kaboom
I see we're easily impressed these days.
Quote from: Eli on May 08, 2009, 09:32:10 PM
I see we're easily impressed these days.
I'm slightly more impressed at this point.
He's going to have tough ROY competition from Bobby Scales.....
I picked him up in Roto, even though the commi asshairs blacked the game out here.
So for those that were able to watch: Does he look nearly as impressive as his numbers or does he look like Jeff Pico waiting to happen any minute?
If he didn't kick Gregg in the nads, I'd be happy to do it for him.
I would've done it, but I also have Marshall.
So is the new league rule that every player on every team wears No. 42, 42 times per season?
I think all players should have No. 42 on their uniforms 42 times and play 42 innings.
Quote from: Bonk on May 16, 2009, 06:56:37 PM
I would've done it, but I also have Marshall.
So is the new league rule that every player on every team wears No. 42, 42 times per season?
I think all players should have No. 42 on their uniforms 42 times and play 42 innings.
Racist.
I realize that Marshall isn't the next Steve Carlton, but he's a seviceable 4th or 5th starter. They most likely will unload Cotts and keep Wells in the rotation now with Marshall in the pen as the sole lefty. If it makes for a better team, so be it, but I feel bad for Marshall for getting yanked around so much. He deserves to be in the rotation.
Quote from: Hawkeye's clutchness on May 16, 2009, 08:06:15 PM
I realize that Marshall isn't the next Steve Carlton, but he's a seviceable 4th or 5th starter. They most likely will unload Cotts and keep Wells in the rotation now with Marshall in the pen as the sole lefty. If it makes for a better team, so be it, but I feel bad for Marshall for getting yanked around so much. He deserves to be in the rotation.
This.
He's a better bullpen lefty than Cottsucker. Then again, so is Joe Kennedy.
Quote from: Bonk on May 16, 2009, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: Bonk on May 16, 2009, 06:56:37 PM
I would've done it, but I also have Marshall.
So is the new league rule that every player on every team wears No. 42, 42 times per season?
I think all players should have No. 42 on their uniforms 42 times and play 42 innings.
Racist.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2098/3529106844_e8ebe6f9a5.jpg?v=0)
Quote from: Hawkeye's clutchness on May 16, 2009, 08:06:15 PM
I realize that Marshall isn't the next Steve Carlton, but he's a seviceable 4th or 5th starter. They most likely will unload Cotts and keep Wells in the rotation now with Marshall in the pen as the sole lefty. If it makes for a better team, so be it, but I feel bad for Marshall for getting yanked around so much. He deserves to be in the a rotation.
Normalize'd.
As much manlove as I have for Marshall disproportionate to what should be considered normal for a player of his stature, he ought to be thrilled to have
any role on a team that'll probably have a better shot than most at taking it
(All of the constant shrieking pantywists like the dickhead described in the first paragraph of this recap (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-17-cubs-astros-chicago-may17,0,2660860.story) notwithstanding)
Bump.
Lou just jumped the Marmot's shit as he came into the dugout at the end of the eighth.
Are you fucking kidding? Wells should get a free nut kick on every member of the team. And two for Marmolade and Gregggg.
Nice job Gregg. Fucking pussy.
I am not enjoying baseball this year.
I hate this fucking team.
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 08:59:25 PM
I hate this fucking team.
Good. Does that mean that we're no longer going to have to read your whiny-ass puke all the time?
Quote from: MAD on June 02, 2009, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 08:59:25 PM
I hate this fucking team.
Good. Does that mean that we're no longer going to have to read your whiny-ass puke all the time?
No.
And fuck off.
Damn, Randy Wells keeps getting hosed. I just assumed the guy was gonna suck on a Juan Mateo/Les Walrond level since he wasn't much of a prospect, but give him credit. He's kept the ball down and thrown strikes, unlike those meatheads at the back end of the pen tonight.
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 09:31:11 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 02, 2009, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 08:59:25 PM
I hate this fucking team.
Good. Does that mean that we're no longer going to have to read your whiny-ass puke all the time?
No.
And fuck off.
You've not only proven dumber than CFiHP, but you've made me hate baseball along the way. Congratulations on your unique brand of stupidity; I anxiously await the day when it purges itself from the gene pool in gutless fucking fashion.
Quote from: ChuckD on June 02, 2009, 10:13:58 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 09:31:11 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 02, 2009, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 08:59:25 PM
I hate this fucking team.
Good. Does that mean that we're no longer going to have to read your whiny-ass puke all the time?
No.
And fuck off.
You've not only proven dumber than CFiHP, but you've made me hate baseball along the way. Congratulations on your unique brand of stupidity; I anxiously await the day when it purges itself from the gene pool in gutless fucking fashion.
So it's me and not this dogshit excuse for a baseball team? Right.
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 10:17:19 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 02, 2009, 10:13:58 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 09:31:11 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 02, 2009, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 02, 2009, 08:59:25 PM
I hate this fucking team.
Good. Does that mean that we're no longer going to have to read your whiny-ass puke all the time?
No.
And fuck off.
You've not only proven dumber than CFiHP, but you've made me hate baseball along the way. Congratulations on your unique brand of stupidity; I anxiously await the day when it purges itself from the gene pool in gutless fucking fashion.
So it's me and not this dogshit excuse for a baseball team? Right.
Right.
This team should be really happy that Randy Wells is not Ted Lilly. If he were the Bull Moose, there might not be a team left tomorrow morning.
And with good reason.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on June 02, 2009, 11:19:58 PM
This team should be really happy that Randy Wells is not Ted Lilly. If he were the Bull Moose, there might not be a team left tomorrow morning.
And with good reason.
I'm not endorsing wholesale slaughter, but I'm not necessarily against it either.
Quote from: Fork on June 03, 2009, 07:56:58 AM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on June 02, 2009, 11:19:58 PM
This team should be really happy that Randy Wells is not Ted Lilly. If he were the Bull Moose, there might not be a team left tomorrow morning.
And with good reason.
I'm not endorsing wholesale slaughter, but I'm not necessarily against it either.
On the bright side, Hawks training camp is less than 3 months away.
Brenly tried to explain just how terrible Gregg's 1-2 pitch to Francoeur was and he got halfway through and just stopped. Basically...
"You've got a guy who will swing at anything, and you're ahead in the count and you...it's...a fastball...right...down...blurrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhh."
Which was opposed to Santo's commentary on it which was, "WHY ME? WHY ME?"
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 08:44:45 AM
On the bright side, Hawks training camp is less than 3 months away.
Shit Oleg, it's hockey. Training camp is probably three days away.
Don't they just pause two-a-days for four hours one Saturday to draft a bunch of new Swedes and then get right back to it?
Quote from: Andy on June 03, 2009, 08:45:25 AM
Brenly tried to explain just how terrible Gregg's 1-2 pitch to Francoeur was and he got halfway through and just stopped. Basically...
"You've got a guy who will swing at anything, and you're ahead in the count and you...it's...a fastball...right...down...blurrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhh."
Which was opposed to Santo's commentary on it which was, "WHY ME? WHY ME?"
Actually, the radio call was quite priceless.
Santo began moaning like a wounded ewe immediately after DLee dropped the first out in the 8th inning. After several "GOSH"es, "Ahhhh"'s and "What is going ON?"'s through the next 1 2/3 innings, Santo finally said something to the effect of "I've got to calm down here. I need to take some pills". Literally seconds after that was when Francouer homered. If I wasn't so disgusted I would have laughed. Point is, that blubbering idiot was actually silent on the home run. Funny, because
that's the time when a homer color analyst would be justified in losing his shit.
If anybody can somehow dig up the radio call of Frenchy's homerun, I promise you the timing of Santo's sudden and unexpected self-realization may actually make you snort a little.
Quote from: Andy on June 03, 2009, 08:46:35 AM
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 08:44:45 AM
On the bright side, Hawks training camp is less than 3 months away.
Shit Oleg, it's hockey. Training camp is probably three days away.
Don't they just pause two-a-days for four hours one Saturday to draft a bunch of new Swedes and then get right back to it?
Yay? Yay!
Quote from: Fork on June 03, 2009, 07:56:58 AM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on June 02, 2009, 11:19:58 PM
This team should be really happy that Randy Wells is not Ted Lilly. If he were the Bull Moose, there might not be a team left tomorrow morning.
And with good reason.
I'm not endorsing wholesale slaughter, but I'm not necessarily against it either.
So what you're really saying is that you don't have a full opinion on it?
Quote from: IrishYeti on June 03, 2009, 10:04:19 AM
Quote from: Fork on June 03, 2009, 07:56:58 AM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on June 02, 2009, 11:19:58 PM
This team should be really happy that Randy Wells is not Ted Lilly. If he were the Bull Moose, there might not be a team left tomorrow morning.
And with good reason.
I'm not endorsing wholesale slaughter, but I'm not necessarily against it either.
So what you're really saying is that you don't have a full opinion on it?
Worse things have hai'ed.
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Quote from: Slakee on June 03, 2009, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Rookie pitcher, making his 5th start, going through the order for a 3rd and 4th time. His two best relievers were well-rested.
I really don't have an issue with this. If Marmol and Gregg pitch well (and despite what the reactionary crowd thinks, that's not a far-fetched notion), this isn't even up for discussion.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
And if anyone knows "really hairy"...
Quote from: Tank on June 03, 2009, 12:29:52 PM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
And if anyone knows "really hairy"...
Someone say hairy?
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 11:55:55 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 03, 2009, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Rookie pitcher, making his 5th start, going through the order for a 3rd and 4th time. His two best relievers were well-rested.
I really don't have an issue with this. If Marmol and Gregg pitch well (and despite what the reactionary crowd thinks, that's not a far-fetched notion), this isn't even up for discussion.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
Problem with that thinking is that the Cubs don't have two "best" relievers. They have Marmol, who is good more often than not, and a steaming pile of suck after that.
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 03, 2009, 01:03:25 PM
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 11:55:55 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 03, 2009, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Rookie pitcher, making his 5th start, going through the order for a 3rd and 4th time. His two best relievers were well-rested.
I really don't have an issue with this. If Marmol and Gregg pitch well (and despite what the reactionary crowd thinks, that's not a far-fetched notion), this isn't even up for discussion.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
Problem with that thinking is that the Cubs don't have two "best" relievers. They have Marmol, who is good more often than not, and a steaming pile of suck after that.
Guzman has been good, Ascanio has been decent, Waddell can't be worse than Cotts, and Marshall will be in the bullpen soon.
Drink a beer, dude.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 01:35:37 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 03, 2009, 01:03:25 PM
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 11:55:55 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 03, 2009, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Rookie pitcher, making his 5th start, going through the order for a 3rd and 4th time. His two best relievers were well-rested.
I really don't have an issue with this. If Marmol and Gregg pitch well (and despite what the reactionary crowd thinks, that's not a far-fetched notion), this isn't even up for discussion.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
Problem with that thinking is that the Cubs don't have two "best" relievers. They have Marmol, who is good more often than not, and a steaming pile of suck after that.
Guzman has been good, Ascanio has been decent, Waddell can't be worse than Cotts, and Marshall will be in the bullpen soon.
Drink a beer Get laid, dude.
Anxiety release'd.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 01:35:37 PM
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 03, 2009, 01:03:25 PM
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2009, 11:55:55 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 03, 2009, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: RV on June 03, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 10:58:43 AM
On the bright side, Randy Wells has been really, really, REALLY fucking awesome so far. I know it's only five starts, but day-um.
1.69 ERA
0.969 WHIP
0.3 HR/9
2.0 BB/9
7.6 SO/9
3.86 SO/BB
He was really, really good last night. I missed the beginning of the Braves' 8th last night - was there a particular reason why Lou gave him the hook after 83 pitches and what should have been the first out of the inning? The way he was pitching I assumed he'd go the distance unless things got really hairy.
Because Lou would rather put in the gas cans than leave a guy in who's been dominant. Lou has been a shell of himself this year.
Rookie pitcher, making his 5th start, going through the order for a 3rd and 4th time. His two best relievers were well-rested.
I really don't have an issue with this. If Marmol and Gregg pitch well (and despite what the reactionary crowd thinks, that's not a far-fetched notion), this isn't even up for discussion.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
Problem with that thinking is that the Cubs don't have two "best" relievers. They have Marmol, who is good more often than not, and a steaming pile of suck after that.
Guzman has been good, Ascanio has been decent, Waddell can't be worse than Cotts, and Marshall will be in the bullpen soon.
Drink a beer, dude.
Maybe one (http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/2097/18850) of (http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/16247/44198) these (http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/angry-hanks-head-trauma-india-pale-ale/74636/49937/).
I believe more in what Nolan Ryan and Mike Maddux are trying to teach their young pitchers in Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sports/baseball/27rangers.html?ref=sports
Let him go until the hitters decide he has had enough. The way Wells was pitching i think he would have had a nice complete game shutout.
I understand the philosophy of going out on a high note and not wanting to destroy his confidence if they tag him up for a bunch of runs. But how much confidence did you give him by watching Marmol and Gregg take a shit on his start after he only went 86 pitches? When a guy is on a roll, ride it as long as you can. They werent getting anything off Wells.
Quote from: MikeC on June 03, 2009, 02:09:55 PM
I believe more in what Nolan Ryan and Mike Maddux are trying to teach their young pitchers in Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sports/baseball/27rangers.html?ref=sports
Let him go until the hitters decide he has had enough. The way Wells was pitching i think he would have had a nice complete game shutout.
I understand the philosophy of going out on a high note and not wanting to destroy his confidence if they tag him up for a bunch of runs. But how much confidence did you give him by watching Marmol and Gregg take a shit on his start after he only went 86 pitches? When a guy is on a roll, ride it as long as you can. They werent getting anything off Wells.
If only the Cubs starters could be more like the Rangers.
Quote from: MikeC on June 03, 2009, 02:09:55 PM
I believe more in what Nolan Ryan and Mike Maddux are trying to teach their young pitchers in Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sports/baseball/27rangers.html?ref=sports
Let him go until the hitters decide he has had enough. The way Wells was pitching i think he would have had a nice complete game shutout.
I understand the philosophy of going out on a high note and not wanting to destroy his confidence if they tag him up for a bunch of runs. But how much confidence did you give him by watching Marmol and Gregg take a shit on his start after he only went 86 pitches? When a guy is on a roll, ride it as long as you can. They werent getting anything off Wells.
I think he had already lost the shutout when the error happened. But yeah, I agree leaving him in would have been a better idea.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 03, 2009, 01:35:37 PM
Guzman has been good, Ascanio has been decent, Waddell can't be worse than Cotts, and Marshall will be in the bullpen soon.
Drink a beer, dude.
I'm all for giving Guzman a crack at closing, because it's not going to matter if it gets worse than Gregg. The only way it'll matter is if it gets better, and at this point, I'm willing to toss Gregg to the 6th inning wolves and see if Guzman can close.
If it doesn't work, the motivation to drink beer is all the same.
Quote from: LoneStarCubFan on June 03, 2009, 02:22:51 PM
Quote from: MikeC on June 03, 2009, 02:09:55 PM
I believe more in what Nolan Ryan and Mike Maddux are trying to teach their young pitchers in Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sports/baseball/27rangers.html?ref=sports
Let him go until the hitters decide he has had enough. The way Wells was pitching i think he would have had a nice complete game shutout.
I understand the philosophy of going out on a high note and not wanting to destroy his confidence if they tag him up for a bunch of runs. But how much confidence did you give him by watching Marmol and Gregg take a shit on his start after he only went 86 pitches? When a guy is on a roll, ride it as long as you can. They werent getting anything off Wells.
I think he had already lost the shutout when the error homerun happened. But yeah, I agree leaving him in would have been a better idea.
Unblinded by rage'd.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 03, 2009, 02:15:19 PM
Quote from: MikeC on June 03, 2009, 02:09:55 PM
I believe more in what Nolan Ryan and Mike Maddux are trying to teach their young pitchers in Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/sports/baseball/27rangers.html?ref=sports
Let him go until the hitters decide he has had enough. The way Wells was pitching i think he would have had a nice complete game shutout.
I understand the philosophy of going out on a high note and not wanting to destroy his confidence if they tag him up for a bunch of runs. But how much confidence did you give him by watching Marmol and Gregg take a shit on his start after he only went 86 pitches? When a guy is on a roll, ride it as long as you can. They werent getting anything off Wells.
If only the Cubs starters could be more like the Rangers.
Actually, looks like they can be more like the Rangers. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9642454/Sources:-Rangers-request-waivers-on-Padilla)
Very strong again. I'm becoming a believer in time to avoid having my blood drained and consumed by this guy's arsenal. Andy's taken to calling him "The Outlaw" and I'm not sure if that's a Josey Wales reference or something from the Simpsons, but Josey Wales was a pure, unadulterated baddass and I'm starting to like the comparison. He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-3.00 ERA.
For instance, during his outing in Atlanta he nearly hit a batter who appeared to go around whilst checking and bailing. He and Soto were halfway to the third base dugout when the ump made the horrendous call of ball. Wells protested briefly and then promptly K'd the rat bastard (Escobar? Blanco?) outright to end the inning. Steak sauce slathered on two fine 178-year-old tennis tits, that was.
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
It's just getting pathetic that he hasn't picked up that first win yet with how great he's been on the mound. Shit, that quick slap hit past Hairston defending against the bunt was great too.
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-2.00 ERA.
Quote from: ChuckD on June 07, 2009, 03:43:01 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-2.00 ERA.
As I typed it he was still pitching with a runner on. I wanted to still be right without actually doing math. It's a skill I've picked up.
And it's a good thing AssCan didn't get hurt or die recently, because it looks like he's actually quite good at baseball.
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 04:06:31 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 07, 2009, 03:43:01 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-2.00 ERA.
As I typed it he was still pitching with a runner on. I wanted to still be right without actually doing math. It's a skill I've picked up.
And it's a good thing AssCan didn't get hurt or die recently, because it looks like he's actually quite good at baseball.
The AssCan has some massive huevos.
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 04:06:31 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 07, 2009, 03:43:01 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-2.00 ERA.
As I typed it he was still pitching with a runner on. I wanted to still be right without actually doing math. It's a skill I've picked up.
And it's a good thing AssCan didn't get hurt or die recently, because it looks like he's actually quite good at baseball.
The AssCan has some massive huevos.
Put me down as leader of the AssCanista movement. Who the fuck's comin' with me?
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 04:06:31 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 07, 2009, 03:43:01 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
He's got some shit-talk to him and I strongly positive that from a guy with a sub-2.00 ERA.
As I typed it he was still pitching with a runner on. I wanted to still be right without actually doing math. It's a skill I've picked up.
And it's a good thing AssCan didn't get hurt or die recently, because it looks like he's actually quite good at baseball.
The AssCan has some massive huevos.
Put me down as leader of the AssCanista movement. Who the fuck's comin' with me?
(http://elproyectomatriz.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/che_guevara_-_poster-_comandante_-_hasta_la_victoria_siempre_by_kinki_gz__galiza_ceive_mid.jpg)
We get Kurt to put some wreck specs on that bad boy and we've got us a club. I'll get crackin' on the newsletter.
EL ASSCANISTA
Vol. 1.
Fuck You and Everything You Love On This Earth
By: Andrew P. Peck, Editor
You know why the call him AssCan? Because his name is Ascanio He gets ass like a drink. You sit there at your desk and suck more Pepsi into your fat, sorry, do-nothing ass and wait to get laid off while Jose tastes the finest chicas our Latin American Brothers and Sisters could conceive in fits of their heated, habeniero-style passionate fuck trophying. Dusk til dawn, this man destroys these:
(http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/d2/unsecured/media/431788361/431788361_444760001_22cf55e70c0364fcd9462957d506805af836cca3.jpg)
I don't want to see anybody get laid off unless they can get some good-paying under-the-table subcontracting gigs to hide from our commie government while they collect IDES dollars. I just want to see AssCan get the full time 7th inning gig while ONHELL cleans up after the elephant balls that Marmol totes around with him in whatever inning Carlos Lee or some other bastard bats in.
Shriek like a bitch. I'm gonna sip my Belgian and bellow my fat ass belches all the way to October.
VIVA LOS ASSCAN!
(awaits editing of Spanish from powen)
Maybe Lou will start using the Asscan a little more often - the dude sat around for a good week or so until today.
Angel Guzman? Fucking money.
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 07:24:40 PM
EL ASSCANISTA
Vol. 1.
Fuck You and Everything You Love On This Earth
By: Andrew P. Peck, Editor
You know why the call him AssCan? Because his name is Ascanio He gets ass like a drink. You sit there at your desk and suck more Pepsi into your fat, sorry, do-nothing ass and wait to get laid off while Jose tastes the finest chicas our Latin American Brothers and Sisters could conceive in fits of their heated, habeniero-style passionate fuck trophying. Dusk til dawn, this man destroys these:
(http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/d2/unsecured/media/431788361/431788361_444760001_22cf55e70c0364fcd9462957d506805af836cca3.jpg)
I don't want to see anybody get laid off unless they can get some good-paying under-the-table subcontracting gigs to hide from our commie government while they collect IDES dollars. I just want to see AssCan get the full time 7th inning gig while ONHELL cleans up after the elephant balls that Marmol totes around with him in whatever inning Carlos Lee or some other bastard bats in.
Shriek like a bitch. I'm gonna sip my Belgian and bellow my fat ass belches all the way to October.
VIVA LOS ASSCAN!
(awaits editing of Spanish from powen)
I can only translate the above image, and it's screaming "Ayyyyyy Papi!!!" to me.
In the words of our esteemed President:
(http://dimpost.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/barack_obama.jpg)
ASS WE CAN.
Kurt's going to get his country renamed to AssCanada.
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
I can't recall where the ball was picked up but couldn't they have pulled a double play on that?
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 12:43:12 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
You are scum.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 12:43:12 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
But considering the replay showed he DID get the guy, couldn't it be argued that he DID know he was gonna get the guy?
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 01:02:20 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 12:43:12 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
But considering the replay showed he DID get the guy, couldn't it be argued that he DID know he was gonna get the guy?
He went to Notre Dame, no way he would have known.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 01:02:20 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 12:43:12 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
But considering the replay showed he DID get the guy, couldn't it be argued that he DID know he was gonna get the guy?
You could argue that but you could also argue that a bang-bang play like that has a potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out and call a tie for the runner. The out at first was kind of sketchy too, I think. It was a good play by Heilman with an unfortunate result. He showed some guts and escaped serious damage there so for once this year, I'll give him credit. I'm sure he'll resume blowing ballgames, goats, dead people etc. on Tuesday though.
Quote from: ~Apex on June 08, 2009, 01:15:03 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 01:02:20 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 12:43:12 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 08, 2009, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 11:28:34 AM
Quote from: Poon on June 08, 2009, 11:03:13 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on June 08, 2009, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Slakee on June 07, 2009, 03:19:28 PM
Quote from: MAD on June 07, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
Quote from: ~Apex on June 07, 2009, 02:23:24 PM
Get this dude a win, now. Please.
EDIT: or don't. fuck it. it's not important.
Carlos Marmol and his Clown Car Antics don't feel it's important either.
Good job getting him out of there before it got really bad. Heilman did a nice job, hard as it is to admit.
I thought he had him at third, meaning he should have gotten out of that inning with Wells' win intact.
That should have been called an out on the force at third. Especially since he didn't slide, the call should have been easier to make.
The ump was in a bad position to make the call either way, but it certainly looked like an out to me.
It was still a dumb decision to go to 3rd.
Why? It should have been an out.
Maybe it should have been an out, there's was no angle of the ball going in along with the foot.
Regardless, it was an questionable gamble. You don't go to third unless you're sure you're gonna get the guy.
But considering the replay showed he DID get the guy, couldn't it be argued that he DID know he was gonna get the guy?
You could argue that but you could also argue that a bang-bang play like that has a potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out and call a tie for the runner. The out at first was kind of sketchy too, I think. It was a good play by Heilman with an unfortunate result. He showed some guts and escaped serious damage there so for once this year, I'll give him credit. I'm sure he'll resume blowing ballgames, goats, dead people etc. on Tuesday though.
Is that a throwback reference to an old Tonk signature? Man, I'm sad for remembering that. Or maybe it's current? Too late, I'm already posting this. I could hit back...but no. I won't rob you of the chance to read this.
Back to the main point - I hope that was Heilman's turning of the proverbial corner. He's no Ass Can and he never will be but mediocrity wouldn't be asking for much, would it?
Yep.
Quote from: Slak on June 08, 2009, 01:18:52 PM
potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out
Is that a throwback reference to an old Tonk signature? Man, I'm sad for remembering that. Or maybe it's current? Too late, I'm already posting this. I could hit back...but no. I won't rob you of the chance to read this.
Tonk = Elmore Leonard?
Quote from: Fork on June 09, 2009, 07:57:45 AM
Quote from: Slak on June 08, 2009, 01:18:52 PM
potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out
Is that a throwback reference to an old Tonk signature? Man, I'm sad for remembering that. Or maybe it's current? Too late, I'm already posting this. I could hit back...but no. I won't rob you of the chance to read this.
Tonk = Elmore Leonard?
Yeah, you didn't know that? Where have you been? Who else would have invented a British dude, living in the Netherlands who loves the Chicago Cubs because he had spent time in the Dominican Republic during a hurricaine in 1998? I mean that's the beauty of Leonard. You know a guy like this could exist, but why would he? If only he did. That would be 31 flavors of dope.
I keep waiting for this son of a buck to start pitching like a guy who spent 3 years in Iowa, but he continues to be the balls. If the Gooz wasn't so goddamn good, I could tell you he's been the best pitcher on the team since his call-up. (http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/ComparePitchers.py?StartDate=05%2F08%2F2009&EndDate=06%2F30%2F2009&GameType=all&PlayedFor=17&PlayedVs=0&Park=0&SortField=CASE+WHEN+FractionalInnings+%3E+0+THEN+27.0*EarnedRuns%2FFractionalInnings+ELSE+0.0+END&SortDir=asc&MinPA=10&MinDEC=0&MinG=0&MinGS=0&MinCG=0&MinGF=0&MinW=0&MinL=0&MinSV=0&MinSHO=0&MinH=0&MinR=0&MinER=0&MinHR=0&MinBB=0&MinK=0&MinHP=0&MinBK=0&MinWP=0)
If Wells keeps it up, Hendry can trade him for Chase Utley at the deadline, right?
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to
deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
So you're saying that Ryan Dempster should have his face shoved into a pile of his OWN shit?
That actually isn't that bad an idea... Nothing else is working.
Quote from: BC on July 01, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
So you're saying that Ryan Dempster should have his face shoved into a pile of his OWN shit?
If by "a pile of his OWN shit" you mean some game film from his starts, then, "Maybe."
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, but I just like the idea of shoving that clown's face somewhere.
Quote from: BC on July 01, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
So you're saying that Ryan Dempster should have his face shoved into a pile of his OWN shit?
Better idea--just shove his face in Randy Wells' shit.
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:44:57 PM
Quote from: BC on July 01, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
So you're saying that Ryan Dempster should have his face shoved into a pile of his OWN shit?
If by "a pile of his OWN shit" you mean some game film from his starts, then, "Maybe."
Well, whenever I want to get out of my ass-grazing depression I just pop in a tape of a Dempster start. That makes me ANGRY.
Quote from: RV on July 01, 2009, 08:48:30 PM
I keep waiting for this son of a buck to start pitching like a guy who spent 3 years in Iowa, but he continues to be the balls. If the Gooz wasn't so goddamn good, I could tell you he's been the best pitcher on the team since his call-up. (http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/ComparePitchers.py?StartDate=05%2F08%2F2009&EndDate=06%2F30%2F2009&GameType=all&PlayedFor=17&PlayedVs=0&Park=0&SortField=CASE+WHEN+FractionalInnings+%3E+0+THEN+27.0*EarnedRuns%2FFractionalInnings+ELSE+0.0+END&SortDir=asc&MinPA=10&MinDEC=0&MinG=0&MinGS=0&MinCG=0&MinGF=0&MinW=0&MinL=0&MinSV=0&MinSHO=0&MinH=0&MinR=0&MinER=0&MinHR=0&MinBB=0&MinK=0&MinHP=0&MinBK=0&MinWP=0)
If Wells keeps it up, Hendry can trade him for Chase Utley at the deadline, right?
If they throw in Steve Eyre, then yes.
In 10 starts, 2.43 ERA 45/14 K/BB, more IP than hits (63.0 IP/54 hits) and a sparklin 1.079 WHIP. Rotoworld also threw this in, which I found pretty damn intriguing:
Quote
Wells has allowed more than three runs just once in 10 starts.
Splooge.
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 09, 2009, 08:35:34 AM
Quote from: Fork on June 09, 2009, 07:57:45 AM
Quote from: Slak on June 08, 2009, 01:18:52 PM
potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out
Is that a throwback reference to an old Tonk signature? Man, I'm sad for remembering that. Or maybe it's current? Too late, I'm already posting this. I could hit back...but no. I won't rob you of the chance to read this.
Tonk = Elmore Leonard?
Yeah, you didn't know that? Where have you been? Who else would have invented a British dude, living in the Netherlands who loves the Chicago Cubs because he had spent time in the Dominican Republic during a hurricaine in 1998? I mean that's the beauty of Leonard. You know a guy like this could exist, but why would he? If only he did. That would be 31 flavors of dope.
When I went to Kauai last week the only author I brought with me was Elmore Leonard.
Quote from: CBStew on July 02, 2009, 09:12:43 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 09, 2009, 08:35:34 AM
Quote from: Fork on June 09, 2009, 07:57:45 AM
Quote from: Slak on June 08, 2009, 01:18:52 PM
potentiality for the common umpire to bitch out
Is that a throwback reference to an old Tonk signature? Man, I'm sad for remembering that. Or maybe it's current? Too late, I'm already posting this. I could hit back...but no. I won't rob you of the chance to read this.
Tonk = Elmore Leonard?
Yeah, you didn't know that? Where have you been? Who else would have invented a British dude, living in the Netherlands who loves the Chicago Cubs because he had spent time in the Dominican Republic during a hurricaine in 1998? I mean that's the beauty of Leonard. You know a guy like this could exist, but why would he? If only he did. That would be 31 flavors of dope.
When I went to Kauai last week the only author I brought with me was Elmore Leonard.
Did you bring any books with you? was it awkward with him being the third wheel and all?
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Well excuuuseee me, Jim Edmonds.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Sorry. I didn't realize I talked about my dogs as often as you annoy everyone on the board.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Sorry. I didn't realize I talked about my dogs as often as you annoy everyone on the board.
Nobody does anything that often. Including masturbate.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Sorry. I didn't realize I talked about my dogs as often as you annoy everyone on the board.
We get it, you're sensitive. That's cool man. I'm not hatin'.
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
My cat shits in front of the litter box. He's in the littler box, but that's not where the shit ends up. That's why we named him Rex.
(OK, he's not really named Rex, but he could be.)
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
Stupid cats.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 12:13:58 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Sorry. I didn't realize I talked about my dogs as often as you annoy everyone on the board.
We get it, you're sensitive. That's cool man. I'm not hatin'.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 11:21:30 AM
We get it, you went to Hawaii.
We get it, you've found yourself a new internet asshole shtick.
Quote from: Tank on July 02, 2009, 12:32:41 PM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 12:13:58 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
Sorry. I didn't realize I talked about my dogs as often as you annoy everyone on the board.
We get it, you're sensitive. That's cool man. I'm not hatin'.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 11:21:30 AM
We get it, you went to Hawaii.
We get it, you've found yourself a new internet asshole shtick.
Stop stealing TDubbs' shtick.
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
My cat secretly shits in LA Gil's toilet.
Quote from: CT III on July 02, 2009, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
My cat secretly shits in LA Gil's toilet.
She has a lot of privacy, with Gil at the strip club 24x7.
Quote from: BH on July 02, 2009, 02:03:36 PM
Quote from: CT III on July 02, 2009, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
My cat secretly shits in LA Gil's toilet.
She has a lot of privacy, with Gil at the strip club 24x7.
That's a tiny stripclub.
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 02:12:23 PM
Quote from: BH on July 02, 2009, 02:03:36 PM
Quote from: CT III on July 02, 2009, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
My cat secretly shits in LA Gil's toilet.
She has a lot of privacy, with Gil at the strip club 24x7.
That's a tiny stripclub.
It's not a liquid garbage can, people!!!
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on July 02, 2009, 03:55:48 PM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 02:12:23 PM
Quote from: BH on July 02, 2009, 02:03:36 PM
Quote from: CT III on July 02, 2009, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on July 02, 2009, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on July 02, 2009, 10:56:42 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on July 02, 2009, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on July 01, 2009, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: MAD on July 01, 2009, 11:28:21 PM
He throws a lot of first pitch strikes.
They need to grab Ryan Dempster by his clown collar and shove his face into some game film of Wells, a la a dog whose face you shove into his own shit.
Isn't the practice of shoving a dog's face in to his own shit intended to deter the dog from shitting in that area again?
Yeah, and it it's a pretty ineffective deterrent as well as being just flat-out mean.
Heeeere we go. We get it, you have dogs.
My cat shits in a litter box.
My cat secretly shits in LA Gil's toilet.
She has a lot of privacy, with Gil at the strip club 24x7.
That's a tiny stripclub.
It's not a liquid garbage can LA Gil's wind pants, people!!!
Proper Strip Club Attire'd.
This thread is starting to suck worse than Jason Marquis after the All-Star Break.
A month or so ago I wanted SeanBearPig over Wells to start because I felt he earned it.
Look at me, wrong again. On both counts.
At what point do we go from expecting the other shoe to drop to just expecting this type of performance?
Quote from: MAD on July 06, 2009, 10:51:59 PM
At what point do we go from expecting the other shoe to drop to just expecting this type of performance?
I expect nothing from Randy Wells everytime out, and everytime out I am pleasantly surprised.
I like that feeling and don't plan on changing anything in the way I mentally prepare for a Randy Wells' start.
Quote from: flannj on July 06, 2009, 10:32:13 PM
A month or so ago I wanted SeanBearPig over Wells to start because I felt he earned it.
Look at me, wrong again. On both counts.
Me too, and as ridiculous as Wells has been in the rotation, SeanBearPig has been equally filthy out of the bullpen. Someone should pay Lou to make these decisions.
That now makes 10 of Wells' 11 starts in which he doesn't give up more than three runs. He's given up less than three runs in 9 of those 11 starts. If he had any kind of run support in his first five starts, he'd be 7-0. To boot, his ERA is at 2.43 with a 1.079 WHIP and just flat-out balltastic 45/14 K/BB ratio. I remember receiving many shit flingings for being fine with SeanBearPig in the bullpen, but that's because he was infinitely better than Neal Cotts as the lone left handed reliever. I had no idea Randy Wells would pitch this well.
I hope I can maitain CT's level of expectance for a Randy Wells start and continually be pleasantly surprised by the result.
Oh, yeah. Splooge.
Someone has to bring up Rookie of the Year, and right now he's at least on the leaderboard.
Quote from: Fork on July 07, 2009, 07:54:46 AM
Someone has to bring up Rookie of the Year, and right now he's at least on the leaderboard.
BUT HE'S ONLY WON FOUR GAMES!
Quote from: Fork on July 07, 2009, 07:54:46 AM
Someone has to bring up Rookie of the Year, and right now he's at least on the leaderboard.
Nah, that movie was shit. I have to admit that my expectations for Wells starts are higher than any other Cubs starter not about to be put on waivers by Phil and his angry minions.
I hate bad baseball, and this team certainly played bad baseball for Aramis's 50-game injury rehab. But, I can't find it within myself to be that damn ANGRY about a team that managed to be one game over .500 and 2.5 games out of first place upon their star's return, and before the All-Star break natch. The Cubs will win the division by 7 games.
I guess this stems from me reading FDB2 this morning. THAT makes me REDFACEDANGRY.
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Quote from: Eli on July 16, 2009, 09:38:05 AM
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Him?
(http://www.nationmaster.com/wikimir/images/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c7/Ann_Veal_-_AD.jpg/250px-Ann_Veal_-_AD.jpg)
Quote from: Eli on July 16, 2009, 09:38:05 AM
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Eli, if I wanted to read some queer pie chart thing, then I'd go finish high school. Try again, hi-liter breath.
Quote from: JD on July 16, 2009, 07:09:50 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 16, 2009, 09:38:05 AM
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Eli, if I wanted to read some queer pie chart thing, then I'd go finish high school. Try again, hi-liter breath.
If that comment were a slider, it would be one of the top three. I could tell you exactly where it was ranked too... If I was into cock.
Quote from: powen01 on July 16, 2009, 08:59:55 PM
Quote from: JD on July 16, 2009, 07:09:50 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 16, 2009, 09:38:05 AM
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Eli, if I wanted to read some queer pie chart thing, then I'd go finish high school. Try again, hi-liter breath.
If that comment were a slider, it would be one of the top three. I could tell you exactly where it was ranked too... If I was into cock.
You mean you're not? This changes the context of every post you've ever made.
Quote from: JD on July 16, 2009, 07:09:50 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 16, 2009, 09:38:05 AM
Statfaggy splooge over Randy Wells' slider. According to this, he's had the third-best slider in baseball this year, behind Zack Greinke and some moron Canadian pitcher.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/who-are-you-randy-wells/
Eli, if I wanted to read some queer pie chart thing, then I'd go finish high school. Try again, hi-liter breath.
Randy Wells' slider is like funnel cakes and Jimmie Johnson.
I'll stop posting information about baseball now, lest anyone ends up learning something.
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on July 17, 2009, 08:58:29 AM
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
You just want to get spanked.
Fucking pervert.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on July 17, 2009, 08:58:29 AM
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
You never clicked through to read Eli's link, did you?
Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2009, 09:48:53 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on July 17, 2009, 08:58:29 AM
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
You never clicked through to read Eli's link, did you?
I don't think he's alone.
Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2009, 09:48:53 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on July 17, 2009, 08:58:29 AM
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
You never clicked through to read Eli's link, did you?
Tank, I'm Bad at Internet Guy. Leave me to my yob, please.
Quote from: Eli on July 17, 2009, 09:51:53 AM
Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2009, 09:48:53 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on July 17, 2009, 08:58:29 AM
I read a post on TMS where they (it might have been Bort) called Wells' slider a combination of a slider and a cutter...or, slutter. I think I like that. If it's DRLP, I'll take the spanking and move on.
You never clicked through to read Eli's link, did you?
I don't think he's alone.
I clicked on it
and read it.
Staring to get ROY consideration from the doofuses on ESPN bump.
Quote from: fiveouts on August 03, 2009, 09:23:56 PM
Staring to get ROY consideration from the doofuses on ESPN bump.
You shouldn't stare. It's impolite.
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 03, 2009, 10:05:54 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on August 03, 2009, 09:23:56 PM
Staring to get ROY consideration from the doofuses on ESPN bump.
You shouldn't stare. It's impolite.
Hey, if it helps Wells gets some ROY consideration, I'm all for it.
Quote from: fiveouts on August 03, 2009, 09:23:56 PM
Staring to get ROY consideration from the doofuses on ESPN bump.
That was about the only positive thing that the doofae had to say about the Cubs as they were beating the Reds tonight.
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
He should rightfully have three more wins if the offense would have shown up during those first several starts.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 09:10:27 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
He should rightfully have three more wins if the offense would have shown up during those first several starts.
Weird how
wins shouldn't be a reflection of how a pitcher has pitched, as some around here have been saying for at least 4 years.
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 09:10:27 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
He should rightfully have three more wins if the offense would have shown up during those first several starts.
Weird how wins shouldn't be a reflection of how a pitcher has pitched, as some around here have been saying for at least 4 years.
I know this, Oleg, but the wins do provide a shiney beacon for the dopes who vote on such things as ROY to notice. Regardless, I think he's in the lead as Kerm mentioned above.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 11:06:31 AM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 09:10:27 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
He should rightfully have three more wins if the offense would have shown up during those first several starts.
Weird how wins shouldn't be a reflection of how a pitcher has pitched, as some around here have been saying for at least 4 years.
I know this, Oleg, but the wins do provide a shiney beacon for the dopes who vote on such things as ROY to notice. Regardless, I think he's in the lead as Kerm mentioned above.
How many first-place votes do you think Jay Kvox would receive? I'd say a handful.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 11:06:31 AM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 09:10:27 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: *In a Nutsack on August 04, 2009, 07:45:20 AM
8-4 in 16 starts, 2.73 ERA in 102 1/3 IP and 1.143 WHIP, 65/23 K/BB ratio. He's only got a 2.0 BB/9. He hasn't walked more than three in any of his starts; he's only walked three twice. He's gone 6 innings in 13 of his 16 starts; gone 7 innings in 10 of 16.
Randy Wells, ladies and gentlemen.
Thi
He should rightfully have three more wins if the offense would have shown up during those first several starts.
Weird how wins shouldn't be a reflection of how a pitcher has pitched, as some around here have been saying for at least 4 years.
I know this, Oleg, but the wins do provide a shiney beacon for the dopes who vote on such things as ROY to notice. Regardless, I think he's in the lead as Kerm mentioned above.
Intrepid Reader: Brandon WebbI agree.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_2003.shtml#NLroy
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Think so?
Quote from: TDubbs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Think so?
Has Weebs ever made a bad prediction before?
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Think so?
Has Weebs ever made a bad prediction before?
No. And I predict that I never will.
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Think so?
Has Weebs ever made a bad prediction before?
No. And I predict that I never will.
Weebs is the Bill Kristol of Desipio.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 04, 2009, 11:54:46 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: Jon on August 04, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
Quote from: TDubbs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:34:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler has been solid, but I forgot all about Happ. Wells has the edge right now, but it will be pretty close if they both keep pitching well.
Think so?
Has Weebs ever made a bad prediction before?
No. And I predict that I never will.
Weebs is the Bill Kristol of Desipio.
Or the Criswell...
(http://blogs.poz.com/shawn/upload/iamcriswellsmall.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Happ might lose his job to make room for Pedro they're saying.
Quote from: BH on August 04, 2009, 12:42:06 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Happ might lose his job to make room for Pedro they're saying.
Well, that would be extraordinarily stupid.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Pun'd.
Sorry.
Quote from: MAD on August 04, 2009, 12:44:17 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Pun'd.
Sorry.
I considered it and decided against it.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:45:14 PM
Quote from: MAD on August 04, 2009, 12:44:17 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Pun'd.
Sorry.
I considered it and decided against it.
You're a better man than me, my friend.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
Hanigan's last RBI was June 13th -- 88 plate appearances ago.
Quote from: Shooter on August 04, 2009, 12:55:55 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
Hanigan's last RBI was June 13th -- 88 plate appearances ago.
Who does he think he is, Milton Bradley, amiright?
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. No?
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. No?
I'm with Oleg, height should be the main criteria.
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
Need another Statfag for the Mathhomo train?
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. No?
Settle down, statsnob. Wells has clearly been better than Happ, but even using statfaggotry it's not completely ridiculous to have Happ in the discussion.
Wells1.14 WHIP
2.83 K/BB
160 ERA+
3.73 FIP
2.0 WAR
Happ1.16 WHIP
2.17 K/BB
144 ERA+
4.21 FIP
1.2 WAR
Quote from: RV on August 04, 2009, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. No?
Settle down, statsnob. Wells has clearly been better than Happ, but even using statfaggotry it's not completely ridiculous to have Happ in the discussion.
Wells
1.14 WHIP
2.83 K/BB
160 ERA+
3.73 FIP
2.0 WAR
Happ
1.16 WHIP
2.17 K/BB
144 ERA+
4.21 FIP
1.2 WAR
Okay, my statnaivete is well documented, but FIP and WAR are clearly made-up.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:41:51 PM
Quote from: RV on August 04, 2009, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. No?
Settle down, statsnob. Wells has clearly been better than Happ, but even using statfaggotry it's not completely ridiculous to have Happ in the discussion.
Wells
1.14 WHIP
2.83 K/BB
160 ERA+
3.73 FIP
2.0 WAR
Happ
1.16 WHIP
2.17 K/BB
144 ERA+
4.21 FIP
1.2 WAR
Okay, my statnaivete is well documented, but FIP and WAR are clearly made-up.
I'm sure Oleg the Statcromancer could explain it better, but the lower the FIP and the higher the WAR, the better. From the Hardball Times:
QuoteFielding Independent Pitching, a measure of all those things for which a pitcher is specifically responsible. The formula is (HR*13+(BB+HBP-IBB)*3-K*2)/IP, plus a league-specific factor (usually around 3.2) to round out the number to an equivalent ERA number. FIP helps you understand how well a pitcher pitched, regardless of how well his fielders fielded.
Here's (http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/how_to_calculate_war/) more than you'd ever want to know about WAR:
QuoteWAR is wins above replacement. Replacement is defined very specifically for my purposes: it's the talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade.
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Oh, man. I suspect Sandoval will probably win it pretty easily, then. It seems like offensive players have a slight advantage in the voters' minds than pitchers in the ROY voting.
And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob. We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.
Quote from: RV on August 04, 2009, 01:49:44 PM
WAR is wins above replacement. Replacement is defined very specifically for my purposes: it's the talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade.
BaseballStone calls bullshit on this. Wells replaced Marquis who has 12 wins, so Wells WAR should be -4!
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).
So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 01:58:15 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Oh, man. I suspect Sandoval will probably win it pretty easily, then. It seems like offensive players have a slight advantage in the voters' minds than pitchers in the ROY voting.
And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob. We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.
I JUST SAID HE WAS INELIGIBLE, IDITO.
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).
So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.
TPD.
Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.
Nice choice, Jim. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mcgehca01.shtml?redir)
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:41:51 PM
Okay, my statnaivete is well documented, but FIP and WAR are clearly made-up.
As RV pointed out, FIP isn't that hard to understand.
It's most useful for when there's a great disparity between a pitcher's FIP and ERA. For example, Matt Cain has baseball's biggest difference between his ERA (2.25) and his FIP (3.83). He's been very good this year regardless, but FIP would indicate that he's been a little lucky.
On the other hand, someone like Cole Hamels goes the other way with his ERA at 4.68 and his FIP at 3.81.
It's good to know for fantasy baseball purposes, if nothing else.
I think Wells is better simply based on his FWAP.
QuoteFWAP- The sound one's cock makes when it strikes the floor after dropping trou.
QuoteFWAP- The sound one's cock makes when it strikes the floor after dropping trou.
Tom Hanks: Nick the what?
Nick: The Dick. [FWAP]
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 01:58:15 PM
And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob. We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.
Intrepid reader: Bill Conlin
I've been studying up on laptop science.
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).
So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.
TPD.
Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.
Nice choice, Jim. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mcgehca01.shtml?redir)
Meh. He only plays second base. Why would the Cubs need another one of those?
Quote from: Canadouche on August 04, 2009, 03:11:06 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).
So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.
TPD.
Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.
Nice choice, Jim. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mcgehca01.shtml?redir)
Meh. He only plays second base and third base. Why would the Cubs need another one of those?
Man down'd (http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0701/chicago_a_ramirez01_300.jpg).
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:05:22 PM
I JUST SAID HE WAS INELIGIBLE, IDITO.
Ugh. Sorry. I was in the middle of fisking Kap's nonsense. It must have rubbed off on me.
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
Back to the suburbs with your statfaggery.
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
I'd stipulate that this is an acceptable average; it's not great, but it's not terrible either. If a .270 average is coupled with like a .390 OBP, then I'd say that player is pretty decent.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:05:55 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
I'd stipulate that this is an acceptable average; it's not great, but it's not terrible either. If a .270 average is coupled with like a .390 OBP, then I'd say that player is pretty decent.
I think Oleg's point is that it's just frustrating to have a discussion with someone who, through years and years of conditioning, turn to batting average as their defense of a player, as if it should end the argument. Sure, IF a player has a .390 OBP to go along with that .270 BA, you've got something. But I'm pretty sure Mel Zetz doesn't have anywhere near a .390 OBP.
EDIT: Getz' SLUGGING isn't even near .390 (.370). And his OBP is .322. No Sox fan should "really like" Chris Getz, unless it's a relative.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:05:55 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
I'd stipulate that this is an acceptable average; it's not great, but it's not terrible either. If a .270 average is coupled with like a .390 OBP, then I'd say that player is pretty decent.
.270 BA is slightly above average (~.260), but pretty meaningless in terms of gauging player performance. A .390 OBA is really good--not pretty decent.
Quote from: ChuckD on August 05, 2009, 12:22:17 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:05:55 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
I'd stipulate that this is an acceptable average; it's not great, but it's not terrible either. If a .270 average is coupled with like a .390 OBP, then I'd say that player is pretty decent.
.270 BA is slightly above average (~.260), but pretty meaningless in terms of gauging player performance. A .390 OBA is really good--not pretty decent.
Oh, I agree, I was just creating a hypothetical. But, nevertheless, I agree with what's been said. BA is just the beginning of an argument over a player; OPS usually is the end, I believe.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:26:47 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on August 05, 2009, 12:22:17 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:05:55 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 05, 2009, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 04, 2009, 01:08:10 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 04, 2009, 01:00:35 PM
If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?
I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.
I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.
I was having a discussion with a buddy last night. He really likes Chris Getz. I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good. So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good. I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."
I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp. I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.
Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average. At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.
I'd stipulate that this is an acceptable average; it's not great, but it's not terrible either. If a .270 average is coupled with like a .390 OBP, then I'd say that player is pretty decent.
.270 BA is slightly above average (~.260), but pretty meaningless in terms of gauging player performance. A .390 OBA is really good--not pretty decent.
Oh, I agree, I was just creating a hypothetical. But, nevertheless, I agree with what's been said. BA is just the beginning of an argument over a player; OPS usually is the end, I believe.
I thought the begining and end was Brian Baschnagel? Or is that something else?
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:26:47 PM
OPS usually is the end, I believe.
That probably depends how nerdy you want to get.
Quote from: Eli on August 05, 2009, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:26:47 PM
OPS usually is the end, I believe.
That probably depends how nerdy you want to get.
Somewhere above dumbassery, but below full-blown statfaggory.
Quote from: Eli on August 05, 2009, 01:20:18 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 05, 2009, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on August 05, 2009, 12:26:47 PM
OPS usually is the end, I believe.
That probably depends how nerdy you want to get.
Somewhere above dumbassery, but below full-blown statfaggory.
Oh, fine.
You guys are lucky this isn't in the 'statfag' thread.
SO lucky!
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on August 04, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Weebs on August 04, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
Quote from: Kermit, B. on August 04, 2009, 11:02:51 AM
Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson? Wells' numbers are better. Ryan Hanigan? Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.
I was trying to think of someone last night. There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson. But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings. I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible. The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.
Fowler and Happ.
Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers. Happ's a good call, though. He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs. Both he and Wells are 26. EERIE, am I right, PA?
Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:
Quote
Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
* Fewer than 130 at bats or
* Fewer than 50 innings pitched
* Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)
So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.
Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).
So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.
TPD.
Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.
Nice choice, Jim. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mcgehca01.shtml?redir)
With Happ taking a DL stint, he may have opened up the door a little bit for everyone's favorite overachiever.
Happ: 149.2 IP, 10-4, 2.77 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, .231 BAA, 104/52 K/BB
McGehee: 296 AB, 15 HR, 57 RBI, 55:33 K/BB, .304/.370/.517
Wells: 143 IP, 10-8, 2.96 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, .260 BAA, 84/38 K/BB
Happ has the minor statistical advantage over Wells in pretty much every category (K/BB is a slight nod to Wells), but McGehee's .931 OPS over the last month is definitely helping his cause.
Quote from: PenFoe on September 15, 2009, 06:55:59 PM
With Happ taking a DL stint, he may have opened up the door a little bit for everyone's favorite overachiever.
Happ: 149.2 IP, 10-4, 2.77 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, .231 BAA, 104/52 K/BB
McGehee: 296 AB, 15 HR, 57 RBI, 55:33 K/BB, .304/.370/.517
Wells: 143 IP, 10-8, 2.96 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, .260 BAA, 84/38 K/BB
Happ has the minor statistical advantage over Wells in pretty much every category (K/BB is a slight nod to Wells), but McGehee's .931 OPS over the last month is definitely helping his cause.
Tommy Hanson should get some consideration, too. Threw seven more scoreless innings tonight and his ERA is down to 2.65.
Well, that 2-out, 1-2 grand slam to the great Jody Gerut can't help...
It might help Jody Gerut get some Rookie of the Year votes. Retroactive to 2003. Hey, he finished fourth that year, every vote counts!
To Eli's point, I did miss Tommy Hanson, I thought he was shorter on innings, but he's over 100 now.
Also, would be remiss not to mention Chris Coughlan: 436 ABs, 72 R, 9 HR, 42 RBIs, 74/50 K/BB, 7 SB, .303/.376/.440, 116 OPS+.
Pretty similar numbers to McGehee (though McGehee's sporting a 129 OPS+) but a lot more ABs.
Chris Coughlan and Andrew McCutcheon are the best rookies in the NL. I should know, they're going to win my fantasy league for me.
Argue with THAT.
(Oh, and I have Randy Wells, too. But I'm going to have to stop starting him.)
Is Garrett Jones even eligible? .298/.366/.589/.955/153, 19 HR, 18 2B and 39 RBI in 295 PA.
Quote from: PenFoe on September 17, 2009, 02:39:05 PM
To Eli's point, I did miss Tommy Hanson, I thought he was shorter on innings, but he's over 100 now.
Also, would be remiss not to mention Chris Coughlan: 436 ABs, 72 R, 9 HR, 42 RBIs, 74/50 K/BB, 7 SB, .303/.376/.440, 116 OPS+.
Pretty similar numbers to McGehee (though McGehee's sporting a 129 OPS+) but a lot more ABs.
Bump for ROY announcement.
Chris Coughlan was a key Cough (hah!--get it?) in my team winning the MLBTradeRumors.com celebrity league!
I picked him up and the little fucker never stopped hitting from August 1 to the end of the season.
Quote from: Andy on November 16, 2009, 05:05:55 PM
Chris Coughlan was a key Cough (hah!--get it?) in my team winning the MLBTradeRumors.com celebrity league!
I picked him up and the little fucker never stopped hitting from August 1 to the end of the season.
And he went 36th in the 2006 MLB Draft.
Cubs took Colvin 13th while Fontenot was the starting 2B this year.
Nice choice, Jim.
Not really that bad, Colvin looks good, but couldn't pass up the Stoneyism opportunity.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/organization-top-10-prospects/2010/269148.html
1. Starlin Castro, ss
2. Brett Jackson, of
3. Josh Vitters, 3b
4. Andrew Cashner, rhp
5. Jay Jackson, rhp
6. Hak-Ju Lee, ss
7. Logan Watkins, 2b
8. Chris Carpenter, rhp
9. Ryan Flaherty, ss/2b/3b
10. D.J. LeMahieu, ss/2b
That last guy is another LSU frenchman.
Quote from: BH on November 16, 2009, 06:17:09 PM
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/organization-top-10-prospects/2010/269148.html
1. Starlin Castro, ss
2. Brett Jackson, of
3. Josh Vitters, 3b
4. Andrew Cashner, rhp
5. Jay Jackson, rhp
6. Hak-Ju Lee, ss
7. Logan Watkins, 2b
8. Chris Carpenter, rhp
9. Ryan Flaherty, ss/2b/3b
10. D.J. LeMahieu, ss/2b
That last guy is another LSU frenchman.
Fuckin' aye.
And here's where the depression sets in with that link:
QuoteTOP PROSPECTS
OF THE DECADE
Year Player, Position 2009
2000 Corey Patterson, of Brewers
2001 Corey Patterson, of Brewers
2002 Mark Prior, rhp Padres
2003 Hee Seop Choic, 1b Kia (Korea)
2004 Angel Guzman, rhp Cubs
2005 Brian Dopirak, 1b Blue Jays
2006 Felix Pie, of Orioles
2007 Felix Pie, of Orioles
2008 Josh Vitters, 3b Cubs
2009 Josh Vitters, 3b Cubs
TOP DRAFT PICKS
OF THE DECADE
Year Player, Position 2009
2000 Luis Montanez, ss Orioles
2001 Mark Prior, rhp Padres
2002 Bobby Brownlie, rhp Braves
2003 Ryan Harvey, of Rockies
2004 Grant Johnson, rhp (2nd round) Gary (Northern)
2005 Mark Pawelek, lhp Reds
2006 Tyler Colvin, of Cubs
2007 Josh Vitters, 3b Cubs
2008 Andrew Cashner, rhp Cubs
2009 Brett Jackson, of
Bump.
Yeah, not splooging for six hits and two walks in six innings, but NO RUNS, STATFAGS!!!!!!
Quote from: Day Man on April 08, 2010, 09:01:04 PM
Bump.
Yeah, not splooging for six hits and two walks in six innings, but NO RUNS, STATFAGS!!!!!!
I'm splooging for getting a grounder when he needed one. Wells 4 Prez.
Quote from: Day Man on April 08, 2010, 09:01:04 PM
Bump.
Yeah, not splooging for six hits and two walks in six innings, but NO RUNS, STATFAGS!!!!!!
Umm..that's a 1.33 WHIP. I'm pretty sure a statfag would be okay with that for a starting pitcher.
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2010, 10:06:47 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 08, 2010, 09:01:04 PM
Bump.
Yeah, not splooging for six hits and two walks in six innings, but NO RUNS, STATFAGS!!!!!!
Umm..that's a 1.33 WHIP. I'm pretty sure a statfag would be okay with that for a starting pitcher.
I know Randy Wells is not in front of the bumper of my SemiStatFagHATEMOBILE.
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2010, 10:06:47 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 08, 2010, 09:01:04 PM
Bump.
Yeah, not splooging for six hits and two walks in six innings, but NO RUNS, STATFAGS!!!!!!
Umm..that's a 1.33 WHIP. I'm pretty sure a statfag would be okay with that for a starting pitcher.
Exactly. Okay with it, but sploogeworthy? I doubt it. I reserve my splooge for CG shutouts with, like, three or four hits max. Exception: Playoff games.
Wells gave up no runs and lead them to the first win of the season, I'm calling it sploogeworthy.
Randy Wells saved the season.
I suggest the Cubs move to a 25-Wells roster post-haste.
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:01:28 AM
I suggest the Cubs move to a 25-Wells roster post-haste.
24 Wells + Dempster. They'll need
some offense.
Quote from: Internet Apex on April 09, 2010, 09:21:27 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:01:28 AM
I suggest the Cubs move to a 25-Wells roster post-haste.
24 Wells + Dempster. They'll need some offense.
And some funny. They have to have teh funny.
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
The ballhawks on the Kentucky side are getting their fishing nets untangled as we speak.
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
Quote from: CT III on April 09, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
No, he was also alive at the MEGASHOUTLUNCH at the Billy Goat. He died shortly afterwards.
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 09, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
No, he was also alive at the MEGASHOUTLUNCH at the Billy Goat. He died shortly afterwards.
at the JEWTABLE.
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 09, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
No, he was also alive at the MEGASHOUTLUNCH at the Billy Goat. He died shortly afterwards.
I recall meeting him at a ShoutLunch at Bacci's after that but, now that i think about it, that may have been a phantasm.
Quote from: MAD on April 09, 2010, 12:07:43 PM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 09, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
No, he was also alive at the MEGASHOUTLUNCH at the Billy Goat. He died shortly afterwards.
I recall meeting him at a ShoutLunch at Bacci's after that but, now that i think about it, that may have been a phantasm.
I am everywhere, and also nowhere. But mostly nowhere.
Quote from: Fork on April 09, 2010, 12:04:28 PM
at the JEWTABLE.
Intrepid readers: The uninvited gentilesSince there's a TV executive that no doubt sits there with you...can you help persuade them to do something about the
Life Unexpected commercials?
Quote from: R-V on April 09, 2010, 12:12:16 PM
Quote from: MAD on April 09, 2010, 12:07:43 PM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 09, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: Slaky on April 09, 2010, 11:13:39 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 11:01:42 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 09, 2010, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Bort on April 09, 2010, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 09, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: powen01 on April 09, 2010, 08:57:47 AM
Randy Wells saved the season.
At least he restored a little interest in the team.
He threw the HATEMOBILE into neutral. But it's idling...waiting...
Silva, it's your move.
Tonight has an opportunity to provide new levels of bile around here.
I can't wait to buckle up in the HATEMOBILE.
The HATEMOBILE will be fueled by the Fuck You Carlos Silva thread. I expect plenty of action as Joey Blotto hits three homers like it's Jon Lieber day.
What a day that was: the first ever Shoutlunch and the last time RV was seen alive.
No, he was also alive at the MEGASHOUTLUNCH at the Billy Goat. He died shortly afterwards.
I recall meeting him at a ShoutLunch at Bacci's after that but, now that i think about it, that may have been a phantasm.
I can be everywhere and nowhere at lunch. I know my style is bumpin' even though some people front.
KRS-One'd.