A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I'm watching the US woman's soccer game, then I'm going to work, and I then will go back to those posts and prove it by tomorrow. I'm sick of this. It needs to stop.

    I'd like to see expitch prove his claim. I'm not holding my breath.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    lol... you said the same thing last year to ex and harness and got proven wrong twice. want to go for 3?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from cassvt2004. Show cassvt2004's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Losing interest in the bickering and he said/she said.  I thought Moon named this thread "A realistic look at 2012: Part III"? 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    moon is out to lunch... still grasping for straws out of the positive punch.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Clamshack. Show Clamshack's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    USA women are on now. They only lead by three at halftime.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I'm watching the US woman's soccer game, then I'm going to work, and I then will go back to those posts and prove it by tomorrow. I'm sick of this. It needs to stop. I'd like to see expitch prove his claim. I'm not holding my breath.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    It certainly does need to stop -- before you blow a gasket.
    I suggest that you hold your breath for five second, then exhale. Do it five times. You'll feel a little better -- for a few moments.


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Anyone care to comment on Expitch's claim above, when he wasn't even freaking here on December 6th, 2010? And people want to comment on my post but let him get away scott free with that one? Where is the logic and the fairness in these discussions on that issue? It really seems that when people agree with someone's position, they let that guy they agree with get away with stuff which is clearly BS. It happens quite often.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    I simply said, "I was on your side." That means, in case you don't get it, I agreed with you, no matter where I was on December 6, 2010. One does not post nor is under any obligation to post every time a thought pops into his head.
    Nor, decidedly, do you have the authority to demand "proof" from anyone else.
    Frankly, all of this sounds a little nutty to me. It reminds me a guy crunching steel balls in his hand on the witness stand. 
    Go crazy rummaging through old posts. Somewhere you'll find me saying that I favored keeping Beltre at third and Youk at first. If memory serves, I said that more than once. I think I even said somewhere, explicitly, that Boom and I were in the minority on the issue in question.
    A man says he agreed with you, and you go bananas. That fevered brain again.
    It would be an understatement to say that you are obsessive. I'll borrow an old direction from Moon to you: Calm down. 
    You're lucky Harness is absent. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : It was actually foresight at the time Burrito...right down to which prospect was the guy we would regret trading. We had lots of discussions on this and very few were pro Beltre. Very few.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Thie above is what you were replying to expitch, and you were not even on this forum until 3 months or so after that event. I do remember you and  agreeing that the left side defense has been suspect the beginning of this year but you were not even on this forum at the time this event and discussion happened. And today's discussion was about the Beltre Vs Agon option. December 6, 2010.

    And I'm the one who gets criticized and the criticism wasn't even correct in this instance. This is the kind of stuff I cite as examples that it makes no difference who gets it right in their projections. Most of you want to hear what you want to hear and anyone who has a different opinion who substantiates it in depth has to be pulled down in some way. Whatever it takes. 

    This whole Salty episode is proof. I cite statistic after statistic from extremely reputable sources all showing Salty be to be near league worst as a defender and it's "Oh NO, that can't be right...I'm watching the games and I guess I'll have to teach you baseball 101" (I'm paraphrasing here ok).

    And no one hear wants to hear it. They don't want to hear the bickering but it's not them who is being lied about. They obviously don't care when people lie. Sometimes they even support the person who is lying when it supports their position. It's truly incredible.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from marstan. Show marstan's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    TO THE POSTERS WHO ARE BANKING ON THE
    SOX BEING IN THE PLAYOFFS, THEY GOTTA BE
    TALKING ABOUT THE WHITE SOX. THERE IS NO
    WAY THAT THE RED SOX ARE EVEN GONNA SMELL
    PLAYOFF WILD CARD STATUS FOR THE
    FORESEEABLE FUTURE WITH THE MIX OF
    "TALENT" [ AND I USE THAT WORD LOOSELY]
    THAT IS ON THE SQUAD NOW !!!  SO....PLAYOFF
    DREAMERS...I WANT WHAT YOU'RE SMOKIN' !
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Salty has 20 home runs. You want to criticize him, go ahead, he's open for criticism. But Pedroia has 8 and AGon has 9. Is anyone trying to advocate their replacements? Nope.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Bailey will be ready to pitch by mid-August. "I'm getting ready for the final couple of months and playoffs," Bailey said. "Today was very encouraging. I felt great, felt normal."
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Thie above is what you were replying to expitch, and you were not even on this forum until 3 months or so after that event. I do remember you and  agreeing that the left side defense has been suspect the beginning of this year but you were not even on this forum at the time this event and discussion happened. And today's discussion was about the Beltre Vs Agon option. December 6, 2010. And I'm the one who gets criticized and the criticism wasn't even correct in this instance. This is the kind of stuff I cite as examples that it makes no difference who gets it right in their projections. Most of you want to hear what you want to hear and anyone who has a different opinion who substantiates it in depth has to be pulled down in some way. Whatever it takes.  This whole Salty episode is proof. I cite statistic after statistic from extremely reputable sources all showing Salty be to be near league worst as a defender and it's "Oh NO, that can't be right...I'm watching the games and I guess I'll have to teach you baseball 101" (I'm paraphrasing here ok). And no one hear wants to hear it. They don't want to hear the bickering but it's not them who is being lied about. They obviously don't care when people lie. Sometimes they even support the person who is lying when it supports their position. It's truly incredible.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    What was once incredible is how you go on and on -- whine, accuse, repeat, blah, blah, blah.
    But it is no longer incredible. It's YOU.
    I chose to reply in my own way and on my own terms to the issue of Beltre, etc. Ypu're more than loopy if you insist that a man who agrees with you had to say so on December 6, 2010 -- or any other specific date, for that matter. I'm on the record as favoring the retention of Beltre. Another of your limp evasive moves. For once and for all, you do not get to dictate the terms or the context of an argument. That is one among many of your misconceptions.
    Who are "they"?  You are putting thoughts in their heads and words in their mouths. See Southpaw. Name the liars ( besides me about USC ) or the people who support liars. C'mon, Boom, you're big on evidence. Let's hear some -- specifically. You've made another of your impulsive accusations. Back it up. 
    And while you're at it, let's have some evidence to support your claim that you played a lot of baseball and were good it. You brought it up. Speaking of claims.
    And evidence that Scioscia called "the pitches" for veteran catchers.
    Finally, you're right. No one cares of should care about this bickering. For goodness sake, this is an anonymous sports forum. As I said before, anyone who frets over his reputation here, or whether he or she is liked or disliked, or thought to be this, that, or the other thing has a problem that goes beyond sports.
    So why not pack it in. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Wow, I can't believe this thread is 7 pages long and I haven't posted yet. I tend to avoid this board during losing streaks lately, all the poseurs tire me I suppose. Excellent breakdown in the OP moon BTW, very informative. Have you gotten to Portland yet? I'd love to hear some first hand accounts of JBJ in center field. Here's how I see it for this year and next. If I were in Ben C's shoes I'd be actively looking to move anyone on the ML roster except for Papi, Middlebrooks, Pedroia, Adrian, Aceves, Bailey, Lester, Buchholz, Doubront or Morales. I'd be looking to get someone like Daniel Corcino, Drew Pomeranz, Dan Strailly, or Martin Perez in return. In my dreams we could get back say 4 top 50 prospects and make a play for the King. Going forward I wouldn't mind seeing an outfield of Linares, Bradley and Crawford with Middlebrooks, Iglesias, Pedroia, Adrian and a platoon of Lavarnaway and Salty in the infield. We absolutely need to get an ace for the starting rotation though, and Beckett's just not that guy anymore.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Not "everyone," Boom. I was on your side. Call the press!
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Above is YOUR EXACT POST, YESTERDAY EXPITCH.

    In response to my post below: 

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I personally agree with this, as controversial as it was at the time. A big part of our problem still is left side defense. The Agon deal wasn't as obvious as it looked to many people here and Rizzo was a big part of that decision. He stumbled last year in the majors but his minor league numbers have been off the charts and imagine where we would be right now with Middlebrooks and Rizzo for the future lineup. He's still only 22 years old and a major bopper with a solid defense:http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3473&position=1B Beltre is still a major RH slugger with great defense who was signable for less money, less years at a more important position than Adrian Gonzalez. Everyone was all over me at the time on that position but it still looks to me like Beltre was the better move.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom

    You know what, I don't care and I don't think people overtly lie here very often. It clearly does happen some though, with Softy for example. As I said at the time I'd give you the benefit of the doubt on that one but I'm tired of all this BS. I try very hard to tell the truth here. I don't like having my veracity challenged when I'm as honest as anyone here. I have not intentionally said a single lie here. And I remember at least 10 posts on the Beltre vs. Adrian Gonzalez issue. Everyone liked Gonzalez. I was one of very few who preferred the Beltre option for the reasons I've cited. Yet again, I probably was right and get zero credit for it anyway.  WTFC any more.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Wow, I can't believe this thread is 7 pages long and I haven't posted yet. I tend to avoid this board during losing streaks lately, all the poseurs tire me I suppose. Excellent breakdown in the OP moon BTW, very informative. Have you gotten to Portland yet? I'd love to hear some first hand accounts of JBJ in center field. Here's how I see it for this year and next. If I were in Ben C's shoes I'd be actively looking to move anyone on the ML roster except for Papi, Middlebrooks, Pedroia, Adrian, Aceves, Bailey, Lester, Buchholz, Doubront or Morales. I'd be looking to get someone like Daniel Corcino, Drew Pomeranz, Dan Strailly, or Martin Perez in return. In my dreams we could get back say 4 top 50 prospects and make a play for the King. Going forward I wouldn't mind seeing an outfield of Linares, Bradley and Crawford with Middlebrooks, Iglesias, Pedroia, Adrian and a platoon of Lavarnaway and Salty in the infield. We absolutely need to get an ace for the starting rotation though, and Beckett's just not that guy anymore.
    Posted by carnie[/QUOTE]

    I was in the Portland area for 2 weeks until July 9th on my way to Salvador & Lencois, Brazil. I was supposed to go to a Sea Dogs game, but missed it.

    No argument from me on the great need for a top line pitcher, but free agency is usually a guy who is over 29 or 30. I'd prefer we trade for a younger stud with many years of tyeam control and a lower salary.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Above is YOUR EXACT POST, YESTERDAY EXPITCH. In response to my post below:  In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I personally agree with this, as controversial as it was at the time. A big part of our problem still is left side defense. The Agon deal wasn't as obvious as it looked to many people here and Rizzo was a big part of that decision. He stumbled last year in the majors but his minor league numbers have been off the charts and imagine where we would be right now with Middlebrooks and Rizzo for the future lineup. He's still only 22 years old and a major bopper with a solid defense: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3473&position=1B  Beltre is still a major RH slugger with great defense who was signable for less money, less years at a more important position than Adrian Gonzalez. Everyone was all over me at the time on that position but it still looks to me like Beltre was the better move. Posted by Boomerangsdotcom You know what, I don't care and I don't think people overtly lie here very often. It clearly does happen some though, with Softy for example. As I said at the time I'd give you the benefit of the doubt on that one but I'm tired of all this BS. I try very hard to tell the truth here. I don't like having my veracity challenged when I'm as honest as anyone here. I have not intentionally said a single lie here. And I remember at least 10 posts on the Beltre vs. Adrian Gonzalez issue. Everyone liked Gonzalez. I was one of very few who preferred the Beltre option for the reasons I've cited. Yet again, I probably was right and get zero credit for it anyway.  WTFC any more.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    You are the board gas works. And biggest cry baby.
    I said simply that I was on your side. Contrary to your mindless nagging, I'm under no obligation to specify a date. I have NEVER said that I preferred the Gonzalez option. But at some point I said explicitly that I agree with Boom or that Boom and I agree on this one. Not good enough. Tough. 
    When you attack the person who agrees with you against the majority, it's like a delirious person shooting at the search team that has come to help him.
    Poor baby, no credit again for being right -- even if the situation is ongoing.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Hey, Boom, you and I could end up being wrong together on this one. 
    I am still on your side, as I have been all along whenever I chose to post on the topic. I made my choice. I'll live with it. But I hope WE are wrong for the sake of the Boston Red Sox and Adrian Gonzalez.
    BTW, "was," unless the date is specified, can refer to any time in the past. I, not you, get to choose the context. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Boom, now that the Beltre business is settled, back to "evidence."
    Who are these posters you called liars or supporters of liars? The way it stands, the accusation could apply to everybody and to anybody. C'mon, you surely don't want the "innocent" to think even for a minute that you have them in mind. Ever heard of Senator McCarty: "I have here a list...."
    What was your baseball experience? I especially want to hear about how good you were. But if you're too modest for that, I'll settle for the level, for how long, at what position, and where. Raw facts and only facts, if you prefer.
    Everyone else who mentioned his baseball past, incuding the phamacist who threw a HS no-hitter ( bravo ) but went to college at his dad's insistence instead of signing with the Astros, has been specific. We've had funny stories from Notin and Drewski. How about some details from you.
    Who were those veteran catchers Scioscia called the pitchers for?

    And here''s one that goes way back. Did you ever act on my suggestion that you should volunteer to help with the Special Olympics as penance for the despicable analogy in which you cited those youngsters? IMO, that was the low-point of low posts on this board. No one since has come close to matching. Moon could speak for his mother. I can speak for myself. Those kids were defenseless. 
    No apology can expunge a stain like that. It went way beyond the bounds of decency. It's on the record. 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]moon is out to lunch... still grasping for straws out of the positive punch.
    Posted by EnchiladaT[/QUOTE]

    I guess you have missed my "sell" posts, my CC posts, my "no way our big 3 starters stay healthy and pitch well this year" posts, my Bard will not do well as a starter posts, my Doubie can not start 33 games in 2012 posts, my "trade Salty while his stock is high" posts this spring, my we need a #1 or 2 slot starter to have a realistc chance at being favorites to win a ring" posts, my Aviles has little rangeand Iggy should start posts this spring, and much more...

    I may be a bit more optimistic than most posters, but I am not punch drunk.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Relative to my suggestion, Boom, since you're so obsessed with and insist upon your
    ( often unrecognized ), rectitude, volunteering to help with the Special Olympics strikes me as The Right Thing. Not that it would clear the record -- but you get the point. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    As I said expitch, I always tell the truth here. You are so pig headed in your positions, in the face of a mountain of evidence, that you remind me of an ambulatory idiot. Throwing food at the table as it is served to you. Trying your best to accomplish insight by throwing whatever comes into your brain against the wall and insisting that it sticks, as it slides in every direction but up.

    I do hate the comparison though, as I would never want to disparage an idiot. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]As I said expitch, I always tell the truth here. You are so pig headed in your positions, in the face of a mountain of evidence, that you remind me of an ambulatory idiot. Throwing food at the table as it is served to you. Trying your best to accomplish insight by throwing whatever comes into your brain against the wall and insisting that it sticks, as it slides in every direction but up. I do hate the comparison though, as I would never want to disparage an idiot. 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    But you did disparage Special Olympians.
    Same old, same old. Just nasty gas. 
    Speaking of evidence, I asked you to supply it in support of many of your assertions.
    Your response is more is twaddle.
    For all to see.
    Don't blame others if you are nuttily undermining your own precious reputation. See, it's an inside job. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Boom, now that the Beltre business is settled, back to "evidence." Who are these posters you called liars or supporters of liars? The way it stands, the accusation could apply to everybody and to anybody. C'mon, you surely don't want the "innocent" to think even for a minute that you have them in mind. Ever heard of Senator McCarty: "I have here a list...." What was your baseball experience? I especially want to hear about how good you were. But if you're too modest for that, I'll settle for the level, for how long, at what position, and where. Raw facts and only facts, if you prefer. Everyone else who mentioned his baseball past, incuding the phamacist who threw a HS no-hitter ( bravo ) but went to college at his dad's insistence instead of signing with the Astros, has been specific. We've had funny stories from Notin and Drewski. How about some details from you. Who were those veteran catchers Scioscia called the pitchers for? And here''s one that goes way back. Did you ever act on my suggestion that you should volunteer to help with the Special Olympics as penance for the despicable analogy in which you cited those youngsters? IMO, that was the low-point of low posts on this board. No one since has come close to matching. Moon could speak for his mother. I can speak for myself. Those kids were defenseless.  No apology can expunge a stain like that. It went way beyond the bounds of decency. It's on the record. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    1) I don't think the Beltre business is settled but I've tried to put it behind us. It is a clear example of a whopper on your part but I'm not here to argue. It is just forced on me regularly. Guys like you pop their heads out a hole here once and a while and unfortunately I'm one of the few who deal with them.

    2) I cited Softy as a clear example of an inveterate liar. You are well on your way to that level.

    3) It was Senator "McCarthy". I know my history like you know your English. Too bad the reading comprehension couldn't be a little more precise.

    4) You've constantly insulted my baseball experience and intelligence, citing what we are all to believe was your sterling record because you told us how great it was 4-5 times. Stating several times you needed to teach me baseball 101, if it were possible. ( LOL). After repeated head banging against a wall in dealing with you I alluded to the special Olympics. I do think that was bad taste but you had a roll in that for sure. It is what it is. I regret saying it but I regret having to deal with you also. A very pompous A.S.S. quite often. 

    5) You said you wrote a book on baseball but it didn't have an ISBN number and could not be found on Amazon.com at all. For all I know it's total BS, because I'm not feeling the insight expitch. I really am not. Facts, data, appear to mean nothing to you at all unless it supports YOUR position. It's called objectivity. Something you seem to have none of sometimes.

    6) After the insults regarding my knowledge of baseball I retorted that yes I have played baseball. And that I was good at it. Big deal. I'm not the one citing my experience here all the time in this regard. You are. If you can't prove something based upon facts you bring up your background, whether it is true or not, we have no idea. Considering some of your positions and your unwillingness to give credence to some very significant data, I find it hard to believe you sometimes. But you throw it out there I guess in an attempt to impress us. Is that what this is all about? All this stuff.

    7) If it will shut you up, I was the #4 hitter on my little league all star team, led that league in HR, was the #3 hitter on my high school Varsity team as a Freshman and Sophmore but quit baseball to concentrate on Soccer, Basketball and Skiing. 9 varsity letters in high school. Would have had 11 if I continued with baseball. I played division 1 soccer in college. Was offered some scholarships but chose the best school academically. Worked in broadcasting for 10 years at an ABC affiliate and with Warner Communications. Started 2 companies and grew them to $5 million in sales. Right now i'm developing some retail stores and I'm an internet entrepreneur with a number of websites beyond boomerangs.com, including larger ones. I'm not hung up on my self. I don't bring it up for any reason other than to shut you up. And yes, I am fully "baseball 101" qualified.

    8) I've seen Scioscia call all the pitches from the bench. Several years ago in the Napolis / Mathis era. It happens from time to time but it is certainly unusual.

    9) As far as I know I've never insulted Moon's mother.

    Will you shut up now? No one wants to hear it.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : 1) I don't think the Beltre business is settled but I've tried to put it behind us. It is a clear example of a whopper on your part but I'm not here to argue. It is just forced on me regularly. Guys like you pop their heads out a hole here once and a while and unfortunately I'm one of the few who deal with them. 2) I cited Softy as a clear example of an inveterate liar. You are well on your way to that level. 3) It was Senator "McCarthy". I know my history like you know your English. Too bad the reading comprehension couldn't be a little more precise. 4) You've constantly insulted my baseball experience and intelligence, citing what we are all to believe was your sterling record because you told us how great it was 4-5 times. Stating several times you needed to teach me baseball 101, if it were possible. ( LOL). After repeated head banging against a wall in dealing with you I alluded to the special Olympics. I do think that was bad taste but you had a roll in that for sure. It is what it is. I regret saying it but I regret having to deal with you also. A very pompous A.S.S. quite often.  5) You said you wrote a book on baseball but it didn't have an ISBN number and could not be found on Amazon.com at all. For all I know it's total BS, because I'm not feeling the insight expitch. I really am not. Facts, data, appear to mean nothing to you at all unless it supports YOUR position. It's called objectivity. Something you seem to have none of sometimes. 6) After the insults regarding my knowledge of baseball I retorted that yes I have played baseball. And that I was good at it. Big deal. I'm not the one citing my experience here all the time in this regard. You are. If you can't prove something based upon facts you bring up your background, whether it is true or not, we have no idea. Considering some of your positions and your unwillingness to give credence to some very significant data, I find it hard to believe you sometimes. But you throw it out there I guess in an attempt to impress us. Is that what this is all about? All this stuff. 7) If it will shut you up, I was the #4 hitter on my little league all star team, led that league in HR, was the #3 hitter on my high school Varsity team as a Freshman and Sophmore but quit baseball to concentrate on Soccer, Basketball and Skiing. 9 varsity letters in high school. Would have had 11 if I continued with baseball. I played division 1 soccer in college. Was offered some scholarships but chose the best school academically. Worked in broadcasting for 10 years at an ABC affiliate and with Warner Communications. Started 2 companies and grew them to $5 million in sales. Right now i'm developing some retail stores and I'm an internet entrepreneur with a number of websites beyond boomerangs.com, including larger ones. I'm not hung up on my self. I don't bring it up for any reason other than to shut you up. And yes, I am fully "baseball 101" qualified. 8) I've seen Scioscia call all the pitches from the bench. Several years ago in the Napolis / Mathis era. It happens from time to time but it is certainly unusual. 9) As far as I know I've never insulted Moon's mother. Will you shut up now? No one wants to hear it.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE
    You are reduced to picking on typos.
    I said I published a story on baseball, "Class A," that was published in Spitball. I even gave you the reference information. I also said I AM writing a book on Rod Dedeaux. Try to keep things straight. No wonder you went on a wild goose chase on Amazon. You don't pay attention because you're so angry.
    For a guy not hung up on himself, you spend a lot of time here declaring how "right" you've been on this and that, and even whined to Moon that you should have been a candidate for Poster of the Year. No bragging? You, tough guy, are one of the few who deal with people who pop out of holes. You and Pike. You, in fact, lack self-knowledge if you actually believe that you don't toot your own horn, blaringly.
    I did't say anything about YOU and Moon's mother. Softy did. I used the example to illustrate how we, Moon and I, can answer for ourselves, unlike the Special Olympians. I had a "role" in your disgusting remark? I made you say it. Or maybe the devil did. I can't entirely blame you for trying to shirk responsibility or to make me share it for something that went way beyond "bad taste."  That one is all yours. And still is. 
    Here's the really pathetic thing about the Beltre business. I entered a thread to try to give you a helping hand, and you tried to lop it off. I never claimed what you maintained I claimed, only that I was "on your side." I did not say that i expressed that view in the initial discussions.  The record will show that there is no "whopper" but rather that I linked us in preferring that the Sox should have retained Beltre. You are fixated on December 6, 2010. But, as my comment on "was" pointed out, my agreement with you could have occurred at any place along the time line. And it did. Once again, you don't get to dictate the context and terms of the argument. I AGREED WITH YOU. Anyone in his right mind would take that and run with it, especially  since most others on the board disagreed with you. 
    How about the many others who do not accept your "data" as proof that Salty is a bad defensive catcher. ( Tim McCarver complimented Salty's defense. Send him your "data." He might "come around." But Moon doesn't seem to have come around, as you predicted. ) Does their demurral also signify their indifference to what you mistakenly call "objectivity"? Their "pig-headedness'?  You need to bone up on that concept. The term is one the most abused in the English vocabulary. All so-called "facts" are developed on the basis of assumptions and criteria that underlie investigations -- even in the exact sciences. Which baseball stats ain't. Do you know what scientists themselves, historians of science, and philosophers of science are now saying about "objectivity"? I didn't think so. Do you ever read Scientific American? I didn't think so. Do you ever read books by statisticians on the limitations of stats? I didn't think so. 
    Speaking of "others," you identify only Softy ( and me, of course ) as a liar. But you distinctly said "they," plural, in reference to liars and supporters of liars. More names, please. Who knows who might be broken-hearted at the mere idea that you, the board Good Guy, Righteous Soul, and Protector ( "I've got your back," ho ) might have them in mind? Put them at ease. Name the real scoundrels. 
    You have no idea unless you were in the dugout what was actually going on between Scioscia and his catchers. Did it ever occur to you that the other team was keeping a close eye on Scioscia? If he was calling the pitches, the other guys would have broken his code sooner or later. We once did it in a college game when the other coach was calling the pitches. 
    Here are the details I've given about my record. I was the losing pitcher in an elimination game at the CWS. ( If I didn't mention it, there it is. ) Another time, I shook off my favorite catcher, and the ball was never found. My teammates had fun at my expense in an intra-squad game. And I looked silly, if not cowardly, in an incident in Texas. Where's the "sterling" part?  I played for and assisted Rod Dedeaux at USC. That is a straightforward account of credentials. Does that experience indicate that I've had excellent training in the fundamentals of baseball? You bet. In rhetoric, it's called an appeal to ethos, the status and the experience of the speaker or writer. I will call upon it any time I like. 
    Which brings us to you. A slugger in Little League and two years of high school baseball. Not bad. But after that, it was books and numbers and data, and ultimately YOUR data uber alles. And I suppose you've watched a game or two. But I don't put much stock in your observational acumen after you comments about Nathan and Salty. ( Danny and Southpaw got it right. ) You have no idea what it feels like to play baseball in a highly competitive atmosphere at higher levels. People who did that learn many valuable lessons that cannot be learned any other way. Between that and my Dedeaux training and my experience as a coach, I've been trying to give you a course like Baseball 101. But you choose to remain willfully ignorant of the real flesh-and-blood game of baseball.
    More of the same. Your invective lacks imagination and bite. It's like a bilious burp.
    Goodnight, Corporal Queeq. Please do not play with steel balls in your bunk. You might keep the other book soldiers awake in your wing. In another wing there are undogmatic, reasonable book soldiers whose "insights" ( to use your overblown term; we are talking opinions here ) are worth attending to. There are a few on this board, by golly. 

    Now, I'm a sucker for success stories. You told one outside of baseball. I congratulate you on your ability and hard work and earned rewards. Way to go.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III October 4 2011

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part III : This accurately sums it up. He's a child, and children can't be held accountable for their actions. He's a rags-to-riches blowhard. He say "put up or shut up" - then runs away from his bogus financial reward. Come the time, with all looking on, I'm gonna shove the very statement he is too cowardly to own up to right down his big mouth. It is a shame this great thread ended like this. Out of respect to Moon , I'll keep this crap on this thread this year. If the child in denial  puts his money where he bloviates , it'll end here. Otherwise, I'll pick the future time to expose him for what he really is. Moon and CO enjoy the GM stuff, so I won't extend this to the new Realistic thread this winter. Moon : You know how it is when stuff like this goes over the top. Ya can't walk away from it. You, I, and Rame know this all too well. "Put up or shut up" goes way over the line with me: regardless of the author or how it's escalated. BTW: I agree with your grades, except for one. I think Youk deserved better. I think his numbers should be seen for their own merit, not how they compare to his better years. The guy was in a ton of pain and probably exceeded expectation in that regard.
    Posted by harness


    "For the record, I was going to just walk away, and may still do that before we are done, because WHO NEEDS THIS BS. Who needs a constant argument for more than a week. Who needs this massive waste of time, constant distortion of my positions...etc. I really do have other things to do, and can move on without difficulty. Until a few minutes ago that is what I was planning to do. No further response at all. It's impacting Moon's threads. I tried earlier to give them the last word. They wouldn't stop. What else could I do if I didn't want to keep ruining Moon's thread? The honorable thing to do was just leave. I can do that. I'd prefer not to but I'm not going to continue arguing for weeks on end.

    Harness says I wished Softy would die. I really do not remember ever doing that. If someone accused any of you of such a thing, how would any of you react? Think about that. How would you react?

    I chose to say prove it because I don't remember doing it. I encouraged everyone here to prove it. I even asked Softy to prove it as he was allegedly involved. I asked Burrito to prove it as he said he commented on it but he didn't remember if i did it or not. What more can I do? 

    Harness alluded earlier yesterday that he had something on me but was waiting for the right time to use it to expitch and then Wink. How would you react? I said, if you have something use it now. I was tired of the innuendo. If it is the softy statement let's have at it. If he dug through 9000 posts and found something else ( who among us hasn't said something bad in 9000 posts ) I said say it now. 

    If I said it, prove it harness. I even opened up my file and left it open all week for you two low lifes to go through it on a fishing expedition. If I said it so be it as Softy has been as big a pain in the rear as anyone here ( Softy - feel free to prove it yourself! ). But prove it harness if you are going to accuse me of it.

    Is there suspicion of me at this point due to all the accusations basically from one person? YES. Is this an accurate Bautista allegory, impliying that my comments about Bautista and sportswriters is comparable? NO. I didn't start the Bautista suspicion by any stretch of the imagination. I commented on the existence of suspicion in the minds of sportswriters and how it might affect the MVP vote and then proved that the suspicion was there. The Bautista situation had a lot of indicators and I had no involvement in starting it. Big difference.

    So if Harness the self appointed moderator, butt kissing suck up of this forum, has something he would like to quote me on after his extensive research HAVE AT IT. Go ahead and PROVE IT. Until then I am done with this discussion and if it means leaving the forum over it that's ok. Arguing with dummies only brings one down to their level. It isn't worth it." Boomerangsdotcom


     

Share