Is it the means or the ends?

by jonk on Dec 12, 2008 8:43 PM EST Comment 14 comments

What is more important, getting to the finish line or how you got there? Most people will say getting to the finish line. If I do it the ugly way, who cares? Well, while in theory that is good, all it does is confuse people on what is the good path. We likely have won the World Series despite ourselves. The Phillies went 24-6 the last 30 games of the season. That doesn't happen often. I once got into an argument over a Joe Sheehan column discussing how the Phils will start off 24-6 one year and how likely that is to occur. My point is that we got very lucky.

So, where does that leave us? Pat is gone and we have Rual Ibanez. A downgrade on many levels and possibly a way for the organization to "save face" by pretending to spend money. Maybe it spells the end of Ryan Howard after this year (I am thinking he is gone). Either way, are we happy if we win despite the road taken to get there?

Honestly, I'd have some sort of sick happiness if Pat signed with the Mets for 2/22 and ended up taking them to the playoffs. I know, it sounds and feels awful, but I am almost at the point that I'd rather cut off my nose to spite my face.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

“That’s awfully mean, but sometimes the ends justify the mean.” -Michael Scott, The Office

by FuquaManuel on Dec 12, 2008 8:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

God I love that show.

by ajay on Dec 13, 2008 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If they were only pretending to spend $30 million on Ibanez, I would be considerably happier. The problem is the opposite – the fact that it’s very real.

by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 9:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I actually don’t think Ibanez is all that much of a downgrade from Burrell though. The problems are the ridiculous cost, the fact that we’re stuck with him for three years, and the loss of the pick.

by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 9:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

It’s about the philosophy. There is a chance that Ibanez would be better than Pat. I only care about why they made the moves that they did. This reeks of stupidity.

For Who? My teammates.

For What? To Win.

How Much? Where do I sign?

by jonk on Dec 12, 2008 9:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He’s a downgrade in almost every (if not every) offensive (and possibly defensive) category…and he swings from the wrong side of the plate…he’s a downgrade from pat – i don’t even think it matters how much – he’s a downgrade from pat and he costs more (contract value) than the one year of arbitration they were ‘afraid’ he’d take.

The phillies made themsleves less good because they are stupid.

And btw – once you win one – the goal is to win two – not sit on your laurels and put a moron in charge who does stupid things…

by jemagee on Dec 13, 2008 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So do you honestly think you’re disagreeing with something I wrote, or do you just enjoy pontificating aimlessly?

by taco pal on Dec 13, 2008 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He enjoys pontificating aimlessly. If you haven’t notice that by now you haven’t been paying attention.

by FuquaManuel on Dec 13, 2008 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gee thanks. What would life be like if there were no rhetorical questions?

by taco pal on Dec 13, 2008 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I think it would be like—

Oh. Right.

by dajafi on Dec 13, 2008 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

LUCK

I’m starting to get the impression that luck is one of the most overused words in baseball. Sometimes players and teams are just good too.

The Phillies have been amongst the best teams in baseball for this decade. They won a division. They repeated that and won a World Series. They ignore Ryan Howard’s bad senior season in college and all the strikeouts on his way up the minor league chain, They are not scared off by Hamels injuries and questionable behavior in high school. They draft a too short and small Jimmy Rollins. They draft Chase Utley who was not a red hot prospect guy. They draft Donald and Drabek and Savery despite lots of question marks.

They pick up Werth and Dobbs and Blanton and Lohse and Lidge and Stairs and Victorino and Romero and Eyre and Moyer and all sorts of other key pieces to a champiopnship club for next to nothing .

This is not luck folks. It’s understanding value and taking advantage of that understanding.

They make lots of dumb mistakes too. Just like the brilliantly run Red Sox and Angels and Cubs. The ownership seems to be more interested in budgets than anything else. They have “spokesmen” who say dumb things. They have a smug GM.

But t6hey won the WFC last season and they have been good to very good for the entire decade and that i not luck.

It’s fun to go back and look at old threads and posts in message boards and stuff. Ansd guys, who are really, really smart and know a lot about baseball and stuff recommend things like signing Andrew Jones and trading for Ian Snell and call the Phils stupid for relying on Dobbs and Werth when they could have gotten Trot Nixon or Craig Wilson or Morgan Ensberg instead.

The difference between us and the real GMs and the real teams in this game is that when we suggest or recommend something stupid, it doesn’t matter because we are not stuck with an Andruw jones or a Trot Nixon. We just say, ooops and move on (if we even remember our dumb suggestion in the first place).

The hils have not been THAT lucky. They’ve been really good for a long time. I’m someone who suffered through on of the owrst teams in baseball history for a lot of years. Those teams weren’t unkucky. They stunk. And I appreciate this Phillies team a lot. Even though they do dumb things like sign Raul Ibanez. Atleast he isn’t Andruw Jones or JuanPierre (I hope).

by smitty99 on Dec 13, 2008 5:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’m not sure anyone who has said anything here attributes the phil’s success all to luck. There is no way that the 2002 phillies, for example, could have been crowned WFC—no matter how much luck they had.

most of us are saying that being a good team + getting lucky is what got us the championship. luck helped us with injuries, timely hitting, etc. could we have won the world series with no luck? no. could we have won the world series with no talent and JUST luck? no.

by char6587 on Dec 14, 2008 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand what you’re saying. But the point of this article is the Phils won in spite of themselves and they finished the year 24-6 and that the team got very lucky. I guess my point is, luck has a little to do with it of course. It always does. But not really all that much so who cares. I’m saying that the Phillies are WFCs mainly because by October they were the best team in baseball. The best team doesn’t always win. But it did in 2008.

The author seems to think the Phils won in some ugly fashion. I don’t think having a really fine core and adding lots of useful and productive parts is all that ugly. It was very fun to follow and watch and cheer on. Just a great way to go in my view.

In theory, it’s easy to sign all the right players and win lots of games because you are really smart about this baseball stuff. It’s called fantasy baseball. But there’s a reason it’s called fantsy baseball. Because it isn’t real.

In the real world teams don’t sign Kyle Lohse to a one year $4 million dollar deal because they just got done signing Kris Benson. The Phils do a lot of things we think are dumb. Sometimes there might be a good reason for it and sometimes there just isn’t. But that’s what real teams do all over MLB.

by smitty99 on Dec 14, 2008 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs