Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bob

Maybe the Yankees did not get screwed in the Pineda deal after all.

Recommended Posts

Pinedas gotta take a cue from the crafty veteran Eddie Harris.

Edited by Matt39

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Buchholz. You're not even close on the spelling. Good lord.

Anyway, the Sox let him get away with it once. He decided to be dumb and is getting punished for breaking the rules. I doubt that there will be much retribution because the Red Sox andM everyone else in Major League Baseball have figured out better ways to do it.

I've already admitted my grammar is on par with your logic, when it comes to a Red Sox argument and I spell like an 8 year old dyslexic.

You asked for evidence of your guys ever cheating before. There is plenty and if we're going to have managers requiring it be checked now every game, you've got more known guilty parties than us. I think the rule should be done away with, but if were going to play this game its going to not only make games take longer between us, its going to make the game more dangerous.

Edited by SayNoToDMC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already admitted my grammar is on par with your logic, when it comes to a Red Sox argument and I spell like an 8 year old dyslexic.

You asked for evidence of your guys ever cheating before. There is plenty and if we're going to have managers requiring it be checked now every game, you've got more known guilty parties than us. I think the rule should be done away with, but if were going to play this game its going to not only make games take longer between us, its going to make the game more dangerous.

Prove anything you just said. I asked for pine tar on an obvious spot. You can't provide it. It's cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen any challenged yet.  But that is going to be hysterical when it does happen.  The short stop is two feet off the bag when he has the ball.  They will be watching it closely in slow motion, lol.  Tough call.

The "neighborhood" play is not up to replay challenge. Can't be challenged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "neighborhood" play is not up to replay challenge. Can't be challenged.

Oh....I didn't know that. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pineda has/had a great arm. You never know with pitchers.

 

Of course, giving Brett Gardener 52 Million seems silly though.

Gardner is a solid player, and you never hear anything negative about him (unlike a-rod). But I am a little biased since he is from my home town

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gardner is a solid player, and you never hear anything negative about him (unlike a-rod). But I am a little biased since he is from my home town

 

He is solid.  However, paying an average of 13 million for a .267 hitter with no power is 'silly'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is solid.  However, paying an average of 13 million for a .267 hitter with no power is 'silly'.

Totally, they couldnt trade him by the end of the month at his salary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is solid.  However, paying an average of 13 million for a .267 hitter with no power is 'silly'.

Are you really encompassing Brett Gardner as a player with his friggin batting average? What is this? 1953? You completely ignoring that his OBP is solid, he's a great basestealer and is one of the top 5 defensive outfielders in the sport. Gardner is actually underpaid if you look at what the Yankees set the market for by paying Ellsbury, who has no power either aside from one season that looks like a fluke.

Edited by unbanmadmike1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you really encompassing Brett Gardner as a player with his friggin batting average? What is this? 1953? You completely ignoring that his OBP is solid, he's a great basestealer and is one of the top 5 defensive outfielders in the sport. Gardner is actually underpaid if you look at what the Yankees set the market for by paying Ellsbury, who has no power either aside from one season that looks like a fluke.

 

What am I supposed to use his below average OPS+?  :rl:

 

The funny thing is you are making the same arguments for Gardner we made for Ellsbury when you were washing Granderson's balls.  Like Gardner, he has one redeemable talent.

 

Your love for non-hitting outfielders is amazing.  13 million per for a .267 hitter with no power is stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty well-known that the Red Sox pichers, just like those on every other team in the league use foreign substances to improve grip.  The Red Sox staff seems to favor a combination of BullFrog and rosin, but for the most part they aren't stupid enough to be extremely obvious about it.

 

I don't think pine tar should be legal for pitchers, but I do think the problem of gripping the baseball on a cold night needs to be addressed.  Personally, I like the idea that has been floated of changing the baseball.  The balls used in Japan are known to be easier to grip than those used in the MLB.  I'm sure Tanaka, Uehara, and Tazawa wouldn't mind using something more like that :)

Edited by WWWWombat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What am I supposed to use his below average OPS+?  :rl:

 

The funny thing is you are making the same arguments for Gardner we made for Ellsbury when you were washing Granderson's balls.  Like Gardner, he has one redeemable talent.

 

Your love for non-hitting outfielders is amazing.  13 million per for a .267 hitter with no power is stupid.

Because I've said how great the Ellsbury contract was?? Huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I've said how great the Ellsbury contract was?? Huh?

 

 

Way to deflect.

 

"Great D.  Blah Blah Blah Great base stealer."  Funny how those stats went from over rated to relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Way to deflect.

 

"Great D.  Blah Blah Blah Great base stealer."  Funny how those stats went from over rated to relevant.

I said defense and base stealing was overrated? Huh? What the hell are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said defense and base stealing was overrated? Huh? What the hell are you talking about?

 

A little Grandernesia?  Ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little Grandernesia?  Ok.

What in the hell are you talking about? Oh you mean when you said granderson sucked because he hit 250 showcasing your 1950s baseball knowledge level?

Edited by unbanmadmike1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said defense and base stealing was overrated? Huh? What the hell are you talking about?

Yes, you said stolen bases were meaningless, or worthless...one of those.  Many, many, many times.

Edited by AirForceJetFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you said stolen bases were meaningless, or worthless...one of those.  Many, many, many times.

 

PIneda hasn't pitched since April and you necro this thread to argue MadMike is inconsistent?  Shame on you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PIneda hasn't pitched since April and you necro this thread to argue MadMike is inconsistent?  Shame on you!

 

Isn't being consistently inconsistent in fact consistent?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PIneda hasn't pitched since April and you necro this thread to argue MadMike is inconsistent?  Shame on you!

 

Yes, how could I ever take a thread that has gone insanely off topic and continue that discussion in an off topic manner?  I haven't spent much time in the baseball forum so I was shocked to see MM say Gardner was an asset in the SB department.  I thought it was a good thing and that he had come around to realize that baseball can be a situational game in which a SB can be huge at the right time.  I thought it was great that he's finally come to this realization, but surprised that he seemed to be implying that he'd never suggested otherwise.  For that reason, I reminded him that he'd said for years that stolen bases were useless.  Shame on me indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, how could I ever take a thread that has gone insanely off topic and continue that discussion in an off topic manner?  I haven't spent much time in the baseball forum so I was shocked to see MM say Gardner was an asset in the SB department.  I thought it was a good thing and that he had come around to realize that baseball can be a situational game in which a SB can be huge at the right time.  I thought it was great that he's finally come to this realization, but surprised that he seemed to be implying that he'd never suggested otherwise.  For that reason, I reminded him that he'd said for years that stolen bases were useless.  Shame on me indeed.

Yeah, but that was two months ago!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I don't spend much time in the baseball forum. I popped in and read the top two or three threads. In the future I'll be sure to check the currency of the discussion. My apologies.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I don't spend much time in the baseball forum. I popped in and read the top two or three threads. In the future I'll be sure to check the currency of the discussion. My apologies.

 

No one spends much time in the baseball forum, but you are right on.

 

MM has been the biggest Granderson cheerleader ever.  He likes to crush me for BA, but he fall in love with OPS, OPS+, etc. and never admits none of them are be all end all stats.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you said stolen bases were meaningless, or worthless...one of those.  Many, many, many times.

No I didn't. Sounds like you were suffering from bad reading comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I didn't. Sounds like you were suffering from bad reading comprehension.

 

OMG!  You and your Grandnesia.

 

We, e.g. me and you, went round and round when arguing Ellsbury vs. Granderson.

 

Maybe that was the other MadMike. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I didn't. Sounds like you were suffering from bad reading comprehension.

Nope, sounds like you've finally come to understand what me and SD were saying to you all that time. Good job buddy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!  You and your Grandnesia.

 

We, e.g. me and you, went round and round when arguing Ellsbury vs. Granderson.

 

Maybe that was the other MadMike. 

You mean when I was right about Granderson being better than Ellsbury? If I recall that argument was about stolen base success rates being much more important than actual number of stolen bases. I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand...

Edited by unbanmadmike1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean when I was right about Granderson being better than Ellsbury? If I recall that argument was about stolen base success rates being much more important than actual number of stolen bases. I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand...

 

 

Better?  :rl:  Stop you are killing me.

 

It was never purely about stolen bases.  If that was the basis of the argument, Ellsbury is twice the player Granderson is.

 

It was about your tunnel vision love of OPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's funny he's objectively better. Always has been. Even in ellsbury's best season Granderson was better than hm (at worst even with him.) What was your brain dead argument anyway? Can't say that I remember. Something about batting avg being the most important stat and k's being evil or some other silliness irrational crap. BTW I also said that Brett Gardner was better than Ellsbury which other than one season, is proving to be true as well. 

Edited by unbanmadmike1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's funny he's objectively better. Always has been. Even in ellsbury's best season Granderson was better than hm (at worst even with him.) What was your brain dead argument anyway? Can't say that I remember. Something about batting avg being the most important stat and k's being evil or some other silliness irrational crap. BTW I also said that Brett Gardner was better than Ellsbury which other than one season, is proving to be true as well. 

 

So, if your premise holds true that Granderson is better, then why did the Yankees effectively replace him with Ellsbury?

Edited by CrazyCarl40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's funny he's objectively better. Always has been. Even in ellsbury's best season Granderson was better than hm (at worst even with him.) What was your brain dead argument anyway? Can't say that I remember. Something about batting avg being the most important stat and k's being evil or some other silliness irrational crap. BTW I also said that Brett Gardner was better than Ellsbury which other than one season, is proving to be true as well. 

 

The only thing Granderson has on Ellsbury is power.  This inflates his slugging which inflates OPS...etc. etc. etc.

 

He has health as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if your premise holds true that Granderson is better, then why did the Yankees effectively replace him with Ellsbury?

Because Brian Cashman is a terrible GM. How about that they have a guy playing next to him who is better than him making half the money? Or that they let their best player walk and signed 4 old done vets to "replace" (LOL) him.

Edited by unbanmadmike1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing Granderson has on Ellsbury is power.  This inflates his slugging which inflates OPS...etc. etc. etc.

 

He has health as well.

Oh, that's all? That meaningless skill? Who needs power? And yes, having more power makes his SLG% better just like hitting more homers makes his HR stat go up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, that's all? That meaningless skill? Who needs power? And yes, having more power makes his SLG% better just like hitting more homers makes his HR stat go up. 

 

Yes, but if you cannot hit and save yourself with your normal low thought response, who cares?

 

Where are you going to bat him? Leadoff? He is not good enough. 2nd or 3rd? :rl: 4th? There is no doubt he has the power to hit there, but he is more likely to strikeout and leave people on base. 5th? He would be adequate protection, but I could see people going to him because he is more likely to strikeout than hit a HR.

 

If you get the guy that crushed it for the Tigers for two years, yeah he is a lot better than Jacoby. Unfortunately, that guy has not been seen in 7 years. 

 

Dave Kingman had power.  No one thought he was a good player much less a great one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...