Best player over the last two years isn’t the same as most valuable to the team going forward

Some baseball writers had Sizemore as league MVP as recently as last season

While I wouldn’t go so extreme as to nearly vilify him, I do agree that there’s no reason to hold Cliff to such a lofty fan-favorite status. Thanks for all the hard work, Cliff, but we need those prospects.

I’ve been thinking about this. Shapiro underwent a major rebuilding effort after 2001, with the idea that NOW we would be contending year after year. He figured we’d build a strong core from within, acquire the right minor leaguers, and eventually this would be a cheap team with a few star-like players surrounded by solid major-leaguers, and we would only have to pay (through free agency or major league-caliber trades) for the role players.

In reality Shapiro hit on a lot of that. These Indians have produced plenty of top 20 players in the league. The only problem is the rest of the formula—either the fill-ins or the solid players—just haven’t lived up to their end of the bargain. Or more accurately, they haven’t done what they’re supposed to do in unison. It happened once, in 2007, and since then (and before) it’s been one guy’s hot while another guy is totally collapsing. So at this point we need a do-over. Not a complete overhaul like 2002, just a miniature version. This is a very bad team with stars on it. Stars that we have an emotional attachment to.

Right away I’ll say that Grady is an exception because of his age and contract. But it’s only our fandom convincing us that we shouldn’t trade Victor or Lee. But this is a team that sucks, SUCKS as is. We have plenty of talent to salvage: Grady, Cabrera, Valbuena, Choo, Carmona, Laffey, LaPorta, Lewis, Raffy Perez, and all the minor leaguers almost ready to contribute. Jettison what we can for value (Pavano, Carroll, Garko) and trade in the big chips (Lee and Victor) and start it over. This time the foundation is stronger than 2002 and it will take less effort and presumably less time.

We have to be lucky for Cliff and Victor to part of the next playoff Indians team, and even then it’s either a one-year window or damn expensive to keep them on. The team that Shapiro rebuilt needs to be semi-torn down again. I think I’ve finally come around to side in favor of trading both players this year.

And I’m still not convinced we couldn’t contend in 2010, although I’ve accepted that we don’t have to.

This is the same Cliffy who thought it was OK to make obscene gestures to the fans when they boo’d him because HE sucked.

Did he do this? I remember him sarcastically tipping his hat to the fans booing him. Was there some mano fica gesture involved?

I don’t mind having an ace who might not be a team player.

Last season we had the former Cy Young (having a great season) and what turned out to be the current Cy Young on our team. It didn’t translate to winning.

Yes. In addition to the persistent MVP candidate in CF.

This was our version of the 1998 Mariners.

I don’t really get what this debate is.

I was calling you out, yes. If you’ve been a serious fan for longer, then you’re a pretty odd duck to be focused on just the last 15 months. You’re also a fairly well educated guy who doesn’t know even the basics of modern statistical thought in baseball, so I can’t really make any assumptions about you.

For the record, I have never treated Lee like a bad guy for saying what he said. I have noted that the Indians don’t like that sort of thing, and — Also! — I have criticized the club more than once for this pantywaist tendency.

“immortal for going on two seasons” is just a ridiculous concept on its face. In ten years, when it turns out that he was immortal for 2.5 seasons, will you be saying, remember that guy Cliff Lee, who played for 11 years and was “immortal” for 2.5 of them?

It’s just silly. He’s a good ballplayer at the peak of his powers.

Right. That was my point; trading someone is almost never done with a lack of respect or gratitude, and I don’t know why this case would be different. You made it sound as if Shapiro needed to do something special when/if he trades Lee and I was wondering what that was.

I imagine him in a Vespa scooter, complete with a white helmet, goggles, and scarf flapping in the wind.

With Wedge in a sidecar, of course.

ZING! Concise takedown of Pam.

I hope that’s not you, ClemsonGirl.

I though Pam was on an upward trend, until the whole drop-out of art school fiasco. To drop out and return to the receptionist job. Wow.

I just don’t see this as Pam. I like Pam.
She did try to go further but Jim held her back. It’s Jim’s fault. Maybe I shouldn’t want a Jim. In that way Jim is like Cory from Boy Meets World. He kept Topanga from Yale.
And Pam now pushed for a sales job. I don’t see this.
I also think Jim has more than a passing interest in a future with Pam.

Yeah I have a lot of respect for him.

True story: I know Favreau’s younger brother

Well she was dating John Krazynski—I don’t know how to spell that.

Don’t drag ME into this.

Pam is overrated as a catch.

What are you even basing this on?

A fictional TV show that I have drawn conclusions from. You sir are shattering my worldview.

I felt like she lacked a certain amount of personality. I felt like she handled the situation in Scranton with a impetuousness that is a long-term liability.

She could have gone without the bangs for a stretch there, her hair was much nicer any other style.

She was pretty exotic. I think her dad was a GI or something.

Yes, there is that obviously.

There’s always my theory: TV is not real

WHAT!?!?!

Now you’re going to tell me you can’t live in a NYC apartment for 10 years without having a job. Don’t ruin my dreams!!!

This is a great point.

We should be concerned about Pam’s long-term relationship with Roy, who by all accounts, was a complete loser. Is this the type of woman you want to marry particularly seeing that you could be the rebound guy?

Nail on the head.

Well Jesus we’ve all been there.

…Haven’t we?

If I had actually thought about things before I said anything out of shock I would have said something similar.

And when I say “Like Pam” this is what I mean. I will prepare myself for a career but I am much more likely to end up as a housewife and mother and this is what I really want out of life. I don’t think that makes me unambitious either. I think it means I have priorities other than a career. I am actually very ambitious simply because I want to be the best wife and mother I can be.

I would argue Jim’s job is not high stress at all

So what you’re saying is Pam is like Lilly, prepared to settle down and raise kids and do some painting in her free time. Karen is like Robin, fast-paced career woman who needs a man that will conform to her life.

Just had to sneak HIMYM in there somewhere.

junky, let me first thank you for making such a thoughtful post on this issue. Still, it seems to me that you’re making a bunch of suppositions about Karen here with little substantiation.

I don’t see Karen as a high-powered career woman. I see her as a woman who has a job and takes it seriously — i.e., she bothers to do it well. If you’re really ready to cast every woman who does her job well into a big bucket labeled “high-powered high-stress career woman,” then I have to ask: Have you actually worked with any women, or with any person who takes his/her job seriously? Lots of folks are simply motivated to do a good job at work.

If anything, it is marrying Pam that is going to force Jim into a high-stress job situation, because someone’s going to have to pay that mortgage and support that kid, and obviously, it isn’t Pam. In fact, Pam is so haphazard and hapless about her career that she almost makes Jim look serious. (It is possible, I suppose, that Pam will turn out to be a tremendous salesperson, at which point, based on your logic, she essentially becomes Karen.)

The dysfunctional family situation seems to be invented out of whole cloth. Let us not forget, all Karen wants is a nice guy with a good sense of humor, like Jim. She may have tried to help him grow up a little bit, but, newsflash, he does need to grow up a little bit eventually. His life with Pam and child will make that crystal clear, and Pam won’t be as helpful in his adjustment.

I refuse to give Pam some kind of “credit” for being willing to settle down with Roy. What that shows is a total lack of reflection on what she really wants, willing to wander blithely down the road of vague expectation that is set in front of her (not unlike some here on this subject). Her startling lack of self-knowledge, in both relationship and career issues, suggests to me that she’s almost bound to get herself into some profoundly unhappy situations, possibly for decades.

You say Pam is comfortable being who she is, but isn’t Karen? You say Pam will be happy to settle down and have kids, but who’s to say Karen wouldn’t be equally happy to do so? There is little reason to think she wouldn’t apply her seriousness and talents to a relationship, marriage or motherhood.

Leaving aside the personality analysis, back to the question of “meant to be.” The question the obsessive romantics need to ask themselves is, Are you meant to be with someone who makes you happy, or are you meant to be with the person you’re “meant to be” with?

I’ve never seen this show, but I’m really falling for Karen here.

In a related note, this is probably the most comfortable way for me to tangentially converse about feelings with my brother without making things awkward, so thank you all for taking the time to be part of this moment.

THIS THIS THIS

Whoa, this is creeping me out.

I’d choose Karen, but it is not clear cut. Pam has some better traits

I don’t think his point was necessarily physical attractiveness so much as the other elements that go into that particular equation, all of which would seem to be more prevalent in Karen than Pam.

But the past is indicative of the future (i.e. a player’s actual baseball skills). Grady is a more talented baseball player overall than Cliff; there simply is no way to disagree with that.

You, as a fan, can “bet” that a 26-year old outfielder is more injury-prone than a 30-year old pitcher, but not if you’re a GM of a baseball team. You’ll lose that bet more often than not, and lose your job soon afterwards. GM’s can’t work that way. It’s fine for you to do that as a fan because you don’t have anything to lose.