lack of passion

[cincrazy]

It's only one game, and I still think this team can have a .500 season or slightly better, but I just see no fire and passion in this team. I just see this nonchalant attitude that drives me crazy. Last year, Sean Casey was a guy that continously brought that fire to the ballpark, but outside of him, I didn't really see any last year. Now that Casey's gone, who provides the fire and passion? I just don't see it in this team. In the 1999 squad that had a great year, you had Dmitri Young, Mike Cameron, Casey, Boone, Pokey Reese, etc. All of those guys had their flaws, but they played with so much passion that they almost willed that team into the playoffs. I see bad defense, an inability to hit in the clutch, thin starting pitching, and most importantly, a lack of passion. There should be an urgency to this ballclub to get off to a great start, and I hear them saying it, but I just don't see it on the field

[OnBaseMachine]

And, obviously, Casey's passion for the game won the Reds many games over the last five years.

Lack of clutch hitting? The Reds led the NL in runs scored last year and are off to a greta start this year. They must be doing something right.

[BoCcc2832]

Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine

And, obviously, Casey's passion for the game won the Reds many games over the last five years.

Lack of clutch hitting? The Reds led the NL in runs scored last year and are off to a greta start this year. They must be doing something right.

This is one of many ridiculous statements you all have made. First off, one person's passion CAN NOT change the fate of a team. Sean Casey was a great man, one of the greatest to put on a Cincinnati Reds uniform. But you cannot tell me that it was squarely on him. Second, just because a team scores runs doesn't necessarily mean they were all clutch. Look how many people they left on base or the average of the team w/ RISP. That will tell you the true clutch hitting-ness of the team. Not total runs, you moron.

Second, "talent wins, not passion." by pedro. True, but not always. Look at the 1999 Cincinnati team that won 96 games. Let me list the starting rotation: Pete Harnisch, Denny Neagle, Steve Parris, Ron Villone, and Juan Guzman. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME? To hear that rotation and believe the team won 96 games is beyond weird. That team will not have any future Hall-of-Famers in it, yet they miss the playoffs by one game. Yet, you want to sit here and tell me that they didn't have passion and it was sheer talent that won it for them? Oh get off of it!

Third, "Would passion have helped Adam Dunn catch a fly ball?" by membengal. No, but if Dunn had any passion at all, you would have seen a reaction to his many mistakes (wind-affected or not). But you never see disappointment or anger in our Reds faces due to mistakes or getting thrown out after a groundball.

Passion is important in all sports. I'm a runner, I know. If you don't have passion, you don't try. If you don't try, you fail. The Reds failed on Monday and sure, it's just one game. But unless hell freezes over first, I guarantee, we will see more passionless baseball from our boys in Red.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by BoCcc2832

This is one of many ridiculous statements you all have made. First off, one person's passion CAN NOT change the fate of a team. Sean Casey was a great man, one of the greatest to put on a Cincinnati Reds uniform. But you cannot tell me that it was squarely on him. Second, just because a team scores runs doesn't necessarily mean they were all clutch. Look how many people they left on base or the average of the team w/ RISP. That will tell you the true clutch hitting-ness of the team. Not total runs, you moron.

Moron? Unacceptable language- particularly considering that you don't have a clue as to the facts of the matter.

The 2005 Cincinnati Reds:

Runs Scored w/Runners On Base: .251 Runs per Plate Appearance (NL Rank- 1st)

Batting Average w/Runners On Base: .270 BA (NL Rank- 8th)

What? You mean that the Reds were an NL average team with Runners on Base but still led the NL in Runs Scored with Runners On? Yeah. That's how it works because BA w/Runners On doesn't mean squat.

Runs Scored w/Runners in Scoring Position: .348 (NL Rank- 3rd)

Batting Average w/Runners In Scoring Position: .256 (NL Rank- 11th)

How did THAT happen? The Reds were the best team in RS with Runners On per PA and the third best team in the NL in Runs Scored with RISP, yet finished 8th and 11th in BA in those respective rankings. Why is that?

It's because your position isn't consistent with what actually drives Run scoring- either over the long haul or situationally. In short, you don't know what you're talking about.

Second, "talent wins, not passion." by pedro. True, but not always. Look at the 1999 Cincinnati team that won 96 games. Let me list the starting rotation: Pete Harnisch, Denny Neagle, Steve Parris, Ron Villone, and Juan Guzman. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME? To hear that rotation and believe the team won 96 games is beyond weird. That team will not have any future Hall-of-Famers in it, yet they miss the playoffs by one game. Yet, you want to sit here and tell me that they didn't have passion and it was sheer talent that won it for them? Oh get off of it!

Sometimes the stars align correctly. Has nothing to do with "passion" or "effort" and it has everything to do with how baseball is a strange game.

Now go find one of the players you cited whose "passion" allowed them to carry their NEXT team to victory after they left the Reds. Good luck on that.

Third, "Would passion have helped Adam Dunn catch a fly ball?" by membengal. No, but if Dunn had any passion at all, you would have seen a reaction to his many mistakes (wind-affected or not). But you never see disappointment or anger in our Reds faces due to mistakes or getting thrown out after a groundball.

Complete bunk. The perception of the unreasonable is never evidence to the contary when faced with a reasonable position. It's usually nothing more than a casual fan's expectation of that which isn't reasonable.

Passion is important in all sports. I'm a runner, I know. If you don't have passion, you don't try. If you don't try, you fail. The Reds failed on Monday and sure, it's just one game. But unless hell freezes over first, I guarantee, we will see more passionless baseball from our boys in Red.

Your "sport" (and I use that term loosely) is immesurably less complex than Major League Baseball. When the Reds underperform your casual expectations in 2006, it's going to be due to talent, not "passion".

And let's face it..."passion" may allow you to finish the race, but it won't allow you to beat a much faster runner. You know that. If you don't try, you don't get into the race. But trying ain't going to make you a winning runner if you don't have the skill to be one. That's as simple as it gets.

[BoCcc2832]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

Your "sport" (and I use that term loosely) is immesurably less complex than Major League Baseball. When the Reds underperform your casual expectations in 2006, it's going to be due to talent, not "passion".

And let's face it..."passion" may allow you to finish the race, but it won't allow you to beat a much faster runner. You know that. If you don't try, you don't get into the race. But trying ain't going to make you a winning runner if you don't have the skill to be one. That's as simple as it gets.

Okay, let me ask a question. (By the way, the only reason I haven't replied to your sarcasm of my response is because this website decided that "moron" was inappropriate. Well, I think making fun of Jesus Christ's passion was inappropriate. But hey, I'm not the one who pays to keep this site up, so I'll shut up) I agree that the MLB is more complex than running. But have you ever heard of Steve Prefontaine? He was a guy from Koos Bay, Oregon, someone that no one ever heard of that came out and gave it HIS ALL EVERY RACE. What happened? He became the best runner in American history, finishing fourth in the 1976 Munich Olympics. He was a person who did not have a runner's body, which is tall, lanky, and long legs. Pre did not have any of these. What he had was PASSION. When he had PASSION, he pushed everyone and dared anyone to beat him. He was the gutsiest and biggest loud-mouth (sorry, that was inappropriate language) in the history of running. What does this have with the Reds, since this is a Cincinnati Reds blogsite? If the Reds had as much PASSION as Pre did, their talent would be that much improved, as was Pre's. I am out.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by BoCcc2832

Okay, let me ask a question. (By the way, the only reason I haven't replied to your sarcasm of my response is because this website decided that "moron" was inappropriate.

Calling someone a moron is inappropriate. I suggest you have someone read the rules at the bottom of the page to you since it appears you have not.

[Gainesville Red]

Originally Posted by BoCcc2832

But have you ever heard of Steve Prefontaine? gave it HIS ALL EVERY RACE. What happened? He became the best runner in American history, finishing fourth in the 1976 Munich Olympics.

I may be about to show my complete lack of knowledge about the "sport" and history of running, but you're telling me that the best runner in all of American history only finished fourth in the Olympics? That can't be right, surely there has to have been better runners.

Like I said I don't know anything about running, and could be way off base here, just find that hard to believe.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by BoCcc2832

Okay, let me ask a question. (By the way, the only reason I haven't replied to your sarcasm of my response is because this website decided that "moron" was inappropriate. Well, I think making fun of Jesus Christ's passion was inappropriate. But hey, I'm not the one who pays to keep this site up, so I'll shut up) I agree that the MLB is more complex than running. But have you ever heard of Steve Prefontaine? He was a guy from Koos Bay, Oregon, someone that no one ever heard of that came out and gave it HIS ALL EVERY RACE. What happened? He became the best runner in American history, finishing fourth in the 1976 Munich Olympics. He was a person who did not have a runner's body, which is tall, lanky, and long legs. Pre did not have any of these. What he had was PASSION. When he had PASSION, he pushed everyone and dared anyone to beat him. He was the gutsiest and biggest loud-mouth (sorry, that was inappropriate language) in the history of running. What does this have with the Reds, since this is a Cincinnati Reds blogsite? If the Reds had as much PASSION as Pre did, their talent would be that much improved, as was Pre's. I am out.

Sure I've heard of Steve Prefontaine. Great story (he's from Coos Bay, Oregon, BTW). But, alas, it's an example that supports my position rather than yours.

Let's assume that Steve Prefontaine worked as hard as he possibly could have. We'll assume that he ate the perfect diet (doubtful considering that he was reputed to drink a bit- which allegedly led to his death) and worked out every day in order to max out his physical potential.

Steve Prefontaine finished fourth in the 1972 Munich Olympics. Considering that you think Pre' was the epitome of "passion", how do you think those other runners beat him when he led with 600 Meters to go in the 5000M race?

One word: Talent.

Well, either that or Pre' wasn't as passionate as a guy like Lasse Viren or the two other runners who took Prefontaine down with 600 meters to go in a race he led. But then, since it appears you think Steve Prefontaine posthumouly finished fourth in the 1976 Summer Olympics, maybe you don't remember Viren's 1972 performance.

Heck, Americans Frank Shorter (who actually won a race at the 1972 Olympics) and Mary Decker-Slaney were more accomplished runners than was Steve Prefontaine and they have the medals and World Records to show it.

And you're right to ask what distance running has to do with Reds baseball. Your answer is nothing. But it is a good demonstration that trying real hard doesn't make you better than a guy who's going to be better than you no matter how hard you try.

[OldXOhio]

Originally Posted by cincrazy

It's only one game

that's my opinion

[kbrake]

Its a long season you cant expect them to be going nuts for every game. Teams that win, win because they are talented and know how to play the game not because they are so excited to go play the game.

[pedro]

Look at the Braves for instance. During the last 15 years they have been one of the most sedate teams I have ever seen and they have won 14 straight division titles. As everyone else has said, talent wins, not passion.

[IowaRed]

I love Casey but no amount of passion can make up for this pitching staff.

[KronoRed]

Originally Posted by IowaRed

I love Casey but no amount of passion can make up for this pitching staff.

Really, passion didn't allow 16 runs to score and neither did Adam Dunn, the pitching sucks, has for decades and will keep doing so for the foreseeable future.

[westofyou]

Baseball is chess, the back and forths can take on a team mentality that is mob rooted in its display, that can be seen as passion. But baseball is seperate pieces in seperate instances that sometime only affect 1 guy at a time.

It's hard to go Lord of the Flies in baseball, the game is full of too many incidents of pure individualism.

[traderumor]

Brad Lesley had passion.