A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III


    Us repulsive 'Republicans' don't argue like this....*LAUGH*
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Nothing but crickets and excuses from you harness, and yet another bad projection regarding Detroit and Fister. Negative poster of the yeal qualitatively and attitudinally. Someone provides insight that happens to disagree with you and it's nothing but grief in return. When they happen to be right as I was about Fister and Detroit all we hear is crickets. And completely unfounded slander. Completely unproven with nothing but happy feet excuses as to why you will not or cannot prove your position.

    Why would I ever want to be here and listen to losers like you who can't get anything right but think you are a baseball god.

    I don't think I made the statement as you quoted it but it's possible. Guys like you and softy, tweedle dumb and tweedle D, do make me angry and frustrated when you can't discuss on the merits. There is no question that I eventually get angry because I really do not have much time and I don't want to argue here. I have kids, manage 2 companies and have other interests that are important to me besides baseball, and I really do not want o ruin it for others. This is all a blur to them harness. They don't read it generally. Why would they want to?

    So have a nice life and remember, I was a good friend to you until you completely blew it.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Us repulsive 'Republicans' don't argue like this....*LAUGH*
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    Some of my best friends are Republican Amp. They make tremendous friends as long as we do not discuss politics or religion generally. They know not the errors of their ways but they try to do the right thing for their families, friends and communities! A misguided lot for sure, but well intentioned!

    And I bet you can say exactly the same thing for democrats! Cool
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Hmm...Victor is still in it as well as Beltre. Hmmn!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Nothing but crickets and excuses from you harness, and yet another bad projection regarding Detroit and Fister. Negative poster of the yeal qualitatively and attitudinally.

    Again UR out to lunch
    . I said Fister has been compromised by hitter parks, and that his 4.56 ERA (career number) is more accurate than his numbers with the Tigers. That is what I expected of him in hitter venues. That and higher. He got clocked in game one (oh my. I guess Boom forgot to mention that one. Never want to make little Boom look bad, do we?).

    His current PO ERA is 6.52. Oh, I guess you missed that. Perhaps I can learn more from your player projection tanks, like Nava as a 4th outfielder. How'd he do in AAA this year?
    Or Rizzo. Or...  

    Gee. I got the CERA right again with Tek over Salty. I guess your "experts" had another off-year.

    Let's see, I projected the Angels spot on. Venue-related data panned out across the board.  Was likely right On Curt Young, when I saw indicators back in May.

    And I missed a couple of others. The shame of it is, you are so warped, you think the gold-standard for a poster is his/her projections.

    Someone provides insight that happens to disagree with you and it's nothing but grief in return. When they happen to be right as I was about Fister and Detroit all we hear is crickets.

    Yes, where were you when Fister got clocked in the all important game one? The stud lasted a whole 5 innings tonight. What is it about a 6+ ERA you can't comprehend?


    And completely unfounded slander. Completely unproven with nothing but happy feet excuses as to why you will not or cannot prove your position. Why would I ever want to be here and listen to losers like you who can't get anything right but think you are a baseball god. I don't think I made the statement as you quoted it but it's possible.

    So now, it's possible. The mask slips again. If you thought it was possible instead of whining in denial, I doubt any of this would have even taken place. But by all means, blame me. That's what you are good at. Blaming anybody but the gutless one in your mirror.

    Oh, BTW, I haven't quoted anything...yet. Guess you fell asleep in journalism class.



    Guys like you and softy, tweedle dumb and tweedle D, do make me angry and frustrated when you can't discuss on the merits. There is no question that I eventually get angry because I really do not have much time and I don't want to argue here.

    Getting angry on a chat board has absolutely nothing to do with time. It has everything to do with imbalanced emotional behavior. Instead of admitting what you know you are capable of, you hide in denial and expect others to fight your battles, always leaving the back door open.

    That's what little boys do.


    I
    have kids, manage 2 companies and have other interests that are important to me besides baseball, and I really do not want o ruin it for others.

    You already have ruined it form others. And you dragged me down to wallow in your squaller in the process. I do hope you manage your other interests better than you manage yourself on a baseball chat board.



    This is all a blur to them harness. They don't read it generally. Why would they want to? So have a nice life and remember, I was a good friend to you until you completely blew it.

    You don't know the meaning of the word friendship. You clearly showed how fragile you are, and how easily you come apart. Then you blame others for carrying on like the ball-less b*tch you are. Putting up with your crap is hardly blowing it.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Hmm...Victor is still in it as well as Beltre. Hmmn!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Yeah. His .222 BA and .300 OBP and .389 slugging as a DH are surely the reason for Detroit's success.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    You mean as a catcher?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]You mean as a catcher?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    He means in the 2011 ALDS.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    harness how about that Mr. Fister?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    We were just a Fister away from having a chance.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I said something like Fister might enable Detroit to succeed in the first round of the playoffs. That he might make the difference ( something like that ). He had put up around a 2.00 ERA for 5-6 games in a row. He was good enough to give them a chance.

    You were something like, NO, he will not make a difference. Detroit will lose.

    And Moon is right, with Fister we probably were in the playoffs. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Yes, boom. You did make that call. I'm not sure who it was, but I think it was harness who much later said that fister was beating up on poor teams. He's looked pretty good in small sample sizes vs good teams of late as well.

    Hard to forsee he'd have been this good, but we did need another arm at the deadline. I wasn't the only one saying it..
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Oh yes I forgot it was only u2 that made that call, along with me and hill55


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III



    Boom.....'misguided' is your opinion....please just leave your narrow opinion to yourself.  Thank you...
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Boom.....'misguided' is your opinion....please just leave your narrow opinion to yourself.  Thank you...
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]
    I said it in a way that it would apply to Democrats also when I turned it around at the end. I meant it as a joke. Nothing I've said recently is being taken that way unfortunately.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Oh yes I forgot it was only u2 that made that call, along with me and hill55 . 
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
    I didn't intend to say that Detroit would win. I just said they had a shot as it wasn't just Verlander. I don't think Moon did either. I think he was saying the Sox needed an extra pitcher in the end. Gotta go!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Oh yes I forgot it was only u2 that made that call, along with me and hill55 . 
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I hope your not talking about me, because I never said a word about Fister until way after he pitched well after the trade. I was giving props to boom, not myself.

    At the deadline, I was taking Guthrie, Wandy Rodriguez, and a few others. I was never "for" a Fister or Jimenez deal.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Oh yes I forgot it was only u2 that made that call, along with me and hill55
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    That means you and whoever else backed Fister were wrong. He blew game one and lasted only 5 frames in game 5. He has an ERA of 6.52 in the PO's... all in hitting venues.
    He had a 4.56 ERA in the top hitting venues (career), and I said that'll carry into the playoffs more so than his ERA with Detroit... beating up Central teams.

    ERA is an average. That means he can get clocked in one game and pitch well in two others - and still have an ERA of 4 & 1/2.

    Had he pitched for Boston, he'd likely carry that number with him, as he'd be facing better line-ups pitching half his games in Fenway.

    This is the position I took with venue, and it again pans out.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Yeah I am talking about you, high noon Sunday at Bunker Hill - duel (pistols or swords your choice).
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    True, harness, but he'd have been ebtter than Weiland and Lackey, and probably helped us turn 2 losses into wins.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    [QUOTE]True, harness, but he'd have been ebtter than Weiland and Lackey, and probably helped us turn 2 losses into wins.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Without question. But anyone seeing Fister as some kind of stud is crazy.
    IMO, I think Bowden & Douby should return to starting. Neither has been that great in relief, and certainly not put in key roles. As starters, the team would have more flex than just Weiland and Taz, who likely needs more seasoning after TJ surgery.

    I'm guessing Theo will add another name or two.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Yeah u2 are right again, I'd rather have Wakefield anyday.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    Don't you mean "Wastefield"?
    The one who had a better ERA in Sept. than Lester or Beckett of Bedard or Lackey or Weiland or Miller...
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III




    That is saying a lot, a lot about the rest of the staff. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III

    I realize that, but it's still the truth.
    1.5 mil for starter insurance from a guy who was durable - throwing 150 frames -
    is a bargain. If not for Wake last year, we'd have been looking at Weiland and less,
    And the historic collapse wouldn't have been so historic because the Sox never would have had the 9 game lead to begin with.
     

Share