2019 LA Dodgers Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 223, 224, 225  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Surfitall
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 12 Feb 2002
Posts: 3163
Location: South Orange County

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:32 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
OK, here are my immediate thoughts as it relates to next season. First off, I agree with chickenjoy24. This team needs a culture change. Flat-out.

The immediate thing that comes to mind is Kershaw. If he opts out, you let him walk, end of story. You have to recognize that his stuff is severely diminished, is almost certainly going to get worse, and giving a 3+ year deal for premium money to a pitcher with a serious back injury whose velocity is down to 90-91 MPH at age 30 is probably not a good idea. If he does not opt out, at least you know you only have a two-year commitment remaining. And I'd go a step further: I'd try to trade him. I'm sure teams would be interested on just a two-year commitment. But I think it's time; it just hasn't worked out in the postseason for him here.

Next order of business: trade Jansen. Like with Kershaw, I've seen enough failure in gigantic moments. It has cast a pall on the entire team, like you're just sensing dread whenever they come in. He has to go. It's nothing personal, but he has to go. Culture change. Doesn't matter if you try to sign a guy like Familia to close, or let Baez try to take the job, or a minor league prospect. It doesn't even matter. You just can't keep running Jansen out there. He has turned into Byung-Hun Kim. Imagine if the Dodgers got back to the World Series again and Jansen gets in there and blows a save. It's a disaster of epic proportions. You have to try something different.

Next up: Roberts has to go, and this one should be obvious. If he gets a contract extension after this "performance" in the World Series, we are going to be in a position where we have to overcome our manager's incompetent decisions in a short series, and that's so damn difficult to do. His 3 straight postseason appearances don't matter, nor does his regular season record matter. His decisions in the postseason have been brutal, and none more so than in the World Series. The Dodgers need to be above great regular season accomplishments. He has simply done a lousy job with basic in-game managerial decisions, and that deservedly should cost him his job.

Next: an overhaul at catcher is needed. Obviously, Grandal will not be brought back as a free agent. And Barnes is a punch-and-judy-hitting backup catcher. They need to offer up a starting catcher that might be able to hit better than .100 in the postseason. Think about how ridiculous it is that I had to type that, that I'm just wishing that a hitter in our lineup could hit better than .100. Will Smith and Keibert Ruiz have legitimate high-end talent. I seriously doubt that they would hit less than .100 in the postseason, and if I'm going to fail, I want to at least go down using high-end talent instead of, well, journeymen. Give the kids a chance to play.

Machado is almost certainly not going to be back, and I think it will be mutual. They needed him to fill a gaping loss of talent when Seager was down, and I applauded that the Dodgers went for that move. But he wants to play long-term on the East Coast, and with Seager coming back, I doubt that the Dodgers want to spend $200+MM on him. I was a fan, but I was really disappointed with his attitude and with his sometimes dirty play. Not exactly too eager to spend $200MM+ on a guy like that.

I'd also like to see us resolve this insane surplus that we have in the OF. Whether it's one blockbuster trade or a couple of trades that get us some assets in spots of need, I think all of the platooning has a negative effect. I don't mind some platooning; that's just a fact of modern baseball. But the Dodgers really take it to an extreme. And I think that guys can get into a funk if they sit on the bench for too long. By my count, the following players are capable of regular or semi-regular AB's as OF'ers: Joc Pederson, Matt Kemp, Chris Taylor, Cody Bellinger, Yasiel Puig, Alex Verdugo, and Andrew Toles. Do something and streamline what you have a bit.

Regarding Bellinger specifically, if he's going back to 1B to alleviate the OF logjam, then you need to do something with Muncy, as Muncy playing second base regularly is a defensive disaster of epic proportions. If you include Belli in a trade, the return could be potentially enormous. And if he's staying in the OF, again, we're just overloaded there. And this doesn't even say anything of a possible pursuit of Bryce Harper.

There are a lot of other things to talk about, like Ryu's free agency, guys we could pursue in free agency, and returning Maeda to his starting role during the regular season, but I suppose we have a lot of time to talk about that. Those were just some of my immediate thoughts. I think it is imperative to replace Roberts, trade Jansen, and let Kershaw walk if he opts out. And if he doesn't opt out, I'd really look to trade him, and perhaps he would even think that it's best for both parties.


I agree on every point. Good take.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:36 pm    Post subject:

Byung-Hyun Kim is one comparison. Another guy Jansen kind of reminds me of is Mitch Williams in 1993. He blew 2 games in the World Series including giving up a winning HR in the clinching game when his team was on the verge of forcing game 7, got death threats after that and for the rest of his career was a terrible pitcher.

Arizona bailed Kim out and won that series anyway so the impact on him probably wasn’t as great as it could have been.

I’m not sure how Jansen will respond to this mentally, and he will get more heat for this then he got last year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 33183

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:49 pm    Post subject:

BH Kim won 2 world series rings even though he is famously remembered for blowing 2 games against the Yankees in the 2001 World Series...he was part of the 2004 Red Sox too but didn't make the postseason roster. I remember that series because Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling won that series.....Randy Johnson pitching game 6 and then coming back in game 7 to pitch relief for Schilling.....the hell with pitch counts...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 19275
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:50 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
Byung-Hyun Kim is one comparison. Another guy Jansen kind of reminds me of is Mitch Williams in 1993. He blew 2 games in the World Series including giving up a winning HR in the clinching game when his team was on the verge of forcing game 7, got death threats after that and for the rest of his career was a terrible pitcher.

Arizona bailed Kim out and won that series anyway so the impact on him probably wasn’t as great as it could have been.

I’m not sure how Jansen will respond to this mentally, and he will get more heat for this then he got last year.


Kim basically never got over that and was never even relevant again as a big league pitcher, was he? In any case, Mitch Williams was always an up-and-down, grab-your-Pepto type of reliever. His WHIP was terrible, and it was usually an adventure with him, even when he got the job done. What's different with Kenley is that he's a downright dominant reliever in the regular season. Historically dominant. Look at his WHIP and K/BB ratio and batting average against. It's pristine. Yet he has blown up in the postseason far, far too often. And not just over the past 2 World Series, either.

I deeply believe we should trade him and that we need to try something different.
_________________
OK, no superteam, but we can still do this. Onward and upward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 5010
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:52 pm    Post subject:

I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vishnu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 16549

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:58 pm    Post subject:

I think Kershaw has 10 and 5 rights so he's tough to trade. He also has a clause in his contract that allows him to be a fee agent after 1 year.

Honestly, other than Grandal and maybe Machado, I'd bring everyone back. I think this is a good team. We just ran into a better one. We do need to either trade Verdugo or trade someone else to make room for him. He needs to be in the bigs.


Last edited by Vishnu on Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 19275
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:59 pm    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I hear you, and to that end, I do think we need to think about our offensive philosophy and what we want our hitters to do. Great pitching beats great hitting, we know that. I'm not expecting to score 5+ runs in every postseason game. But we just fail far too easily when simple contact is needed. There are too many strikeouts, and in the postseason, against great pitching, it's going to be exploited. Against mediocre pitching that you often see over 162 games, it's easier to bang out a whole bunch of home runs if you're swinging for the fences. But that approach is probably not going to win you 11 games in the postseason. We were kind of lucky that the NL was down this season, got a great draw with the Braves in the NLDS, got a decent draw in the NLCS against the Brewers (where I think Counsell overmanaged), and up against a great Red Sox team, maybe we weren't going to win a 7-game series. But what I do know is that we made it far too easy for them.
_________________
OK, no superteam, but we can still do this. Onward and upward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 33183

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:01 pm    Post subject:

Thats why there needs to be a shakeup on the roster....
You need an infusion of attitude. These guys might be too comfortable in the postseason.
BTW, the guys on the Boston locker room acted like they were not coming back to Boston without leaving LA as champions....and they did it.....was it brash and (bleep)? Probably. I never felt that with Dave Roberts managing....in his post game pressers he said it was only one game....no time to panic....well this is the World Series, some of these guys might never come back. You need a sense of urgency.


Last edited by lakersken80 on Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 19275
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:01 pm    Post subject:

Vishnu wrote:
I think Kershaw has 10 and 5 rights so he's tough to trade. He also has a clause in his contract that allows him to be a fee agent for 1 year.

Honestly, other than Grandal and maybe Machado, I'd bring everyone back. I think this is a good team. We just ran into a better one. We do need to either trade Verdugo or trade someone else to make room for. He needs to be in the bigs.


You're right about the 10-and-5 rights. But if the Dodgers made it clear to him that they didn't see him in their plans after two more years, maybe he'd agree to it, who knows. I'm OK if he doesn't opt out, as at least there's a final destination, so to speak. But I am absolutely not OK with giving him a new contract. I think it would be a terrible decision. Perhaps not as bad as the Kobe contract (I was aghast when I heard how much he was getting paid in a salary cap league), but I would be upset.
_________________
OK, no superteam, but we can still do this. Onward and upward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:04 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
Byung-Hyun Kim is one comparison. Another guy Jansen kind of reminds me of is Mitch Williams in 1993. He blew 2 games in the World Series including giving up a winning HR in the clinching game when his team was on the verge of forcing game 7, got death threats after that and for the rest of his career was a terrible pitcher.

Arizona bailed Kim out and won that series anyway so the impact on him probably wasn’t as great as it could have been.

I’m not sure how Jansen will respond to this mentally, and he will get more heat for this then he got last year.


Kim basically never got over that and was never even relevant again as a big league pitcher, was he? In any case, Mitch Williams was always an up-and-down, grab-your-Pepto type of reliever. His WHIP was terrible, and it was usually an adventure with him, even when he got the job done. What's different with Kenley is that he's a downright dominant reliever in the regular season. Historically dominant. Look at his WHIP and K/BB ratio and batting average against. It's pristine. Yet he has blown up in the postseason far, far too often. And not just over the past 2 World Series, either.

I deeply believe we should trade him and that we need to try something different.


Kim had his best season after that and made the all-star team. Then his performance dropped off after that. But I remember him saying something about not wanting to go to South Korea in the 2001 offseason because he was too embarrassed about what happened.

Yeah on second thought I’m not sure about bringing up Mitch Williams. But another reason I mentioned him is Jansen could still be a Dodger and I’m not sure how he will rebound from this. And Jansen wasn’t as effective this year as he had been in previous seasons.

Speaking of the culture of a team, it doesn’t surprise me that David Freese, a guy who has won before and was a major part of that, happened to be one of the few guys that was actually helping the Dodgers in the playoffs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 5010
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:17 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I hear you, and to that end, I do think we need to think about our offensive philosophy and what we want our hitters to do. Great pitching beats great hitting, we know that. I'm not expecting to score 5+ runs in every postseason game. But we just fail far too easily when simple contact is needed. There are too many strikeouts, and in the postseason, against great pitching, it's going to be exploited. Against mediocre pitching that you often see over 162 games, it's easier to bang out a whole bunch of home runs if you're swinging for the fences. But that approach is probably not going to win you 11 games in the postseason. We were kind of lucky that the NL was down this season, got a great draw with the Braves in the NLDS, got a decent draw in the NLCS against the Brewers (where I think Counsell overmanaged), and up against a great Red Sox team, maybe we weren't going to win a 7-game series. But what I do know is that we made it far too easy for them.

It isn't just about the mental aspect when it comes to not having a home-run-or-bust mentality. What I'm really talking about is making sure that there's still as much fight and belief in these guys as ever next season so that if they get back to the WS they'll believe that they will win throughout every fiber of their soul. It goes along with the culture change that you and others have mentioned in this thread.

When they got off to a bad start early in the season I remember asking in the 2018 thread if it was time for Roberts to throw an intentional tantrum in the locker room to fire up his team, a la Tommy Lasorda. Calm and cool may have worked for Phil Jackson, but for some people it will result in their team playing with too little emotion and subconsciously telling themselves that it will be OK if we lose.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs


Last edited by slavavov on Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:21 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:21 pm    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vishnu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 16549

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:28 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.


I think the difference was in both situations, the better team was down and came back. That is particularly true of the Cowboys. What happened in the World Series was a historically good team beating the Dodgers. There were opportunities to win, but it didn't work out.

I think this team did have fight. They were 10 games back early in the year, 3rd place in September, down 2-1 in the NLCS. They fought back. For an example of a team without fight, look no further than what happened to Arizona. That's a team without fight. The Dodgers lost to a better team tonight. It doesn't mean they didn't try or care.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:30 pm    Post subject:

Machado was actually one of the few hitters I felt wasn’t either just HR or strikeout. His World Series hitting was meh but he was far from an automatic out IMO. If it wasn’t for his lazy attitude and the huge contract he will get I’d definitely want him back. But because of the negative stuff I have mixed feelings about him.

Edit: Hmm, on second thought:

Quote:
He was 8 for 28 (.286 batting average) with three home runs and nine RBIs in the four-game NL Division Series against Atlanta and the first three games of the NL Championship Series against Milwaukee. But his production tailed off the rest of the way as he batted .184 (7 for 38) with three RBIs in the remaining nine games.


https://www.google.com/amp/amp.ledger-enquirer.com/sports/article220776525.html

The team needs more hitters like Turner. A guy with some power, but also the ability to get clutch hits off of tough pitchers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 5010
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:31 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

My biggest fear with the Dodgers is that they will develop that kind of mentality and that it will cancel out any improvements they make to their roster. Last year the only concern was about making some minor tweaks to the roster and making it back to the WS.

Even as a fan I don't have any real faith that this group will win a world championship. Last year I had plenty more faith that they could come back because they gave it away as much as Houston won it. This year they just weren't lucky enough from start to finish. maybe blowing last year's WS when it was supposed to be their year brought them some bad karma that they won't be able to recover from for a while.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 19275
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:41 pm    Post subject:

Vishnu wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.


I think the difference was in both situations, the better team was down and came back. That is particularly true of the Cowboys. What happened in the World Series was a historically good team beating the Dodgers. There were opportunities to win, but it didn't work out.

I think this team did have fight. They were 10 games back early in the year, 3rd place in September, down 2-1 in the NLCS. They fought back. For an example of a team without fight, look no further than what happened to Arizona. That's a team without fight. The Dodgers lost to a better team tonight. It doesn't mean they didn't try or care.


And there is no question in my mind that the Dodgers had the better team than the Astros last year and still lost. I would not move forward with the status quo. I think it would be a mistake.
_________________
OK, no superteam, but we can still do this. Onward and upward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vishnu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 16549

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:48 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
Vishnu wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.


I think the difference was in both situations, the better team was down and came back. That is particularly true of the Cowboys. What happened in the World Series was a historically good team beating the Dodgers. There were opportunities to win, but it didn't work out.

I think this team did have fight. They were 10 games back early in the year, 3rd place in September, down 2-1 in the NLCS. They fought back. For an example of a team without fight, look no further than what happened to Arizona. That's a team without fight. The Dodgers lost to a better team tonight. It doesn't mean they didn't try or care.


And there is no question in my mind that the Dodgers had the better team than the Astros last year and still lost. I would not move forward with the status quo. I think it would be a mistake.


I dunno. I think there should be some question. They're pretty good. With that version of Darvish, they were probably better.

I think major changes could potentially make the team worse, not better. I'd rather improve on the margins. Historically, this is just what the Dodgers do. They lose a lot in the postseason. The Boys of Summer team lost even more than this version did. They didn't trade Jackie, PeeWee, Campy, etc. Things eventually went their way. The same thing happened to the 70s Dodgers. They came up short constantly before breaking through. I think this team has a good chance of breaking through too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:49 pm    Post subject:

Vishnu wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.


I think the difference was in both situations, the better team was down and came back. That is particularly true of the Cowboys. What happened in the World Series was a historically good team beating the Dodgers. There were opportunities to win, but it didn't work out.

I think this team did have fight. They were 10 games back early in the year, 3rd place in September, down 2-1 in the NLCS. They fought back. For an example of a team without fight, look no further than what happened to Arizona. That's a team without fight. The Dodgers lost to a better team tonight. It doesn't mean they didn't try or care.


I’m not sure the Cowboys were at their best then. Troy Aikman suffered a really nasty concussion just a week earlier and has said he didn’t remember the NFC Championship Game. So I’m not sure how he was feeling in that Super Bowl.

And Buffalo offensively put up a ton of yards in the first half and controlled the game. They wasted some chances before the half to take a 17-6 lead.

If they ever had a chance to beat Dallas this was it. Yes, on an average day of that season Dallas was better, but not 24-0 in a half better (Dallas outscored Buffalo 24-0 in the half).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 33183

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:49 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
Machado was actually one of the few hitters I felt wasn’t either just HR or strikeout. His World Series hitting was meh but he was far from an automatic out IMO. If it wasn’t for his lazy attitude and the huge contract he will get I’d definitely want him back. But because of the negative stuff I have mixed feelings about him.

Edit: Hmm, on second thought:

Quote:
He was 8 for 28 (.286 batting average) with three home runs and nine RBIs in the four-game NL Division Series against Atlanta and the first three games of the NL Championship Series against Milwaukee. But his production tailed off the rest of the way as he batted .184 (7 for 38) with three RBIs in the remaining nine games.


https://www.google.com/amp/amp.ledger-enquirer.com/sports/article220776525.html

The team needs more hitters like Turner. A guy with some power, but also the ability to get clutch hits off of tough pitchers.


Machado had a great game 1.......got a couple of RBIs.....problem is he got worse as the series wore on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BirdMagicLegend
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 289
Location: Boston, MA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:51 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
slavavov wrote:
I said this in the 2018 thread and I'll say it again. You can lose one WS, Super Bowl or NBA world championship and turn it into a positive by getting tougher and better and winning it all next year. But when you lose back to back championships, there's a real risk in developing this subconscious expectation in the players that something will inevitably go terribly wrong if they make it back to the WS again.

I watched the 30 for 30 on the 90s Buffalo Bills, and in their fourth Super Bowl they led at halftime, and Troy Aikman walked past them in the tunnel at halftime and said their body language made it look like they expected to lose.

I've also read (correct me if I'm wrong) that Jerry West and the 60s Lakers were the same way.

ChickenStu made some great points about personnel changes. But they could make all the right personnel changes and still lose if they don't find a way to develop a winning attitude and philosophy starting NOW. Every good result we can ever hope for in any walk of life starts with the right values, philosophies and attitude.


I saw that 30 for 30 episode too. Aikman said he felt Buffalo dominated the first half, and expected to see them look charged up when they were leading in a big game and playing well. Instead they didn’t show much emotion at all.

And Buffalo did dominate the first half btw. Dallas was fortunate to only be down 7.

Another thing I remember being mentioned is when Buffalo fumbled in the third quarter, and Dallas recovered it and ran it all the way into the end zone to tie the game, the Buffalo sideline looked dead. They looked like they were done and got destroyed after that.

I didn’t see enough fight from this Dodger team in game 5, and it was a weak, pathetic way to go out.

The 2010 Lakers were down 3-2 after a couple of losses and responded when they faced adversity. They didn’t just roll over and die. They took it to the Celtics, destroyed them in game 6, faced more adversity in game 7 when falling behind, came back and won.


Again with 2010? First of all, Perkins went down for Game 6 and 7 and that basically lost the Celtics game 6 as the players were shell shocked. In Game 7, we lost the rebounding war to the Lakers badly with no Perkins but were still winning. All of a sudden in the 4th quarter, the refs start calling ticky tack fouls on the Celtics and Pau Gasol is flopping like mad which eventually allows a comeback by the Lakers with Kobe shooting a horrible 6-24. If anything the Celtics had more adversity in that series as even KG was not 100% himself.

Oh well, we have 2008 and now 2018 with the Red Sox 4-1 winners over the Dodgers.
_________________
"Larry, you only told me one lie. You said there will be another Larry Bird. Larry, there will never, ever be another Larry Bird." — Magic Johnson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:52 pm    Post subject:

Oh and as for the Dodgers not having any fight, they took a much bigger blow in game 4 of this series than they ever took during the season or in the NLCS. I’m sure the players cared but I was disappointed with the effort in game 5. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were still in shock.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 5010
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:04 pm    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
Oh and as for the Dodgers not having any fight, they took a much bigger blow in game 4 of this series than they ever took during the season or in the NLCS. I’m sure the players cared but I was disappointed with the effort in game 5. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were still in shock.

And that's exactly what happens that becomes a permanent imprint in your subconscious.

I don't want to trivialize this, since it's a real illness that our troops who serve our country are suffering with, but it's almost like PTSD. When you're in the environment again, or a different environment that reminds you of the one that was a traumatic experience, something happens mentally where even if things are going well enough, you'll relive the traumatic experience on some level and it will translate in a bad way into your actions.

If I'm the Dodgers FO this is something I'm discussing in terms of, how will we prevent this from actually happening, starting now. How will we train these players mentally when spring training starts so that they'll be positive and full of swag when they face adversity in the WS?

I know this all sounds like serious psychobabble, but if we talk to any pro athlete, especially a retired one who now has perspective, they'll tell us that all this is true and maybe the biggest difference between winning and finishing second.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs


Last edited by slavavov on Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 10880

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:07 pm    Post subject:

BirdMagicLegend wrote:


Again with 2010? First of all, Perkins went down for Game 6 and 7 and that basically lost the Celtics game 6 as the players were shell shocked. In Game 7, we lost the rebounding war to the Lakers badly with no Perkins but were still winning. All of a sudden in the 4th quarter, the refs start calling ticky tack fouls on the Celtics and Pau Gasol is flopping like mad which eventually allows a comeback by the Lakers with Kobe shooting a horrible 6-24. If anything the Celtics had more adversity in that series as even KG was not 100% himself.

Oh well, we have 2008 and now 2018 with the Red Sox 4-1 winners over the Dodgers.


Dude nobody cares about Perkins when Bynum was playing injured the whole series and when the 2008 Laker team was missing 2 key players who were better than Perkins ever was. Perkins couldn’t even win in OKC with Durant, Harden and Westbrook. Injuries suck but they happen.

If you want to talk about calling ticky tack fouls watch Leon Powe in the 2008 Finals.

And this seems like a topic for a different thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LAkers 4 Life
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 14616

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:09 pm    Post subject:

Jansen has become Mark Wohlers. Established himself as one of the best closers in the game, then completely crapped the bed. The only differences are Wohlers still got a title before the carriage turned into a pumpkin and Jansen doesn't have the wild walk rates. He serves up poorly placed cutters.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LAkers 4 Life
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 14616

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:14 pm    Post subject:

BirdMagicLegend wrote:
Again with 2010? First of all, Perkins went down for Game 6 and 7 and that basically lost the Celtics game 6 as the players were shell shocked. In Game 7, we lost the rebounding war to the Lakers badly with no Perkins but were still winning. All of a sudden in the 4th quarter, the refs start calling ticky tack fouls on the Celtics and Pau Gasol is flopping like mad which eventually allows a comeback by the Lakers with Kobe shooting a horrible 6-24. If anything the Celtics had more adversity in that series as even KG was not 100% himself.

Oh well, we have 2008 and now 2018 with the Red Sox 4-1 winners over the Dodgers.


Why are you on a Lakers site whining about a series 8 years ago in a Dodgers thread? It takes a special kind of asshat to decide on the night his team wins the freakin' World Series to go to an opponent's site to (bleep) about a long ago series just to poor salt on the wounds in another sport. Stop being a classless tool hijacking a thread over a topic that has nothing to do with the current topic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 223, 224, 225  Next
Page 2 of 225
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB