Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo
- - - - -

Tony Mazz ... butthead


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
36 replies to this topic

#1 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,294 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 12:54 PM

In today's boston.com column (fuck it, here it is), Tony Massarotti shows the world how to carry a grudge:

No matter what Teixeira says publicly – so long as he is wearing a Yankees uniform, is he really going to come out publicly, with or without Scott Boras, and say that his preference was to be in Boston? – some of us (ahem) believe the Red Sox had a chance to close the Teixeira deal. And that they blew it. Even in a two-year period, the fallout from the Teixeira negotiations was considerable.


What he's saying is don't believe what Teixeira or his (former) agent said, the Red Sox could have had him but they completely blew it. Completely and totally blew it. Massarotti says this over and over and over again, but he never has any proof. And I'm not sure how the fallout from the Teixeira negotiations are "considerable", what does this even mean?

Think of it. Since Teixeira went to the Yankees, New York has won a World Series and Boston has not won a single playoff game. The Red Sox’ television ratings on NESN plummeted. To make up for that mistake, the Red Sox had to sacrifice elite prospects and sign Gonzalez (wink, wink) to a deal that will effectively pay him as much as they would have paid Teixeira.


Think of it, since Barack Obama was elected President, New York has won a World Series and Boston has not won a single playoff game.
Think of it, since "Community" debuted on NBC, New York has won a World Series and Boston has not won a single playoff game.
Think of it, since the Sports Hub started on 98.5, New York has won a World Series and Boston has not won a single playoff game.
Think of it, since AJ Burnett went to the Yankees, New York has won a World Series and Boston has not won a single playoff game.

And that last line, is Gonzalez not worth the money? Yes, it sucked to have to give up prospects but isn't Massarotti also against "buying" a championship? Doesn't he get his panties in a bunch about that?

I used to be a big Tony Massarotti fan, but now he's worse than the CHB.

#2 FelixMantilla


  • reincarnated mr hate


  • 8,689 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 12:58 PM

I wonder if the Herald would take him back.

#3 teejay1324

  • 482 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:03 PM

I can't believe he still goes on and on about this. I stopped listening to his show specifically for this reason. It's funny he complains about them not ponying up money and then when they do go out and commit prospects and cash(eventually) for Gonzalez, he's complains about that too now. And he said a few weeks back that Theo can't be given too much credit for landing Gonzalez because that's an ownership decision. Does he actually know how much credit should or should not be given to Theo as opposed to ownership or is just speculating? I can't stand him. I can't stand any of them, really, which I why I haven't read a newspaper in over a year now.

#4 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,206 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:13 PM

Mark Teixeira of the .846 OPS last season? That Mark Teixeira?

#5 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,294 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:13 PM

The thing is, without evidence he sounds like the crazy guy on the corner shouting about the end of the world is nigh.

To my knowledge, he has never said that the Red Sox are at fault for not signing Teixeira because of reasons A, B and C. Also, I don't know why he has such a hard time believing that Teixeira used the Sox. Kirby Puckett, Bernie Williams and Mariano Rivera (last year) have done it to the Red Sox. Why wouldn't Teixeira do it? Especially if he had some hard feelings with how the Sox negotiated his contract when he was first drafted. Furthermore, maybe his wife does like living in NYC rather than Boston. Is this so out-of-the-question that someone might want to live in one of the greatest cities of the world?

With Massarotti, it's all pushed aside and immaterial. The Red Sox fucked up and they're going to suck forever.

#6 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,206 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:14 PM

Some of the user comments on that article are great

"Mr. Massarotti your nude FATHEAD of Mark Texeria will ship overnight today as you requested."

#7 BannedbyNYYFans.com

  • 3,175 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:18 PM

Scott Boras has the best FA position player in the market. The Red Sox want him and offer the biggest contract in their ownership's history. The Yankees however, were never going to be involved and only made a higher offer after the Red Sox "blew it".

To belive this you have to also belive:

The Yankees were content to go into that season with Nick Swisher at 1st Base - coming off a .743 OPS.

Teixeira always wanted to play for Red Sox (regardless of the sour taste in his mouth after the Duquette debacle years earlier). And despite him and wife saying they always wanted NY over the Boston.

Boras never wanted the Yankees to be involved, regardless of their deep pockets and need for a first baseman. He would have rather had his client to go to the Sox w/out giving the Yankees a chance to up the offer.


And to JMOH, I've argued with Mazz about this on the radio a couple times. His argument is that he "had a source very close to the negotiations" who he trusted but can't reveal.

Edited by BannedbyNYYFans.com, 14 March 2011 - 01:21 PM.


#8 mt8thsw9th


  • anti-SoSHal


  • 14,171 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:25 PM

I used to be a big Tony Massarotti fan, but now he's worse than the CHB.


Really? He's always been a weasely prick, in my opinion he's been insufferable as far back as I read the Herald (2002). This sort of thing just seems par for the course with him.

#9 Gambler7

  • 3,080 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:32 PM

I think it has become clear he has found something he knows irritates people, doesn't believe it any more than you or I, and has stuck to it because he is too lazy to do anything else. It's his crutch, and it's easy. Page hits, radio calls, he gets it all from this topic every time. He doesn't have to try. I can't get over how many times Felger will ask him if he saw a game or a part of a game during the show and he says "missed it." It's laziness.

Edited by Gambler7, 14 March 2011 - 01:49 PM.


#10 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,294 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:34 PM

And to JMOH, I've argued with Mazz about this on the radio a couple times. His argument is that he "had a source very close to the negotiations" who he trusted but can't reveal.


I hate the answer to this type of argument, I really do. It all boils down to, I know and you don't, so take my word for it. Which would be laughed at if the roles were reversed. Furthermore, Mazz seems to be the only member of the Boston media beating this drum. Is he the only one that got this information? Seriously?

Really? He's always been a weasely prick, in my opinion he's been insufferable as far back as I read the Herald (2002). This sort of thing just seems par for the course with him.


Yes, I really did. Post-2004 WS, there were a ton of books that came on the market about the Sox and that season. I happened to read Mazz and John Harper's "Tale of Two Cities" where each author traded off chapters and wrote about the 2004 season from the perspective of each reporter's team. Harper went into great detail about how Mazz was one of the writers who really cared about the Red Sox. He'd get really pissed off when they lost (like a fan) and loved when they won. I haven't read the book in six years, but IIRC Harper talks about how Mazz would get pissed off at NY writers, got angry at the annual Bos-NY writer baseball game and pretty much behaved like a fan with a press pass. BTW, Harper didn't write this to shit on Mazz, he wrote it as part of what makes Massarotti a great columnist.

Anyway, after reading that I gave Mazz a break and assumed that he was acting as his character on the radio and in the papers. Within the last two years or so (since TSH has been on) I'm beginning to believe that Mazz is an asshole and maybe he had Harper fooled.

#11 smastroyin


  • simpering whimperer


  • 17,032 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:41 PM

Everyone knows that his stance on Teixeira is kind of a joke at this point, and I presume he writes something like this because he is feeling put upon. I know Felger has been giving him a heavy load of shit for his Teix conspiracy theories in light of the money the Gonzalez trade and Crawford contract.

I don't know of a single print columnist who has become a better writer as a result of going on-air.

#12 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 11,116 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 01:58 PM

Anyway, after reading that I gave Mazz a break and assumed that he was acting as his character on the radio and in the papers. Within the last two years or so (since TSH has been on) I'm beginning to believe that Mazz is an asshole and maybe he had Harper fooled.

He's definitely not an asshole whatsoever, and this is all pretty much act/schtick to be controversial and stand out. I don't respect it and I think it's really tarnished his name around the city, but it's made him a buttload of money and landed him a primetime radio gig, so maybe he's right after all (to choose this path). I think the main reason we know that he doesn't believe this is because he sucks at being a contrarian. You can tell it's not genuine, there's no passion, and it comes off as forced and whiny.

Mazz was an outstanding beat writer for the Herald and a pretty good columnist for them. The move to Boston.com and TSH has really coincided/caused the downturn in his work's quality. It's too bad.

#13 TheoShmeo


  • made johnny damon think long and hard


  • 8,336 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 02:05 PM

I think that Mazz might well be right about Teixeira. I've long thought that that the Sox misplayed the negotiations, particularly given the Yankees' late entry into the fray.

But my worthless musings on the subject are just that, worthless, and Tony Mazz's comments are no better without any sort of proof beyond "well, trust me, I just know."

What a clown.

#14 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,294 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 02:13 PM

He's definitely not an asshole whatsoever, and this is all pretty much act/schtick to be controversial and stand out. I don't respect it and I think it's really tarnished his name around the city, but it's made him a buttload of money and landed him a primetime radio gig, so maybe he's right after all (to choose this path). I think the main reason we know that he doesn't believe this is because he sucks at being a contrarian. You can tell it's not genuine, there's no passion, and it comes off as forced and whiny.

Mazz was an outstanding beat writer for the Herald and a pretty good columnist for them. The move to Boston.com and TSH has really coincided/caused the downturn in his work's quality. It's too bad.


I agree with most of your post, but I don't know if I agree with your assertion that Maz isn't an asshole.


Let me preface by saying that I don't know Tony Massarotti and he may very well be a sweetheart of a guy, but if you play an asshole all day (whether in print, on the radio or both) and have done so to some acclaim, aren't you really kind of an asshole? I guess the larger question is, do you have to sell yourself out for money/a better job? It doesn't seem like Bob Ryan did. Neither did Mike Felger. Michael Holley, Michael Smith, Dale Arnold, Jackie MacMullan, Sean McAdam, Steve Buckley even someone like Nick Cafardo (who I can't stand) don't seem to have to take on the "asshole" personality to become successful and make money.

From what I remember, Tony the Asshole was a "character" that Massarotti took on when he was on the Big Show. He's not on the Big Show anymore yet he's still acting like an asshole.

#15 jk333

  • 1,781 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 02:25 PM

And to JMOH, I've argued with Mazz about this on the radio a couple times. His argument is that he "had a source very close to the negotiations" who he trusted but can't reveal.



It would make sense if Boras was this source because in the 2008 negotiations the Sox stuck at 8/180. (Rightfully so, 8/180 was the high offer) Boras wants either 1) a gross overpayment, (in this case, say 8/210 or 7/200) or 2) to drag negotiations out until he gets the best possible offer; ideally this involves a bidding war with mystery teams and/or big markets setting the salary.

Boras benefits by having big market teams bidding on free agents rather than sticking to their "best" offer. If he can prove to fans that the the Red Sox were "cheap" with Texeira then next time there is a free agent Henry/Theo may be more likely to keep the Red Sox involved rather than give one offer. After all, the Red Sox "overpaid" for Gonzalez with a big contract and prospects anyway.

I think it has become clear he has found something he knows irritates people, doesn't believe it any more than you or I, and has stuck to it because he is too lazy to do anything else. It's his crutch, and it's easy, page hits, radio calls, he gets it from this every time.


I guess we're talking about him here so maybe it's working but I shut 98.5 off when Mazz starts talking about the Red Sox. Felger is controversial while Mazz is a whiner and it doesn't even seem like he watches sports. Felger will give observations from games, historical facts like with the Montreal hosts where they said the Zednik hit was in Boston but it was in Montreal. Mazz doesn't give any of that; he really does seem to latch onto one or two talking points.

#16 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 11,116 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 02:34 PM

I agree with most of your post, but I don't know if I agree with your assertion that Maz isn't an asshole.


Let me preface by saying that I don't know Tony Massarotti and he may very well be a sweetheart of a guy, but if you play an asshole all day (whether in print, on the radio or both) and have done so to some acclaim, aren't you really kind of an asshole? I guess the larger question is, do you have to sell yourself out for money/a better job? It doesn't seem like Bob Ryan did. Neither did Mike Felger. Michael Holley, Michael Smith, Dale Arnold, Jackie MacMullan, Sean McAdam, Steve Buckley even someone like Nick Cafardo (who I can't stand) don't seem to have to take on the "asshole" personality to become successful and make money.

From what I remember, Tony the Asshole was a "character" that Massarotti took on when he was on the Big Show. He's not on the Big Show anymore yet he's still acting like an asshole.

No, you certainly don't have to at all. But he did, it worked, so he kept doing it I guess. Nowhere did I say it was the only way to get where he is, it was just a way for him to stand out. I also said that I don't respect that path, and that it's sad because it's tarnished his reputation (deservedly so) around the city.

I do/did know him, and he's a really nice guy in person, which is why I was saying that he's not an asshole. He's just playing one on TV/radio/print.

#17 Pilgrim

  • 441 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 03:39 PM

I just never understood why this was such a thing. Players of Mark Teixeira's level are awesome to have, but theyre not incredibly rare. In fact, we already had one playing the same position. Its not like the Sox lost out on Barry Bonds or something.

The fact that they acquired a similar player a few years later isnt an acknowledgement of mistake. The real point here is that slugging first basemen are available every couple of years if youre willing to pay up. No reason to bid against the Yankees for one of them. Mark Teixeira at 25 mill a year, or whatever Boston could have eventually signed him for, sounds like a shit deal to me.

Edited by Pilgrim, 14 March 2011 - 03:41 PM.


#18 snowmanny

  • 2,680 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 03:50 PM

Mark Teixeira of the .846 OPS last season? That Mark Teixeira?


This is the thing. Not having Teixeira cost the Sox in 2009 (when the Red Sox made the playoffs, btw), but not 2010 when Beltre -who they signed because they didn't have Teixeira - was much much better. And going forward I would take Gonzalez over Teixeira by a wide margin, and probably would have taken the back-up plan of keeping Youkilis at first and re-signing Beltre as well.

So it's a dead issue. And if you're going to kill them for not having Teixeira in 2009, you might as well kill them for re-signing Lowell after 2007 instead of signing/trading for some other third baseman, or maybe signing Dunn and living with his defense, and a dozen other possible moves that wouldn't have mattered one iota if Boston wasn't going to hold a lead in the 9th inning of playoff games.

Edit: grammar

Edited by snowmanny, 14 March 2011 - 03:56 PM.


#19 lexrageorge

  • 3,157 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 05:28 PM

The Boston writers really lost their schtick when the Sox had the audacity to win it all in 2004. No longer could they play up the 86 year old Curse. Winning it in 2007 made it even worse for them; they could no longer claim that 2004 was a "1 and done" variety team.

The best writers all get hired away now to national venues. So, the guys that are left can either (a) write interesting columns raising interesting and little noticed points for discussion; or (b) write columns of the type that state "I'm too stupid to understand UZR, so I'm going to call all folks that use UZR stupid". Unfortunately, there's an impression (right or wrong, I cannot tell) that articles that pointlessly call the front office "a bunch of bums" sell papers and attract viewers and listeners. Mazz is either incapable of writing option (a), or he's under pressure not to from his management, or otherwise chooses option (b). Not sure which, and I'm not sure which is more infuriating.

The other problem is that if you want to criticize the Sox front office, there's not a whole lot to take on. Pick your poison among the following:

- Paying Dice-K $20M/yr to be a 5th starter (one of the media's fallacies is that Dice-K is actually getting $20M/yr). This is a popular one, but only goes so far, especially as starters 1-4 appear to be pretty solid.

- Paying Drew $14M/yr to be a part-time player. This was popular, but I think it's just run out of legs, as Drew was one of the heroes of 2007, he's actually played in a fair number of games last year, and he generally doesn't make a lot of waves. And who really cares how much the Sox pay their right fielder?

- Julio Lugo, but he's long gone now, and they won it in 2007 with him regardless.

- The John Lackey signing. A potential to be a favorite among the talk radio set, despite the fact that his peripherals indicate he was damn unlucky in 2010. This one will grow legs if he flounders in 2011. But, it's hard to get too excited about this one at the moment.

- The Josh Beckett extension. Beckett has had too many good moments (2007, most of 2009) to date. Again, most folks need to see what he does in 2011 before getting too excited.

So that leaves the Teixeira non-signing, facts be damned. The Evil Empire comes in and swipes from our hands the biggest FA signing in history at the time.

#20 AquaNarc

  • 146 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 05:40 PM

Even if he was right about the he said/she said stuff, the simple fact is having Teixiera wouldn't have made much of a difference the last two years. He only affects two positions, first and third. Last year they couldn't possibly have gotten better production, offensively or defensively, from either position (ignoring Youk's injury). In 09 they definitely could have used Teixiera given Lowell's mediocre year, but they still won 95 games and made the playoffs. So yes, there is the small chance that one guy, a position player no less, would've had such an impact in the small sample size that is the postseason the the Red Sox would've won the WS and not the Yankees. Other than that, it hasn't hurt them at all. What they needed Teixiera for was the long-term, not the short term. Gonzalez takes care of that.

Tony is also being disingenuous when he goes on about "giving up elite prospects", because he freely admits that he would have done the deal and he is a guy that views prospects as nothing more than trade chips in general. He's trying to make a point about how it goes against what Theo believes, but as someone said, it's just his way of finding something critical/negative to say even when he completely supports the move.

Edited by AquaNarc, 14 March 2011 - 05:42 PM.


#21 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,663 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 10:17 PM

This self-serving propaganda from Tony is getting very old. The vast majority of Sox fans have moved on, especially now that we have Gonzo. More importantly, while Tex may have helped in 2009, pitching was our main problem last year not run production, and now pitching will determine how far we go. Tony should focus on todays issues/problems, not revisionist history.

#22 twibnotes


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,000 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 10:55 PM

I think it has more to do with laziness than Mazz trying to mix it up. It's not interesting or controversial enough to make me more likely to read the guy...it's just annoying and pathetic.

Either way, thought this indefensible line of thinking (that ownership won't do what it takes to make the "big deal") would die for awhile after the Adrian Gonzalez trade and Crawford signing.

#23 Mueller's Twin Grannies

  • 222 posts

Posted 14 March 2011 - 10:59 PM

What I don't get is this: what is the point of these constant rants and suggestions that the Red Sox cheaped out and lost a franchise player and Messiah? Is he writing a book called Curse of the 'Whipped Horseface? Because if he isn't, it seems like there's little point in him continuing to beat Teixeira's dead cousin's corpse like this. If he's trying to drum-up ratings to compete with the new-look The Big Show, one would think going back to a topic that many of his listeners have complained about hearing on the radio isn't the best way to do that. So what's his agenda? And if he is thinking of writing a Shank-esque "Curse of..." book, doesn't he have to wait 40-50 years or so before it will seem like it MIGHT somehow, some way, be remotely true? He won't be alive, never mind capable of cogent thought, by then so, to quote the Dude, "What's the point?"

#24 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,663 posts

Posted 15 March 2011 - 08:09 AM

What I don't get is this: what is the point of these constant rants and suggestions that the Red Sox cheaped out and lost a franchise player and Messiah?


Its just an attempt to get the fan base fired up and paying attention to him. Similar to CHBs feud with Schilling.

#25 m0ckduck

  • 324 posts

Posted 15 March 2011 - 08:31 AM

Its just an attempt to get the fan base fired up and paying attention to him. Similar to CHBs feud with Schilling.


I think this basically explains the motivation. But I think another thing that's happening is that writers are struggling to hold onto a semi-coherent storyline that effectively describes the twists and turns of the past few years in conveniently small-minded moralistic terms.

Before '04, the storyline was that the Sox were eternal losers; after '04, it became that they had finally turned the tables on the Yankees through a commitment to homegrown players, shrewd levelheaded moves, etc. But then, fastforward to '09, and the Yanks do the same unsubtle, big-market play they always do (i.e. buying every top free agent on the market)... except this time it WORKS and they are champions while the Sox 'haven't won a playoff game' (as we're eternally reminded of). If you're trying to keep track of this in terms of simplistic storylines instead of actual facts, the only angle that presents itself is that Tex represents some 'symbolic turning point', the One That Got Away, a new Babe Ruth, yak yak.

edit: typos

Edited by m0ckduck, 15 March 2011 - 08:33 AM.


#26 AquaNarc

  • 146 posts

Posted 15 March 2011 - 11:06 AM

He (and Felger) are going to have a field day with this http://www.weei.com/...-signed-red-sox

When Vmart signed with DET and Mazz was talking about how they lost a middle of the order bat, it was the closest I ever came to calling a radio show to point out that Vmart and Dustin Pedroia have almost identical career slash lines.

#27 backpeddling

  • 158 posts

Posted 15 March 2011 - 12:10 PM

Just wait until the little light bulb in his head goes off and he starts beating the "they should have waited for Pujols" drum.

#28 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,206 posts

Posted 16 March 2011 - 10:04 AM

Called out by Chad Finn?

The number of Boston.com sportswriters who are still howling at the Red Sox for not signing Teixeira before the 2009 season is, by my count, down to a lonely one. Come toward the sunshine, Mazz. Gonzalez is here, Teixeira isn't, and that's a great thing going forward. To put it another way: If the former isn't superior to the latter over, say, the next five seasons, I'll eat both of Dennys Reyes's stirrup socks without any spices or condiments.

http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2011/03/_david_ortiz_john_lackey.html?p1=Well_Sports_links

#29 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,663 posts

Posted 26 August 2011 - 12:53 PM

Mazz not onoly wrote this bit it also got past his editors:

Verlander is 19-5, which should serve as evidence that wins do mean something on a pitcherís resume. (Compare this with Felix Hernandez last year.) In five of his last six victories, Verlander has left the game with a one-run lead, which speaks to an ability to pitch to the score.


So many things wrong this this. Was he pitching to the score or just having a great month? And if he was pitching to the score and the Tigers scored 4 in the first few innings would he then let up a few runs if he felt a little tired perhaps? And how could you compare Verlander to Felix when Felix was on one of the worst teams in all of baseball last year, and was robbed of wins all the time. Considering the run support he has got Verlanders wins are impressive and probably more impressive than most 19 win seasons, but that just goes to demonstrate that wins for pitchers really need to be put in the proper context.

#30 Ahriman


  • noob, toughguy


  • 1,556 posts

Posted 26 August 2011 - 01:40 PM

Edit: wrong thread.

Edited by Ahriman, 26 August 2011 - 01:40 PM.


#31 Alcohol&Overcalls

  • 1,214 posts

Posted 26 August 2011 - 03:02 PM

So many things wrong this this.


I don't know ... there's a fine line between brilliant prose and casual retardation, and the argument "A large number of wins by a good pitcher should be evidence that wins matter" toes that bad boy pretty perfectly.

#32 Van Everyman


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,615 posts

Posted 26 August 2011 - 03:45 PM

On the other hand, this is well put:

The Mike Flanagan story is so sad and tragic it goes well beyond words. The same is true anytime someone feels so desperate as to resort to suicide. This should serve as a reminder to all of us that professional athletes, executives and broadcasters are no different than anyone else, susceptible to the pressures, issues and flaws that dot every human life from the moment we all set foot on the planet. Can we all stop with the notion that professional athletes somehow lead a dream existence? They donít. Much of who they are has been determined before they go to the first grade.

What this all speaks to, really, is the frailty of the human composition, be the issues physical, psychological, chemical, professional or environmental. If youíre a baseball fan or follower, this story absolutely, positively had to resonate with you. I didnít know Flanagan at all, but I know many people who did know him in the same way that I know others in the game. As a result, I have great compassion for him, his family, for others burdened with the same type of desperation he felt.

If only we could fix that.






#33 joyofsox


  • empty, bleak


  • 6,706 posts

Posted 28 August 2011 - 09:36 AM

That quote really clashes with his behaviour regarding Ellsbury last May where he, from all available public evidence, essentially created the myth that Ellsbury was a soft, lazy player who needed "maintenance" throughout his minor league career and into his time in Boston. He offered no evidence for this, outside of some generic Francona comment that everyone is banged at the end of a season and players have to work with that.

The way that meme caught fire, spread. and was echoed by so many print and radio people -- and then, by fans -- could have unraveled the mind and career of a comparatively thin-skinned player.

Knowing Mazz through his writing, for him to type about his concern for "the frailty of the human composition, be the issues physical, psychological, chemical, professional or environmental" seems like a bad joke.

#34 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,206 posts

Posted 01 September 2011 - 02:32 PM

"I'd rather have Victor Martinez than David Ortiz." Felger ageed.

For reference, Ortiz's OPS is 178 points higher than Victor's.

#35 Humphrey

  • 149 posts

Posted 01 September 2011 - 02:49 PM

"I'd rather have Victor Martinez than David Ortiz." Felger ageed.

For reference, Ortiz's OPS is 178 points higher than Victor's.


Anyone hear Mazz's reaction to Theo's comments about looking for another job? Basically, even though he said he was happy and focused on the Red Sox job.....because he never mentioned the Cubs. as opposed to an outright denial, it meant he is interested.

#36 cgori

  • 1,503 posts

Posted 11 October 2011 - 11:41 PM

In today's column, mostly positive, he decides to get a shot in:

Two years ago, remember, the Patriots faced a third-and-2 at their own 28-yard line while trying to protect a later lead at Indianapolis. Belichick put the ball in the hands of Brady, who threw a pair of incompletions that aided a Colts comeback and forever made "fourth-and-2" part of Patriots lexicon.


I don't even understand how that kind of factual error gets in there -- Faulk CAUGHT THE BALL on fourth down and was spotted short (that sequence was as intently studied as Zapruder footage here, so it's pretty hard to forget, but perhaps everyone else has).

Edited by cgori, 11 October 2011 - 11:42 PM.


#37 BannedbyNYYFans.com

  • 3,175 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 12:51 AM

Tony's version makes the Pats sound more incompetent, so why let the facts get in the way...