could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

    /QUOTE]

    No one said you were wrong most disagree with your premise that a game like Sat has a lingering effect. You then said "I told you so."

    Yet you never looked at the game and just said the effort was feeble with out giving any credit to the Angels or Weaver who despite throwing 75 pitches by the top of the 5th pitched a helluva game.

    You were so intent and happy at saying "I was right and you were wrong...nah nah" you disregarded the totality of last night and Weaver.

    If the RS lost 10 to zip and it was against a guy with an ERA over 5.00 you would have been right but last night was not in direct corelation to Sat.

    BTW sarcasm is supposed to be some what hidden and not so blatantly obvious...Or do you have more experience at that as well?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

    /QUOTE]

    No one said you were wrong most disagree with your premise that a game like Sat has a lingering effect. You then said "I told you so."

    Yet you never looked at the game and just said the effort was feeble with out giving any credit to the Angels or Weaver who despite throwing 75 pitches by the top of the 5th pitched a helluva game.

    You were so intent and happy at saying "I was right and you were wrong...nah nah" you disregarded the totality of last night and Weaver.

    If the RS lost 10 to zip and it was against a guy with an ERA over 5.00 you would have been right but last night was not in direct corelation to Sat.

    BTW sarcasm is supposed to be some what hidden and not so blatantly obvious...Or do you have more experience at that as well?



    Sarcasm , hidden or obvious , is usually preferable to snarky comments.  I do know that much. 

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.



    Well, we know Weaver's a bum - only 38-13 the last two years with an ERA around 2.60.  So it couldn't have had anything to do with him.  The opposing pitcher has little impact on a team's performance anyway.  Our hitters were just all in a fog because of the tough loss. 

     

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     



    Well, we know Weaver's a bum - only 38-13 the last two years with an ERA around 2.60.  So it couldn't have had anything to do with him.  The opposing pitcher has little impact on a team's performance anyway.  Our hitters were just all in a fog because of the tough loss. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Looks like we are headed for our first four game losing streak of the year. 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    Looks like we are headed for our first four game losing streak of the year. 



    Yes it does.  But as far as how much the subsequent losses had to do with blowing the second game of the trip, a) we'll never know, and b) it doesn't matter.

    You're convinced that it's the case, that's fine, you're certainly entitled to your point of view.

    It was a brutal loss, but in the following three games the pitching matchups have all been bad for us, so I don't know how you can tie one to the other.  

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE] 

    Looks like we are headed for our first four game losing streak of the year. 

     

     



    Yes it does.  But as far as how much the subsequent losses had to do with blowing the second game of the trip, a) we'll never know, and b) it doesn't matter.

     

    You're convinced that it's the case, that's fine, you're certainly entitled to your point of view.

    It was a brutal loss, but in the following three games the pitching matchups have all been bad for us, so I don't know how you can tie one to the other.  

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Well, this Seattle pitcher tonight does not look very good.  Hopefully , we can pull this one out.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to ConanJr's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My sincerest apologies to anyone whom I may have offended. I stated my belief that blowing a game that seemed to be an easy win, could have a carry over effect. We were shutout on five hits the following night , but it had nothing whatsoever to do with any lingering effects from the previous night's game.  The guys battled valiantly against the great Jered Weaver and three Angels relievers, but had some rotten luck and just came up short. Again, my humble apology. I was wrong.  I will strive to do better in the days ahead. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

    /QUOTE]

    No one said you were wrong most disagree with your premise that a game like Sat has a lingering effect. You then said "I told you so."

    Yet you never looked at the game and just said the effort was feeble with out giving any credit to the Angels or Weaver who despite throwing 75 pitches by the top of the 5th pitched a helluva game.

    You were so intent and happy at saying "I was right and you were wrong...nah nah" you disregarded the totality of last night and Weaver.

    If the RS lost 10 to zip and it was against a guy with an ERA over 5.00 you would have been right but last night was not in direct corelation to Sat.

    BTW sarcasm is supposed to be some what hidden and not so blatantly obvious...Or do you have more experience at that as well?

     

     



    Sarcasm , hidden or obvious , is usually preferable to snarky comments.  I do know that much. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I hate snarky remarks and mjagger, ConanObrien, and MrYazz were great at one-line insults. Two were banned and we are waiting for the third.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Snarky comments are bad. A sense of humor is good.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?


    Snarkey definition Irritable or short-tempered; irascible. My comment was not this.

    It was unvieled sarcasm.

    I also have a great sense of humor since I can now laught at the egotistical statement you (dgale) made about being all knowing that the loss on Sat would have long lasting effects. That you stood steadfast despite most disagreeing.

     BTW last nights win will only bolster this teams confidence but even that has no effect on today's game.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Love the Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year.

     

     

     

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?


    HEY DGALE DO YOU STILL THINK THAT GAME LEFT A LASTING EFFECT ON THIS TEAM? jUST ASKING SINCE YOU WERE SO ABSOLUTELY SURE YOU WERE RIGHT AND THE REST OF US WRONG

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Love the Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year.

     

     

     

     

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

     

     

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

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

     


    HEY DGALE DO YOU STILL THINK THAT GAME LEFT A LASTING EFFECT ON THIS TEAM? jUST ASKING SINCE YOU WERE SO ABSOLUTELY SURE YOU WERE RIGHT AND THE REST OF US WRONG

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Love the Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year.

     

     

     

     

     

     




    Jim, I never thought it would have a long term lasting effect. I still think it had an effect in the extra innings of that game and in the next couple of games. There is no point in further debate as to whether it did or not. Everyone has their opinion. Some agreed with me and some disagreed. Anyway , whether it had an effect or not, it is obviously no longer an issue. They are back to playing winning baseball. For that , we can all be glad.  This is my last post on this thread.

     

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: could LACKEY have the ANGELS lacking for a shutout or no-hitter?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

     


    HEY DGALE DO YOU STILL THINK THAT GAME LEFT A LASTING EFFECT ON THIS TEAM? jUST ASKING SINCE YOU WERE SO ABSOLUTELY SURE YOU WERE RIGHT AND THE REST OF US WRONG

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Love the Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year.

     

     

     

     

     

     




    Jim, I never thought it would have a long term lasting effect. I still think it had an effect in the extra innings of that game and in the next couple of games. There is no point in further debate as to whether it did or not. Everyone has their opinion. Some agreed with me and some disagreed. Anyway , whether it had an effect or not, it is obviously no longer an issue. They are back to playing winning baseball. For that , we can all be glad.  This is my last post on this thread.

     




    Dgale, you mention the effect the blown game would have on "the rest of the trip", more than once.

    That's more than a couple of games.

    Admit it, you were a little too quick with the victory dance...

     

Share