It is currently Sat Nov 16, 2024 5:08 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
I'll also say this, it's pretty difficult to be as good as this Cub team is while bringing up the rear in batting average. That's probably your best argument for the brilliance of Maddon.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:36 pm
Posts: 19345
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Except they aren't. The Sox are better at first, short, and center and right, as well as the rotation and bullpen. They are at least as good at second. Do the Cubs even have a second baseman? It seems like they're playing second base roulette.

Anyway, you should be more concerned about whether the Cubs are better at any position than the Cardinals. I'll give them first base and center.



That's not "almost every position". The Cubs are clearly better at minimally a third of the positions. And the places the Sox are better, the difference is marginal. The Cub rotation is having a better season. I don't think most people would swap the Sox rotation for it going forward.though. Probably not even most Cub fans.


:lol: Of Course saying the Cubs are only better at 3 spots is not almost every position.

_________________
Frank Coztansa wrote:
conns7901 wrote:
Not over yet.
Yes it is.


CDOM wrote:
When this is all over, which is not going to be for a while, Trump will be re-elected President.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:48 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Except they aren't. The Sox are better at first, short, and center and right, as well as the rotation and bullpen. They are at least as good at second. Do the Cubs even have a second baseman? It seems like they're playing second base roulette.

Anyway, you should be more concerned about whether the Cubs are better at any position than the Cardinals. I'll give them first base and center.



That's not "almost every position". The Cubs are clearly better at minimally a third of the positions. And the places the Sox are better, the difference is marginal. The Cub rotation is having a better season. I don't think most people would swap the Sox rotation for it going forward.though. Probably not even most Cub fans.


:lol: Of Course saying the Cubs are only better at 3 spots is not almost every position.



I'm not looking to get into the semantics of "almost" with you. If you're looking for such an argument I'm sure BRick will be around later.

But you're ignoring the context of my post you quoted. It was a response in a thread called something like "Would any Sox player start for the Cubs?" wherein Cub fans were using selective criteria to argue in favor of each Cub.

Has Soler had a better tear than Garcia? Has Fowler had a better year than Eaton? Has Rizzo had a better year than Abreu? I don't know who you consider the Cub second baseman. Is it the guy with 4 RBI in 100 at bats? I'll grant you Russell has been marginally better than Ramirez. At the time of that post their numbers were very similar.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:36 pm
Posts: 19345
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Except they aren't. The Sox are better at first, short, and center and right, as well as the rotation and bullpen. They are at least as good at second. Do the Cubs even have a second baseman? It seems like they're playing second base roulette.

Anyway, you should be more concerned about whether the Cubs are better at any position than the Cardinals. I'll give them first base and center.



That's not "almost every position". The Cubs are clearly better at minimally a third of the positions. And the places the Sox are better, the difference is marginal. The Cub rotation is having a better season. I don't think most people would swap the Sox rotation for it going forward.though. Probably not even most Cub fans.


:lol: Of Course saying the Cubs are only better at 3 spots is not almost every position.



I'm not looking to get into the semantics of "almost" with you. If you're looking for such an argument I'm sure BRick will be around later.

But you're ignoring the context of my post you quoted. It was a response in a thread called something like "Would any Sox player start for the Cubs?" wherein Cub fans were using selective criteria to argue in favor of each Cub.

Has Soler had a better tear than Garcia? Has Fowler had a better year than Eaton? Has Rizzo had a better year than Abreu? I don't know who you consider the Cub second baseman. Is it the guy with 4 RBI in 100 at bats? I'll grant you Russell has been marginally better than Ramirez. At the time of that post their numbers were very similar.


Then why are the Cubs 20 games better than the Sox in the standings if they are so close in players? We know its not the manager. Is it really all Tyler Flowers fault?

_________________
Frank Coztansa wrote:
conns7901 wrote:
Not over yet.
Yes it is.


CDOM wrote:
When this is all over, which is not going to be for a while, Trump will be re-elected President.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
conns7901 wrote:

Then why are the Cubs 20 games better than the Sox in the standings if they are so close in players? We know its not the manager. Is it really all Tyler Flowers fault?


1. Pitching
2. Bryant
3. Bench

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Except they aren't. The Sox are better at first, short, and center and right, as well as the rotation and bullpen. They are at least as good at second. Do the Cubs even have a second baseman? It seems like they're playing second base roulette.

Anyway, you should be more concerned about whether the Cubs are better at any position than the Cardinals. I'll give them first base and center.



That's not "almost every position". The Cubs are clearly better at minimally a third of the positions. And the places the Sox are better, the difference is marginal. The Cub rotation is having a better season. I don't think most people would swap the Sox rotation for it going forward.though. Probably not even most Cub fans.


:lol: Of Course saying the Cubs are only better at 3 spots is not almost every position.



I'm not looking to get into the semantics of "almost" with you. If you're looking for such an argument I'm sure BRick will be around later.

But you're ignoring the context of my post you quoted. It was a response in a thread called something like "Would any Sox player start for the Cubs?" wherein Cub fans were using selective criteria to argue in favor of each Cub.

Has Soler had a better tear than Garcia? Has Fowler had a better year than Eaton? Has Rizzo had a better year than Abreu? I don't know who you consider the Cub second baseman. Is it the guy with 4 RBI in 100 at bats? I'll grant you Russell has been marginally better than Ramirez. At the time of that post their numbers were very similar.


Let's not say things we don't mean. That was a great thread.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
So managing doesn't matter, the Sox players are pretty much the same of better... but the Cubs are a couple dozen games better in a tougher division... how does this add up?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:09 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Darkside wrote:
So managing doesn't matter, the Sox players are pretty much the same of better... but the Cubs are a couple dozen games better in a tougher division... how does this add up?


1. You don't know when managing matters and when it doesn't so you should shut the fuck up about it.

2. The Sox have some players better than their Cub counterparts. The Cubs clearly have a better team.

3. If the NL Central is so tough how could the AL be the 30-something games above .500 vs. the NL that they are?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

1. You don't know when managing matters and when it doesn't so you should shut the fuck up about it.

What are you talking about? Good lord you're angry for no reason calm down dude. Mercy. Managing matters every day. Leadership matters. Handling the players every day matters. The way he handled Castro and his benching and subsequent reinstatement mattered. His looseness matters. The team tends to take the personality of it's management and that worked this year.

JORR wrote:
2. The Sox have some players better than their Cub counterparts. The Cubs clearly have a better team.


Some. That's a bit different from what you were saying earlier. I like it. You've adapted.

JORR wrote:
3. If the NL Central is so tough how could the AL be the 30-something games above .500 vs. the NL that they are?

You're not serious. You can't be serious. You're desperate. It's stinky.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Today JORR wrote:
2. The Sox have some players better than their Cub counterparts



A couple weeks ago Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Except they aren't. The Sox are better at first, short, and center and right, as well as the rotation and bullpen. They are at least as good at second. Do the Cubs even have a second baseman?

So the Cubs are only better at third and left a few weeks ago, but today they've got some better players.. :lol: :lol: EVOLUTION OF JORR!

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
JORR, I love ya, buddy. You're losing it, though.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:37 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Darkside wrote:
What are you talking about? Good lord you're angry for no reason calm down dude. Mercy. Managing matters every day. Leadership matters. Handling the players every day matters. The way he handled Castro and his benching and subsequent reinstatement mattered. His looseness matters. The team tends to take the personality of it's management and that worked this year.


So Matt Williams was a great manager last year and a horrible one this year.

Darkside wrote:
Some. That's a bit different from what you were saying earlier. I like it. You've adapted.


Again, I would appreciate my comments not being taken out of context. Are Soler, Fowler, and Baez better than the Sox guys on the numbers? You don't like the answer. So you're pretending as if I'm saying something outlandish.

Darkside wrote:
You're not serious. You can't be serious. You're desperate. It's stinky.


Why do you hate facts? How can the NL be stronger when they're 30 games under .500 vs. the AL? By your rationale, maybe the Sox are better than the Cubs. :lol:

Finally, I'm not sure why I'm arguing with a guy who is rooting for his favorite team to lose in the playoffs.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

So Matt Williams was a great manager last year and a horrible one this year.

Anyone can have success one year and not have it the next. Pitchers, managers, anyone. Maddon is the right man in the right place at the right time. Perhaps in 2 years he will not be. Today, this season, he is.
JORR wrote:
Again, I would appreciate my comments not being taken out of context. Are Soler, Fowler, and Baez better than the Sox guys on the numbers? You don't like the answer. So you're pretending as if I'm saying something outlandish.

You said that the Sox were better at every position but two. That's not out of context.

JORR wrote:
Why do you hate facts? How can the NL be stronger when they're 30 games under .500 vs. the AL? By your rationale, maybe the Sox are better than the Cubs. :lol:

Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote. I did not argue that the NL was stronger. Not at all.

JORR wrote:
Finally, I'm not sure why I'm arguing with a guy who is rooting for his favorite team to lose in the playoffs.

Reading comprehension is not your thing I guess. I am positively rooting for them and I am really hoping they do well. I probably said that 3 or 4 times in that thread. You have a hard time understanding things. I have a cousin with a learning disability so I'm not unfamiliar with the effects they have on people. I forgive you.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
You're not good at this.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
You're not good at this.

Was good enough to trounce you.
But I didn't need to be good at this to do so, to be fair, so you may be right yet.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Darkside wrote:
Anyone can have success one year and not have it the next. Pitchers, managers, anyone. Maddon is the right man in the right place at the right time. Perhaps in 2 years he will not be. Today, this season, he is.


What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad. Or maybe, he was just as good as his players played. What do you think makes more sense?

Maybe Maddon is "the right man in the right place at the right time". If he makes a questionable decision in the playoffs does that mean he got stupid?

Darkside wrote:
You said that the Sox were better at every position but two. That's not out of context.

It is out of context. Bryant is a big difference maker. Unlike a swap of Maddon and Ventura, I'm sure the records would be different if you swapped Bryant for Saladino/Beckham.

Darkside wrote:
Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote. I did not argue that the NL was stronger. Not at all.


if the NL is weaker, how can the NL Central be stronger?

Darkside wrote:
Reading comprehension is not your thing I guess. I am positively rooting for them and I am really hoping they do well. I probably said that 3 or 4 times in that thread. You have a hard time understanding things. I have a cousin with a learning disability so I'm not unfamiliar with the effects they have on people. I forgive you.


Nope. You thought it would be better for them to lose. And then you took heat and began backtracking. Then you did the Darkside. :lol:

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:08 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Darkside wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
You're not good at this.

Was good enough to trounce you.
But I didn't need to be good at this to do so, to be fair, so you may be right yet.


You've never trounced anyone here. You've even been trounced by a mult on home improvement tips.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
JORR wrote:
It is out of context. Bryant is a big difference maker. Unlike a swap of Maddon and Ventura, I'm sure the records would be different if you swapped Bryant for Saladino/Beckham.

So your position is that Bryant is something like a +20 WAR? And you give us shit for saying he's potentially HOF caliber material.
Odd.

JORR wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad. Or maybe, he was just as good as his players played. What do you think makes more sense?

Oh. I see. So we're either of the mindframe that the manager does it all or doesn't. Of course the players make a huge difference. Of course the quality of the players makes the majority of the wins and losses. We all know that. The point is that management makes a difference in many games. Certainly Joe Maddon didn't win 97 games this year on his own. I don't think anyone suggests that. The Cubs are a good team but there's no way they win 97 with Renteria. Maddon counts for some of the success.

JORR wrote:
if the NL is weaker, how can the NL Central be stronger?


Is this a joke?

JORR wrote:
Nope. You thought it would be better for them to lose. And then you took heat and began backtracking. Then you did the Darkside.

No. Again no. And I can't get my mind around how you don't understand this. The point was that there's two ways of taking a loss in a big meaningful game. You can let it break you or you can let it make you. I thought that with the makeup of this team, the manager that they have, if they didn't win that game they would be back even better next year than had they won that game because they'll feed off it, grow from it and never want to feel like that again.
JORR wrote:
You've even been trounced by a mult on home improvement tips.

Yeah, you're getting desperate. Best wishes to you, hope you try to enjoy the weekend.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:28 pm
Posts: 29948
Location: SW Burbs
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad.

Brady Anderson had an all-time great season. He must have been great. Then he got bad.
That's how sports work.

The same can be applied to managers as players. Both matter.

_________________
FavreFan wrote:
Im pretty hammered right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:28 pm
Posts: 6211
Location: Knoxville,Ill
pizza_Place: Caseys
Darkside wrote:
JORR wrote:
It is out of context. Bryant is a big difference maker. Unlike a swap of Maddon and Ventura, I'm sure the records would be different if you swapped Bryant for Saladino/Beckham.

So your position is that Bryant is something like a +20 WAR? And you give us shit for saying he's potentially HOF caliber material.
Odd.

JORR wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad. Or maybe, he was just as good as his players played. What do you think makes more sense?

Oh. I see. So we're either of the mindframe that the manager does it all or doesn't. Of course the players make a huge difference. Of course the quality of the players makes the majority of the wins and losses. We all know that. The point is that management makes a difference in many games. Certainly Joe Maddon didn't win 97 games this year on his own. I don't think anyone suggests that. The Cubs are a good team but there's no way they win 97 with Renteria. Maddon counts for some of the success.

JORR wrote:
if the NL is weaker, how can the NL Central be stronger?


Is this a joke?

JORR wrote:
Nope. You thought it would be better for them to lose. And then you took heat and began backtracking. Then you did the Darkside.

No. Again no. And I can't get my mind around how you don't understand this. The point was that there's two ways of taking a loss in a big meaningful game. You can let it break you or you can let it make you. I thought that with the makeup of this team, the manager that they have, if they didn't win that game they would be back even better next year than had they won that game because they'll feed off it, grow from it and never want to feel like that again.
JORR wrote:
You've even been trounced by a mult on home improvement tips.

Yeah, you're getting desperate. Best wishes to you, hope you try to enjoy the weekend.

You just beat his ass sideways. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
spanky wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad.

Brady Anderson had an all-time great season. He must have been great. Then he got bad.
That's how sports work.

The same can be applied to managers as players. Both matter.


It's not the same at all. Brady Anderson is good or bad based on his own efforts. Joe Maddon is good or bad based on the efforts of Rizzo and Arrieta.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:52 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79465
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Scooter wrote:
Darkside wrote:
JORR wrote:
It is out of context. Bryant is a big difference maker. Unlike a swap of Maddon and Ventura, I'm sure the records would be different if you swapped Bryant for Saladino/Beckham.

So your position is that Bryant is something like a +20 WAR? And you give us shit for saying he's potentially HOF caliber material.
Odd.

JORR wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad. Or maybe, he was just as good as his players played. What do you think makes more sense?

Oh. I see. So we're either of the mindframe that the manager does it all or doesn't. Of course the players make a huge difference. Of course the quality of the players makes the majority of the wins and losses. We all know that. The point is that management makes a difference in many games. Certainly Joe Maddon didn't win 97 games this year on his own. I don't think anyone suggests that. The Cubs are a good team but there's no way they win 97 with Renteria. Maddon counts for some of the success.

JORR wrote:
if the NL is weaker, how can the NL Central be stronger?


Is this a joke?

JORR wrote:
Nope. You thought it would be better for them to lose. And then you took heat and began backtracking. Then you did the Darkside.

No. Again no. And I can't get my mind around how you don't understand this. The point was that there's two ways of taking a loss in a big meaningful game. You can let it break you or you can let it make you. I thought that with the makeup of this team, the manager that they have, if they didn't win that game they would be back even better next year than had they won that game because they'll feed off it, grow from it and never want to feel like that again.
JORR wrote:
You've even been trounced by a mult on home improvement tips.

Yeah, you're getting desperate. Best wishes to you, hope you try to enjoy the weekend.

You just beat his ass sideways. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Now he knows he lost. You're the dumbest guy who ever posted here.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:28 pm
Posts: 29948
Location: SW Burbs
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
spanky wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad.

Brady Anderson had an all-time great season. He must have been great. Then he got bad.
That's how sports work.

The same can be applied to managers as players. Both matter.


It's not the same at all. Brady Anderson is good or bad based on his own efforts. Joe Maddon is good or bad based on the efforts of Rizzo and Arrieta.

Do you not see how Maddon could influence Rizzo or Bryant having a more successful season?
Really? You really do not see that?

Did Maddon affect Castro's success this year? At all?

_________________
FavreFan wrote:
Im pretty hammered right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68612
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Scooter wrote:
Darkside wrote:
JORR wrote:
It is out of context. Bryant is a big difference maker. Unlike a swap of Maddon and Ventura, I'm sure the records would be different if you swapped Bryant for Saladino/Beckham.

So your position is that Bryant is something like a +20 WAR? And you give us shit for saying he's potentially HOF caliber material.
Odd.

JORR wrote:
What makes a good manager? A winning team. Matt Williams has managed a winning team. He must have been good. The he got bad. Or maybe, he was just as good as his players played. What do you think makes more sense?

Oh. I see. So we're either of the mindframe that the manager does it all or doesn't. Of course the players make a huge difference. Of course the quality of the players makes the majority of the wins and losses. We all know that. The point is that management makes a difference in many games. Certainly Joe Maddon didn't win 97 games this year on his own. I don't think anyone suggests that. The Cubs are a good team but there's no way they win 97 with Renteria. Maddon counts for some of the success.

JORR wrote:
if the NL is weaker, how can the NL Central be stronger?


Is this a joke?

JORR wrote:
Nope. You thought it would be better for them to lose. And then you took heat and began backtracking. Then you did the Darkside.

No. Again no. And I can't get my mind around how you don't understand this. The point was that there's two ways of taking a loss in a big meaningful game. You can let it break you or you can let it make you. I thought that with the makeup of this team, the manager that they have, if they didn't win that game they would be back even better next year than had they won that game because they'll feed off it, grow from it and never want to feel like that again.
JORR wrote:
You've even been trounced by a mult on home improvement tips.

Yeah, you're getting desperate. Best wishes to you, hope you try to enjoy the weekend.

You just beat his ass sideways. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Now he knows he lost. You're the dumbest guy who ever posted here.


ChicagoEd.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Now he knows he lost. You're the dumbest guy who ever posted here.

That wasn't nice. You get mean a lot.

But I guess even the dumb guy knows you got moon pounded.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:28 pm
Posts: 6211
Location: Knoxville,Ill
pizza_Place: Caseys
Darkside wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Now he knows he lost. You're the dumbest guy who ever posted here.

That wasn't nice. You get mean a lot.

But I guess even the dumb guy knows you got moon pounded.

I find it funny how I am always the dumb guy. Smarter at life than this prick will ever be. Better baseball thoughts also. Go on dreaming about 2005 and pounding your dick to it as your gross wife wipes her ass with a kitchen towel that says Go Sox Go !!! You fucking pudwack.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68612
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
Yep.

Dumb.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:28 pm
Posts: 29948
Location: SW Burbs
:o

_________________
FavreFan wrote:
Im pretty hammered right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:28 pm
Posts: 6211
Location: Knoxville,Ill
pizza_Place: Caseys
Then we agree. JORR is a dipshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65733
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Yeah so that did get a little weird.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group