From: john smith on 8 Oct 2009 16:52
Come on Bob, Dunn and Arizona for 5 weeks, I don't think that Arizona
and a winning team had anything to do with Dunn being there......
I don't want to start another Dunn diatribe post here but him and Kearns
have played for nothing but 5th or 6th place teams their whole career.
You underrate attitude as a factor in winning. Sure attitude in no way
comes close to talent as far as winning is concerned. I am just saying
when you get used to losing, it is a hard habit to break. Especially if
the losing is perpetual and especially if the losing always seems to put
you out of the race after your first stretch of adversity.... The " here
we go again" attitude is very easy to have when you have never won
anything....I always got a kick out of that psychiatrist who came and
talked the team and kept telling them "losing is a disease". Silly
idiotic movie but funny at times...
I am a firm believer that team chemistry and a winning attitude go a
long way for any successful baseball franchise. The Yankees seem to have
those ingredients down to the T.... this year. It is a very happy
clubhouse despite the Jorge controversy...
From: Bob Braun on 8 Oct 2009 17:27
"john smith" <eddygdvd(a)msn.com> wrote in message
> Come on Bob, Dunn and Arizona for 5 weeks, I don't think that Arizona
> and a winning team had anything to do with Dunn being there......
If Arizona doesn't count, then your sample size is a grand total of 2 teams.
The common denominator, better yet, the lowest common denominator being Jim
From: John Kasupski on 8 Oct 2009 18:23
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 02:23:12 -0400, "Bob Braun" <oxinfla(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>As far as Kearns goes, I think his problems are based on lack of effort.
I was going to say more about Kearns but I ended up cutting it out. However,
looking back...he has what is basically a brilliant minor league career, where
he was looked at by some in the Reds' organization as a better prospect than
Dunn was. He comes up to the Reds and actually has a decent rookie year,
finishing third in ROTY voting. Then injuries handcuffed him for a couple of
years, and then he gets traded in mid-season, from one losing team to another
one that just happens to be MLB's modern-day equivalent of the '62 Mets.
While you'd like to see a guy keep battling and fight his way through all that
and rise to the top like cream is supposed to do, I can understand it if that
affected him mentally. What was that Berra-ism, 50% of baseball is 90% mental or
something like that? So...yeah, when I was writing that post, it did occur to me
to wonder if part of the reason for Kearns' decline was because, playing for a
perennial league doormat, he just doesn't give a bleep anymore. He wasn't nearly
an all-star his first full year in Washington; he wasn't horrible either. But
the two seasons that have elapsed since...pretty ugly.
From: John Kasupski on 8 Oct 2009 18:25
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:31:29 -0400, "Bob Braun" <oxinfla(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>Both players were coveted by leather pants. The only correlation I see
>relative to Kearns/Dunn and losers is Jim Bowden.
Yeah, but that in itself speaks volumes.
From: David Short on 9 Oct 2009 09:47
john smith wrote:
> I am a firm believer that team chemistry and a winning attitude go a
> long way for any successful baseball franchise. The Yankees seem to have
> those ingredients down to the T.... this year.
That and spending 200+ million a year on the best talent money can buy.