With both the Red Sox and Celtics off on Thursday, and the Bruins and Patriots in their off-season it was a relatively slow day in sports, especially for Boston standards. Cam Neely and the Jacobs’ did address the Bruins media to discuss the future plans for the team and look back at the 2011-2012 season.

The Celtics are back in action tonight as they host the Hawks for an important Game 3 at TD Garden, and the Red Sox open a weekend series with the Baltimore Orioles at Fenway Park.

Making sense of unapologetic, defiant, thankful Rajon Rondo– Paul Flannery looks at Rajon Rondo and how he reacted following Game 2, thanking his teammates for pulling out the victory.

A contrite Rondo? Don’t count on it– Chris Forsberg has Rondo not apologizing for being suspended, and in Rondo’s mind he doesn’t think he has to.

Celtics can’t afford to go soft on Hawks– Gary Washburn says the Celtics need to keep riding their momentum and not let up.

Rajon Rondo, Josh Smith bring a close relationship to postseason series– Mark Murphy looks at the friendship between Rondo and the Hawks’ Josh Smith

Looking forward Bruins need consistency– Stephen Harris has the consistency of all four of the lines being the key to the Bruins’ future success.

Deep-rooted belief– Fluto Shinzawa says depth will be important for the Bruins to improve upon for next season.

Full circle at Fenway: The making of Will Middlebrooks– Alex Speier looks at Middlebrooks’ entire career in the Red Sox organization.

It sure feels like bridge year for the Red Sox– Tony Massarotti says with Will Middlebrooks already being called up, Josh Beckett injured, and Kevin Youkilis on the disabled list, it is beginning to feel like a bridge year.

Red Sox sellout streak a real numbers game– Bob Hohler and Seth Lakso look at whether or not the Red Sox really sell out each and every game by attending a game this past week conducting  gate-by-gate reviews, and interviewing team executives.

Jerry Remy’s absence concerns Red Sox fans– Chad Finn in his weekly media column writes about Jerry Remy, and when he expects to return to the booth.


15 thoughts on “A slow day in Boston sports

  1. Apparently someone @ the Globe listens to Felger and Mazz. They suggested someone in the local media do a story on how big of a fraud the sellout streak is:

    Article is 2nd to last above.


    1. Wait…you mean the Globe was doing some sort of investigative journalism targeted at the Sox.  Even though I read the article I have to believe I was dreaming.  


    2. I’m honestly starting to wonder what’s up with the Globe and Bob Hohler.  First, he publishes a story putting Francona’s private life into public view, including drug use.  Francona has not admitted this, yet has not only not attacked the Globe article but is now working on a book with one of Hohler’s associates.  Second, the Globe owns a percentage of the Sox yet now decides to bit the hand that feeds them by bringing the team’s fraudulent sellout streak into question.  Should we continue to trust anything this newspaper prints regarding the Red Sox?


  2. This sellout “controversy” is, by far, the most laughable bulls–t I’ve ever encountered in my decades of following Boston sports.

    Comps, holdbacks, and giveaways are ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS considered sold tickets in any public-venue-sale arena, be it sports, concerts, theater, opera, or what have you.  There are very specific and detailed accounting reasons why this is so.  I’m happy to explain them if anyone wants the details.  This is not something unique to the Red Sox — this is, as they say, industry-wide, and is completely accepted and normal treatment of sales numbers.  When the Red Sox release and subsequently sell the holdbacks, that’s a secondary market sale, because the tickets are already, for all purposes, considered sold.  

    This method of accounting was used to calculate the Jacobs Field sellout streak, the Trailblazers streak, whatever Broadway show has the longest sellout streak, and every other ticket sales streak ever in modern history.  Criticizing the Sox for using it to determine whether they’ve sold out or not is asinine.  That’s how it’s done, period, end of story.  That you don’t like how the system works is completely effing irrelevant. Everyone uses that metric, therefore it’s the proper metric to use.  

    This story is as functionally silly as an article where the Globe was questioning the “fraud” of the Red Sox claiming that Ted Williams is the last person to hit .400 in MLB.  Because hitters since then have gotten a lot of hits and walks and sacrifices, which help the team, so their OBP has been well over .400, and why aren’t they considered to have hit .400 then? BECAUSE THAT’S NOT THE F—KING METRIC.  It’s batting average, which doesn’t count walks and ignores sacrifices entirely.  Does that ignore valuable contributions by a hitter?  Yes.  Are there better measures of how well a batter did at the plate?  Yes.  But that’s the definition of batting average, and Ted’s the last guy to hit .400 using that metric.  End of story.


    1. Dave…great rant.  Ted Williams was definitely the last person to hit .400.  The idea Sabrematricians don’t want to see that is silly.  What was that you said about the Sox sellout streak…I could not hear you because of the echo in the cavernous empty ballpark where I am not sitting.


  3. Oh, and one more thing on the sellout streak bullcrap:

    WHO THE F–K CARES????????????

    The Sox also claim that Fenway is “America’s Most Beloved Ballpark”.  Are we going to get a Globe investigation into that “fraud” as well?  What about the “fraud” that the Wally the Green Monster lives inside the left field wall?  Scandal:  Wally is a guy in a suit!!!!!  OMFG!!!!!

    “Slow news day” doesn’t begin to describe this.


    1.  I think the “outrage” (if you want to call it that), is more on how they cherish it and promote it as legit.

      Maybe the best way to relate it is when Skip Bayless claims on First Take that he’s never wrong?

      Agree with your 1st post above and understand why they do it.

      Unfortunately, 0 boston sports, slow sports day and I assume it was just great filler.


  4. Eh, the sellout streak fraud doesn’t bother me all that much. The Celtics waited until after Bird retired in the summer of 1992 to finally stop reporting sellouts (breaking the “streak” that went back to 1980 or 1981)–everyone at that time knew they were lying, especially when you consider that Bird missed an entire season in 1988-89 and the team went just 42-40, playing in front of a two-thirds full Garden some nights.The Sox probably will wait until Big Papi–the last true link to the 2003 team that got the sellout streak rolling in the first place–leaves town, one way or another, and then they’ll acknowledge the end of the streak “officially”.


    1.  No, I think the streak will end “officially” when they can no longer call it a sellout using the current criteria, and not sooner. It might not happen until next season when people realize you don’t have to buy tickets way in advance, especially for April weekday games.


      1.  Adding on the comment to George below, McAdam added on the show:

        If a school night game, on a horrible weather day, in high 40 degree temperatures against one of the worst teams (Oakland) won’t provide enough empty seats for them to give it up, I’m not sure what will.

        Again, as pointed out here and by the sentiment, it’s them missing the ball on this streak.


    2. I almost wonder at this point if they’ll just let the streak fade away, not officially ending it but instead not choosing to pump it up.  Also bet that ownership is hoping for a deep Celtics playoff run to deflect attention away from the Fenway train wreck.


  5.  I’d like to add on this since Sean McAdam was in for Mazz who is “seeking a second opinion on the advice of Josh Beckett” (F+M fans will get it):

    McAdam points out about not only the streak being rather phoney, but any major league team that is there gets 25-30% (he said it varies) of gate receipts. So, in maintaining the bogus streak, the Red Sox are throwing away money doing so..

    Good point on McAdam’s part.

    Wish the Globe article had stated this since it seems like something well known but obviously not documented so well because finances tend to be private.


Comments are closed.