get rid of Manny almost on principle.

Your argument seems to be that the Red Sox were actually a better team without Manny because even though he is a great hitter, he wasn't playing like one in Boston, and with him gone things went smoother in the clubhouse, etc, to the point where it made up for the difference in his bat over Bay's.

My argument is that the Red Sox screwed up. There's no doubt they took a gamble by waiting to see on Manny's options before this season, and that's a gamble they ended up losing, plain and simple. Management's role is to manage the team, and that includes the very peculiar personality of one very talented right handed hitter. They couldn't do that, ended up joining the long line of people who got outsmarted by Scott Boras, and are left sitting at home right now instead of being in the World Series.

[chippa13 1844]

While agreeing that EVERYBODY would want to have the LA Manny is Boston, particularly during the playoffs, compare the records before and after Manny. 55-43 (.561) before and 40-24 (.625) after. I think it's safe to assume the Manny saga was a distraction.

Oh come on, you and I both know that doesn't wash because their schedule was much much easier towards the end of the season.

That article you linked is making the case that by trading Manny the Red Sox were in effect not putting the best team on the field (and that includes whatever gains you see from other players who are apparently now happier that Manny is gone), the author there argues that the Red Sox had to get rid of Manny almost on principle.

Your argument seems to be that the Red Sox were actually a better team without Manny because even though he is a great hitter, he wasn't playing like one in Boston, and with him gone things went smoother in the clubhouse, etc, to the point where it made up for the difference in his bat over Bay's.

My argument is that the Red Sox screwed up. There's no doubt they took a gamble by waiting to see on Manny's options before this season, and that's a gamble they ended up losing, plain and simple. Management's role is to manage the team, and that includes the very peculiar personality of one very talented right handed hitter. They couldn't do that, ended up joining the long line of people who got outsmarted by Scott Boras, and are left sitting at home right now instead of being in the World Series.

Where are the Dodgers sitting? The all-powerful Manny didn't get them into the World Series, either. Just wait until Manny decides he wants out of his next destination. Great hitter, and here's the important part, when he wants to be.

People don't get outsmarted by Boras, they get outfucked. The guy is slimy to the hilt.