|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 4, 2016 11:52:18 GMT -8
Of course Vin Scully and Mike Parker have differences. By the same token they have similarities. To say that the only similarity is their professions is only an opinion (a very disputable opinion), which said opinion becomes weaker when you are adamant it is the only opinion. Never said it was the ONLY... it's pretty obvious one is in a class almost by himself. One is a regional college announcer. I tried to emulate Radford and Blume, but could hold their dirty jocks in terms of the level of success I had in doing so and to say we were similar is a little far fetched. Vin is "MJ" to MP's 3A hoopster. Thats not being demeaning to MP, but analogous to the "pecking order". Vin's greatness happens to be the opinion of several dozen HOF voters. I get you guys love MP... but really??? Disagree, call me names, at least my orange tinting does not make me go blind! LOL |
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Apr 4, 2016 23:27:23 GMT -8
"Their both announcers that's where the similarity ends..."
Obviously the word only isn't in there. It is actually a stronger statement than the toned down one I used. Sorry if me using only somehow misconstrued your statement.
I never once said that I like Mike Parker, and I think that is relevant since you quoted my statement. I actually appreciate that you see weaknesses in Mike Parker's announcing. I myself do not always jive with his style and delivery. I just felt that my or your like or dislike of Mike Parker has very little to do with judging whether he has had some success in patterning himself after Vin Scully. I usually do not move onto other issues loosely connected to the starting issue if the starting issue is not understood. In the beginning I basically said it did not make sense to me. To be honest, I agree with the moving target statement and I understand less where you are coming from now.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 5, 2016 7:42:03 GMT -8
"said opinion becomes weaker when you are adamant it is the only opinion."
My comment was based on your stating my opinion was weakened because VIN being superior broadcaster was the ONLY one... did I misread?
|
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Apr 5, 2016 8:56:15 GMT -8
You think he said Mike is 'better than Vin'? he said he succeeded in patterning himself via Vin. But hey, we all know bb0000 knows all! He actually mentioned he "succeeded"... Mike is a decent college announcer. Beaver family can love their own, but MP is not in the same universe nor is his "pattern" or style close to Vin. Mike is as much a "homer" and at time over zealous bordering on unprofessional at times. If MPs antics were those of an opponent's announcer our fans would be all over him on this site. It is not my opinion... simple fact. Vin is an ALL TIME GREAT. MP couldn't get the Blazer job. Not sure which Vin Scully you're talking about, but the one I listened to for years was an inveterate homer. He bleed Dodger Blue. The greatest ever? I guess you never heard Lon Simmons. |
|
|
|
Post by gzrbvr on Apr 5, 2016 9:10:29 GMT -8
He actually mentioned he "succeeded"... Mike is a decent college announcer. Beaver family can love their own, but MP is not in the same universe nor is his "pattern" or style close to Vin. Mike is as much a "homer" and at time over zealous bordering on unprofessional at times. If MPs antics were those of an opponent's announcer our fans would be all over him on this site. It is not my opinion... simple fact. Vin is an ALL TIME GREAT. MP couldn't get the Blazer job. Not sure which Vin Scully you're talking about, but the one I listened to for years was an inveterate homer. He bleed Dodger Blue. The greatest ever? I guess you never heard Lon Simmons. I listened to a lot of Lon Simmons. I much preferred him to Scully.
In my mind, there is no question that MP patterned his style on Vin Scully and Al Michaels for that matter. I seem to remember that MP has said he listened to Scully by the hour. My opinion is that Michaels also patterned his style on Scully. Whether or not MP has exceeded Scully is doubtful, but maybe so. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. The fact that MP is a "regional" voice means little. We remember Cowherd as a regional voice that went on to bigger things practically overnight. Something about right place at the right time comes to mind. It happens in all fields--there is more luck to success than a lot of people want to admit. Unless it is the case cited in that paragon of knowledge, the Onion, last week about the CEO of a large company that attributed his success to the fact that he was lucky enough to be born the son of the previous CEO.
|
|
|
|
Post by justdamwin on Apr 5, 2016 9:19:14 GMT -8
What's wrong with being overzealous? Parker bleeds orange and black. Nothing wrong with that. I enjoy listening to him almost as much as I do Vin Scully. He does an admirable job with basketball and football too, but I like his baseball broadcasts best. Like MP, I also want to know why the Husky player who struck out on the strike out/throw out was allowed to bat the next inning. He eventually scored the tying run. If he doesn't get a second chance, we win that game. If you get him out you win the game! AND... we are the home book responsible for official statistics... was there any argument from PC? After the player's hit and reached base did PC appeal that he was indeed out of order? If so, none was mentioned or shown on TV. I was not in attendance, but saw the play on TV. IF the plate ump did call strike 3 on the half swing on a ball in the turf... camera cut away quickly to the play at 2nd... the batter turns runner and was not legally tagged out. The 3rd out was recorded at 2nd base. In most instances umpires would have called the batter out in that he made no initial move to advance to 1st base. In that case the hitter should not have lead off as it would be similar to a player grounding into a FC. However... there is a very real possibility that the plate ump after the 3rd out was recorded had asked for help on the swing from the 1st base umpire. IF it was determined not a swing (IT WAS!) then the batter leads off the next inning. If MP knew the rules or cared to check between innings he would have been prepared to explain to the radio audience, and not have to perform one of his over-the-top "I'm a Beaver Believer" antics. His job is to find out and inform not freak out! That is the main difference between a true professional announcer... they inform their audience without regard to their allegiance. Then at least, if the ruling is incorrect MP can go thru his hysterics. At times he borders on unprofessional and has been called on the carpet for it on multiple occasions. Vin also employed by the team he announces for yet never has slammed down equipment in anger, been heard swearing court side/name calling officials, been admonished by officials, had to be restrained when jumping on the counter, etc. Their both announcers that's where the similarity ends... Working from my memory of the events: The swing was immediately appealed by the home plate umpire and the field umpire, confirmed strike. The ball was not possessed cleanly by the catcher, so the batter becomes a runner to first and must be forced or tagged out. The runner from first was already in motion toward second. So now, we have the third strike called but the batter has not been forced or tagged out. OS threw the ball to second, Tagging out the base runner from first. The batter still is not "out" as he has neither been forced or tagged out. The batter should start his at bat over, same as if the runner from first had been caught stealing on strike two. With two outs and dropped third strike the batter becomes a runner, now the runner from first is in a force. If OS has made the play by stepping on second, then the batter would not have led off the next inning at the plate, the at bat would be completed with the force out at second. My only problem with the scenario was, after Meggs discussed with the official, I think the official should have discussed with PC. Maybe PC gave them a head nod and all was good, but I did not see that. Other than that I think it was well done. I think the pitcher gets the K and a wild pitch (or past ball), the tag out is recorded on the base runner. |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Apr 5, 2016 9:57:48 GMT -8
If you get him out you win the game! AND... we are the home book responsible for official statistics... was there any argument from PC? After the player's hit and reached base did PC appeal that he was indeed out of order? If so, none was mentioned or shown on TV. I was not in attendance, but saw the play on TV. IF the plate ump did call strike 3 on the half swing on a ball in the turf... camera cut away quickly to the play at 2nd... the batter turns runner and was not legally tagged out. The 3rd out was recorded at 2nd base. In most instances umpires would have called the batter out in that he made no initial move to advance to 1st base. In that case the hitter should not have lead off as it would be similar to a player grounding into a FC. However... there is a very real possibility that the plate ump after the 3rd out was recorded had asked for help on the swing from the 1st base umpire. IF it was determined not a swing (IT WAS!) then the batter leads off the next inning. If MP knew the rules or cared to check between innings he would have been prepared to explain to the radio audience, and not have to perform one of his over-the-top "I'm a Beaver Believer" antics. His job is to find out and inform not freak out! That is the main difference between a true professional announcer... they inform their audience without regard to their allegiance. Then at least, if the ruling is incorrect MP can go thru his hysterics. At times he borders on unprofessional and has been called on the carpet for it on multiple occasions. Vin also employed by the team he announces for yet never has slammed down equipment in anger, been heard swearing court side/name calling officials, been admonished by officials, had to be restrained when jumping on the counter, etc. Their both announcers that's where the similarity ends... Working from my memory of the events: The swing was immediately appealed by the home plate umpire and the field umpire, confirmed strike. The ball was not possessed cleanly by the catcher, so the batter becomes a runner to first and must be forced or tagged out. The runner from first was already in motion toward second. So now, we have the third strike called but the batter has not been forced or tagged out. OS threw the ball to second, Tagging out the base runner from first. The batter still is not "out" as he has neither been forced or tagged out. The batter should start his at bat over, same as if the runner from first had been caught stealing on strike two. With two outs and dropped third strike the batter becomes a runner, now the runner from first is in a force. If OS has made the play by stepping on second, then the batter would not have led off the next inning at the plate, the at bat would be completed with the force out at second. My only problem with the scenario was, after Meggs discussed with the official, I think the official should have discussed with PC. Maybe PC gave them a head nod and all was good, but I did not see that. Other than that I think it was well done. I think the pitcher gets the K and a wild pitch (or past ball), the tag out is recorded on the base runner. In that case, he should not have batted the next inning. |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Apr 5, 2016 10:01:03 GMT -8
Of course Vin Scully and Mike Parker have differences. By the same token they have similarities. To say that the only similarity is their professions is only an opinion (a very disputable opinion), which said opinion becomes weaker when you are adamant it is the only opinion. Never said it was the ONLY... it's pretty obvious one is in a class almost by himself. One is a regional college announcer. I tried to emulate Radford and Blume, but could hold their dirty jocks in terms of the level of success I had in doing so and to say we were similar is a little far fetched. Vin is "MJ" to MP's 3A hoopster. Thats not being demeaning to MP, but analogous to the "pecking order". Vin's greatness happens to be the opinion of several dozen HOF voters. I get you guys love MP... but really??? Disagree, call me names, at least my orange tinting does not make me go blind! LOL So you were a high school football coach that took his team to the state title game, a high school basketball coach that took his team to the state title game, a minor league baseball player, AND a play-by-play announcer? |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 5, 2016 10:02:47 GMT -8
Never said it was the ONLY... it's pretty obvious one is in a class almost by himself. One is a regional college announcer. I tried to emulate Radford and Blume, but could hold their dirty jocks in terms of the level of success I had in doing so and to say we were similar is a little far fetched. Vin is "MJ" to MP's 3A hoopster. Thats not being demeaning to MP, but analogous to the "pecking order". Vin's greatness happens to be the opinion of several dozen HOF voters. I get you guys love MP... but really??? Disagree, call me names, at least my orange tinting does not make me go blind! LOL So you were a high school football coach that took his team to the state title game, a high school basketball coach that took his team to the state title game, a minor league baseball player, AND a play-by-play announcer? And you just specialized as a DB?? |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Apr 5, 2016 10:04:09 GMT -8
So you were a high school football coach that took his team to the state title game, a high school basketball coach that took his team to the state title game, a minor league baseball player, AND a play-by-play announcer? And you just specialized as a DB?? DB? |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 5, 2016 10:07:04 GMT -8
And you just specialized as a DB?? DB? Let your mind run wild.... LOL |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Apr 5, 2016 10:10:16 GMT -8
Let your mind run wild.... LOL I'm sorry. I'm not as omniscient as you, apparently. Please clarify. What do you mean by "DB?" |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Apr 5, 2016 13:58:37 GMT -8
Listening to yesterday's game as Parker wove interesting interviews with Bill Rowe, Jonah Nickerson and Kevin Gunderson into the play by play call without missing a beat on either side only reinforced my opinion of him. He really is an exceptionally talented broadcaster. Amazing the nonsense that followed my simple thread post. I was merely trying to show my appreciation for MP after listening to him interview Rowe, Nickerson and Gunderson while painting the picture of a tight OSU UW game In my mind he is an exceptionally talented broadcaster I stand by that. Not sure why anyone would take offense to that simple statement. Go Beavers! |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 5, 2016 14:07:58 GMT -8
Listening to yesterday's game as Parker wove interesting interviews with Bill Rowe, Jonah Nickerson and Kevin Gunderson into the play by play call without missing a beat on either side only reinforced my opinion of him. He really is an exceptionally talented broadcaster. Amazing the nonsense that followed my simple thread post. I was merely trying to show my appreciation for MP after listening to him interview Rowe, Nickerson and Gunderson while painting the picture of a tight OSU UW game In my mind he is an exceptionally talented broadcaster I stand by that. Not sure why anyone would take offense to that simple statement. Go Beavers! No offense and respect your opinion... just do not share your high regard and think OSU could do better as we move into a new era. And, "no"... I do not have any possible candidates. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by justdamwin on Apr 5, 2016 14:14:57 GMT -8
Working from my memory of the events: The swing was immediately appealed by the home plate umpire and the field umpire, confirmed strike. The ball was not possessed cleanly by the catcher, so the batter becomes a runner to first and must be forced or tagged out. The runner from first was already in motion toward second. So now, we have the third strike called but the batter has not been forced or tagged out. OS threw the ball to second, Tagging out the base runner from first. The batter still is not "out" as he has neither been forced or tagged out. The batter should start his at bat over, same as if the runner from first had been caught stealing on strike two. With two outs and dropped third strike the batter becomes a runner, now the runner from first is in a force. If OS has made the play by stepping on second, then the batter would not have led off the next inning at the plate, the at bat would be completed with the force out at second. My only problem with the scenario was, after Meggs discussed with the official, I think the official should have discussed with PC. Maybe PC gave them a head nod and all was good, but I did not see that. Other than that I think it was well done. I think the pitcher gets the K and a wild pitch (or past ball), the tag out is recorded on the base runner. In that case, he should not have batted the next inning. Help me understand...in which case? If you are referring to the pitcher getting K in the book, I do not think you are correct. For example a pitcher throws a third strike and the ball is not possessed cleanly by the catcher. The batter safely makes it to first base. The pitcher gets a K, an error (or PB) is logged and the runner advances to first safely (Reached on error) Same scenario here, the batter is still not "out" (tagged or forced) so he would lead off the next inning, the batters AB is not completed. |
|
