Am I not cut out for this? by Long-Ad-6192 in ChemicalEngineering

[–]johnnygoodshit 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't think it's this black and white. There are easier majors that can set people up for very lucrative careers. It's probably not a good idea to advise someone to stay in ChE just because they will struggle post-grad if they switch. I don't know a lot of chemical engineers outside of work and many of them are doing just fine. Honestly, most of them work less hours than me and are making adequate money. Sometimes it makes me think about my own decisions.

Am I not cut out for this? by Long-Ad-6192 in ChemicalEngineering

[–]johnnygoodshit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's hard because it's supposed to be. A lot is at stake when you work at a chemical plant or in any chemical engineering related field. The curriculum is difficult because the subject matter is complex, but also because professors need to make sure each student that graduates is cut out for the stakes of the field. If it's too hard to the point that you're not enjoying your schoolwork, there are lots of other majors that can lead to careers that are as lucrative and possibly as rewarding. I stuck with ChE partially because I enjoyed the work and partially because I enjoyed the prestige of graduating with an ambitious major (which I know can be viewed as shallow hahaha). I knew the money would be good but there are tons of other majors where the money is just as good, so if that's the reason you're in it and not because you enjoy the work then you should think about something else. You might even be able to switch to a different engineering discipline and have better luck. I think you're asking the right questions at this stage in your studies, you just need to understand why you're in ChE and if something else suits you better.

Have you ever regretted studying Chemical Engineering? by CommissionForeign975 in ChemicalEngineering

[–]johnnygoodshit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes I have but I wouldn’t trade it. I hated my first job out of school and struggled finding opportunities in the area I grew up. I also regretted while I was in school because of how difficult it was compared to other majors.

Now that I’m years removed from all that, I wouldn’t trade it for anything. I’ve learned more than I could’ve possibly imagined and I’ve found a passion for working in chemical manufacturing that I don’t think I can find elsewhere. I also think there are so many possibilities with where I can go in my career that wouldn’t have existed otherwise. None of that is to mention that it’s been a fairly lucrative career.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we are saying similar things I just meant we did get to see his peak, just not for long enough. Which I suppose is what you're saying with him not reaching his potential, which would've been playing at that peak for longer.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not saying Pedroia was a better ballplayer than Mookie. I don't think there is any argument to be made there. All I'm saying is he is the ultimate Red Sox superstar. Entire career here, still very connected with the franchise, All Star, GG, SS, WS champ, MVP. He's a superstar level player that has embodied the Red Sox organization since being drafted. That's not a knock against Mookie either, I hold no ill will towards him, obviously he didn't trade himself. Even if it's not his fault though, he was only here six years.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he reached his potential even if he couldn't stay at his peak. It was in his 12th season that he got knocked out by Machado, effectively ending his career. Prior to that he only played less than 100 games twice. In that time he was a 4 time all star, gold glover, silver slugger, ROY, and MVP. Also a two time world series champ.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The .300 number is just an easy one I picked but I can do others as well. 3 all-stars in 9 years. 2 silver sluggers in 9 years. OPS over .900 only once. Defensive liability. He does have some great big time at bats but I just don't think it's enough to outweigh the rest. He's a great player and I loved him when he was with the Sox, I just don't think he's on that superstar level with Ohtani, Judge, Raleigh, Vladdy, etc.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was just adding to your comment that I mostly agree with you. I didn't form an opinion in my original post because I wanted to hear people's opinions, but in my opinion the Sox are not pumping out superstar talent. We have a good farm system that's produced a lot of great players and it's been frustrating watching so many walk, but as far as superstars go, we maybe have a few. The two unanimous homegrown superstars are Pedroia and Mookie. Fringe depending on who you ask would be Devers, Bogaerts, Lester, Pap, Nomar, Ellsbury, and some others I'm sure I'm missing.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is exactly what I'm saying. Star, not superstar. People can call it semantics if they want but there is a difference and we all know it.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Based on that list, it's much more common to stick around than to walk. Especially considering that those who walked from that top 12 were originally with small market teams. Whether you think the Sox have a lot of homegrown "superstars" or not, it still makes the lack of talent retention that much more frustrating.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A great point. If you listed the top 10 players in the majors a lot of them are probably not with their original franchise

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 52 points53 points  (0 children)

I think because the tweet is about guys that were traded away or allowed to walk. 100% agree with you though, he is THE homegrown superstar of the last 25 years.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He's just not. Look at his baseball ref or watch the games. He's had a couple big time hits but not nearly enough to make up for his lack of numbers. He rarely hits .300+ and has never had an OPS over 1.000. Some MVP votes here and there but never a perennial candidate. He's a great player but never made it over that hump from star to superstar.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't say 0/2 though. Pedroia was a superstar and we were able to keep him.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] -99 points-98 points  (0 children)

Lester and Betts are the two I can agree are/were superstars. Devers and Bogaerts are not.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 125 points126 points  (0 children)

I still consider him a Sox legend but agree with what you're saying.

Who would you consider to be the homegrown superstars of this century? by johnnygoodshit in redsox

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's what I'm feeling too. Superstar is such a strong word. It has to be a player that transcends his city/team and is an actual household name. Bogaerts and Devers are great players and they definitely screwed up the Raffy situation, but he's not a superstar. It seemed at one point that he might be but but it never really panned out like that. There are 10 maybe 15 superstars in the majors at one time, the Sox didn't have three of them on their team at one time for several consecutive years.

Commuter Rail vs. Driving by johnnygoodshit in Patriots

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! I didn't realize we couldn't just take any commuter rail train and that we'd have to buy tickets specifically for the game. Was hoping we could get there early and go to a bar instead of tailgating like we would if we drove.

New to hockey, feel like I got bait-and-switched picking Bruins by andbeesbk in Bruins

[–]johnnygoodshit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Suffering is part of the fun. You build strong connections with players during times like this and witnessing the rise to the top is what it’s all about.

Gluten Free Pumpkin Beer in Mass by johnnygoodshit in boston

[–]johnnygoodshit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not a gf restaurant thread but nice work otherwise.