A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]I hope it's not another fatal attraction! The O's helped Boston by blanking the Rays tonight, 7-0 - in Baltimore. The O's are 3 in back of the Rays. They really got their plow cleaned out west, but are playing much better now at home. The Rays are 19-14 on the road. Looks like NY took their frustration out on the Tribe tonight... literally . The Indians are already in danger of falling out of first. Funny to see the Angels behind the M's. On paper, I figured they'd contend, but Scioscia's gang isn't getting it done this year.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]Well the Angels have run themselves out of lots of innings, the starting pitching cooled off quite a bit as far as Haren and Weaver go and the bullpen is a crapshoot any night.

    Oh and Vernon Wells is just awful on a team that needed him to make the line-up 5 to 6 deep.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I wonder if that Pedey at bat affected Weaver. He was on fire and completely in sync until that game. Pedey's memorable at bat just seemed to wear Weaver down.
    He's not been the same since.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I wanted Vernon Wells in a BOS uniform once upon a time, but that was 5 years ago.

    Glad I didn't get my wish.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]I'm expecting a softy appearance any minute on Tb "going away": it may be all he has left to bash me with.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]Well Moon I read one of your posts where you quoted his post to you about this (I have this fellow on ignore as I got tired of having to read so many toxic posts to get to a valuable take).

    Any way, in the quote he said something along the lines that you'd still be claiming they wouldn't go away if they were 5 GB with 10 to go. Funny thing was to me that would have meant that they didn't go away. And with their pitching and knack for streak periods where their BA with RISP exceeds their team BA I think they could lurk a few games back all season.

    As for it being the only thing to beat you or Harness with I think not. Part of the reason I stopped reading him is that his takes no longer need any real foundation and less foundation the more mean spirited they get. It is like somebody being asked to change the station just keep on turning the volume up on the radio. And the more it is apparent the programming is wrong the higher the volume goes.

    Seriously, I think if you all just ignored him he'd either come back to earth and be an highly opinionated but interesting read or he'd just go away. The newbees couldn't possibly feed his hunger for conflict and attention. At a minimum if you guys would do it here he'd take to other OPs IMHO.

    Try one of these, they are soooo good for BDC enjoyment.





     
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Katz: The problem with that can only be seen if you have gotten into it with him over the years.He (and his present dupe) will slide a knife in UR back at a moment's notice. He (and his dupe) live to distort/delete/mis-represent and bait

    Moon, for example, can't possibly defend himself if he has him on IGGY.

    I think the ignore tab is useful for those who don't have a long history with a given poster. Not so much otherwise.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'll never put anyone on ignore, but katz is right.

    He's not worth it.

    He's so far gone now, there is really nothing to say anymore.

    When he goes away the level of debate is so much better.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    One thing to keep in mind is that if you are going to post on his threads, keep a record of pertinent dialog. Once it's deleted (banned), he'll either say he never said it  - or it was mis-quoted.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Katz : The problem with that can only be seen if you have gotten into it with him over the years. He (and his present dupe) will slide a knife in UR back at a moment's notice. He (and his dupe) live to distort/delete/mis-represent and bait .  Moon , for example, can't possibly defend himself if he has him on IGGY. I think the ignore tab is useful for those who don't have a long history with a given poster. Not so much otherwise.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]IMO he "knifes" people for the reaction, for the give and take of it all. No response and there is no give and take and it will slowly die off. He'll find fresh meat. Those who say don't feed the troll have a point. And BTW I see the quotes and he has taken a few passes at trying to suck me back into the darkness, though I am a light weight compared to his war with you guys.

    And do you really care what is written? The vast majority of the community knows where it is coming from

    At any rate I broke my own personal rule of not shedding any light on the behavior which IMO is designed to attract attention.

    My apologies to all who came here looking for baseball conversation...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'm about to give up trying to prove he is wrong. I mean, the guy still thinks Jake is having a bad year. He still wants Wake cut. He still wants BHall back.

    I used to save his quotes, but even when you cut and paste them, he denies he said it. There is no use.

    The time has come harness.

    Let it go.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    To be honest, I have let much of it go. My responses lately have been short mocks. I know all to well of his inability to admit failure at any level. But I enjoy seeing him trip himself up. The allure is strong after seeing this loudmouth boast for years. I guarantee you, if Moon or I ignore him completely, he'll take that as a slight; a sign of insignificance. And he'll increase the baiting to no end.

    Since the Burrito/Softone alliance, it's like dealing with two-headed dementia. And I think the banning process should either be eliminated or updated.
    Posters who are banned only return to make a mockery of BDC.

    Moon, our ignoring him won't change the effect he has on this board. Not one bit.
    But I do think ignoring him on this thread is a step in the right direction.
    I'm definitely with you there.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Your Angels update. After going down 0-4, the Angels got within 2 with a runner on second and the Angels put the runner in motion. Base hit to LF sent him around and he was nailed by 20 feet on a shallow hit to LF and the rally died. And the Angels went down 4-2. Another night at the Big A...

    If the Tito haters watched two weeks of Angel baseball they'd never sign the praises of scowling Mike again.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    If Scioscia didn't employ an aggressive running game, would they be better off?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    As a manager, you have to mix it up.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    The Angels predicate their game on Scioscia's approach.
    Managers tend to be either aggressive or patient.
    The smart ones pick the appropriate time to be one or the other.

    I gotta believe playing in a spacious venue plays into his thinking. Hard to fault his track record.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    No, I like him, but I do think he goes to the opposite extreme of Tito to the point of bordering on recklessness.

    His Mathis over Napoli was gutsy and right.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well part of understanding the Angels is that Mike isn't managing the team the GM put together, the GM puts togther the team Mike wants. He is the cornerstone of that organization having been here longer than the GM and Regans builds his team to the Angel way, which is Mike's vision. From the draft to the trades and FA signings the organization is built to Mike's managerial style. Where in Boston, Tito was hired to manage to Epstein's vision. And at least IMO Epstein is more flexible in his approach to player personnel than the Angels are.

    As for being better off the math is beyond my pay grade to prove or disprove it. But like I say the play by play guys on radio and TV moan about the running but blame it on the players rather than the system. It may just be a bad streak for the approach but they are killing more rallies than creating runs. Right or wrong, in Boston the outs would have the Nation killing Mike.


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Correct, but they might blame the 3rd base coach too.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]No, I like him, but I do think he goes to the opposite extreme of Tito to the point of bordering on recklessness. His Mathis over Napoli was gutsy and right.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I don't. I don't like him at all. But I respect him.
    I think the reason the RedSox have been so successful against them is that Scioscia won't adjust his game. He has less margin for error playing the likes of Boston/NY, especially in Boston/NY.

    Farrell is making his mark as a very aggresive MGR. He's not doing badly with Totonto.
     
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    toronto really has no business staying in the race. It's there for one reason....

    Bautista. It's the Barry bonds phenomena. One guys numbers completely skewing the data for the entire team. Single handedly carrying a team's offense.

    Barry Bonds

    Yaz in 67

    It happens sometimes.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    When he goes away the level of debate is so much better

    Nothing like someone constantly bickering and indignantly complaining about another person who is "crazy and obviously should just be ignored". When all is said and done, much is said but nothing done. 

    Whenever I make a comment, every one of you cicrle jerkers will read every comment and then either deny it or claim it was so out of hand it had to be called out.

    Baseball is a hobby, and while I enjoy an intellectual challenge on any subject, I confess to seeking idle entertainmnet from the amusing arched backs on this drivel drone bully dominated forum.  There certainly isn't any intellectual challenge to discussing baseball on a forum that is dominated by two or three, to quote the Stooges, lamebrains. 

    The level of debate of childish taunting with text doodling is certainly so much better than the baseball comments from the Board protagonists.

    And, you, Tom-UK, with the Swedish "scientific study" brain scans to identify preferences, when is Dusty coming off the DL?  And why did Theo sign Lugo to that large contract that you applauded? How is that elite SS, doing? The one who went 0-5, made two more errors and who has had more problems with dogs eating his homework.

    When the Red Sox were 2-10, how many brilliant minds on this board in that "high level of debate" said that the Red Sox would soon blow by the other AL East teams? All of your enlightening posts are still there, take a look back and read them and see if anyone said that or whether they said the Rays "weren't going away". 

    And, you, 5K, author of the "Crisp selling insurance on the streets of LA", since when is 5 games back with 10 games to go "not going away". The Cubs aren't going away, until they are eliminated by the math in the last week or two of the season. Nearly every team "won't go away" based upon your definition of the meaningless phrase, "won't go away". 

    The Indians are pretenders, the Royals are pretenders, and the Twins are getting back on track but dug a huge hole without a healthy Mauer. Teams like the Twins and Rays cannot afford core player injuries of any length of time. The Central has a couple of lightweights which will increase the chances of getting the wild card spot. The West has the Rangers and Angels, and improved Mariner team and sideways A's team. The AL East has an improved pretender O's team, which removes the old doormat AL East team. The Tigers and White Sox are in a division which gives them a good chance to get the WC for the Central, with the Red Sox or Yankees loser in the AL East (more likely the Yankees) as the only contenders against the Central for the WC. Injuries can obviously change things, but the Rays would have to have a miracle to get enough injury luck to beat out the Red Sox, Yankees (they will make big mid-season move or moves), Tigers and White Sox to get the WC spot. Miracles are called miracles for a reason.  
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II






                               HUH?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Proof in the pudding.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Personally I think being within 5 games with 10 games left to play is "Not going away!". They play 152 games and are still within striking distance. That is GOOD!

    If the Rays are within 7 or so games at that point that's "Not going Away" to me. Lots of people here thought they were gone after losing Garza, Crawford..etc. Soriano, Pena...etc. They made some adjustments and have stayed in the mix.

    I think Moon and I projected them at around 90 to 91 wins. Maybe 89. To me that's "Not Going Away" for sure. It might even get them in the playoffs this year if they can do that. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up passing the Yanks at some point. If a Granderson or Texiera get hurt or something else happens of that magnitude.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    And for the record, our dogs have eaten my kid's homework SEVERAL times!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I've tried putting Softy on ignore several times but he just gnaws on my behind anyway. Even with these anonymous identities we still like to keep our reputation. It's like a dungeons and dragons identity. When it dies you feel it!
     

Share