Jump to content

Interesting quotes from a beleaguered Buck Showalter...


JTrea81

Recommended Posts

But then again, if the entire world of baseball players had a true talent, verified by God, of hitting with RISP with an OPS of .750, you would observe some players at .800, or .850 and some at .700 or .650. And in small samples of ABs off by even more.

Sure. I just commented that he's got one of the good separations with a large sample size and not inflated by IBB's. I certainly don't think it's statistically signficant, even assuming some probable level of skill. I do think it's notable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply
If you don't think I'm upset, you obviously have no clue who I am or care to find out.

Well, that's for sure. I do not care to find out who you are.

Why would I intentionally post things knowing I'd get slammed for them and take personal attack after attack?

THAT is the point. You do it all the time, so you know the answer to this question. You obviously have some sick need to piss everybody off, which you have proceeded to do in this thread, and in almost every Orioles Talk section thread that you start or enter.

You are intentionally obstinate, you get some type of warped satisfaction out of having countless posters trying their damnedest to get through to you, and therefore you are not a nice guy.

My goal is to express and inform.

Weams asked you if someone had talked to you directly regarding the "information" that you were posting, or if it were just something that you personally hoped to be true. You used Nestor Aparicio and WNST as your "source."

Your "goal" of expressing and informing is about as genuine as that of The Star or The National Inquirer in their quest to express and inform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THAT is the point. You do it all the time, so you know the answer to this question. You obviously have some sick need to piss everybody off, which you have proceeded to do in this thread, and in almost every Orioles Talk section thread that you start or enter.

You are intentionally obstinate, you get some type of warped satisfaction out of having countless posters trying their damnedest to get through to you, and therefore you are not a nice guy.

Your "goal" of expressing and informing is about as genuine as that of The Star or The National Inquirer in their quest to express and inform.

This is entirely false and that's all I will say because you've already made up your mind based on who you think I am and that's unfortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is entirely false and that's all I will say because you've already made up your mind based on who you think I am and that's unfortunate.

You're on the internet Trea. It's nice that some people on here have personal friendships. I've been fortunate to meet a couple posters myself. I'm sure you're a nice guy in person. I'm also sure you're probably no where near the annoyance in real life as you are on here.

For the most part your reputation on here is determined by your body of work. In your case that's basically a pile of trash. if you're a punching bag it's because you earned it. Either wear it or change. Don't expect people to accommodate you. In any event, stop whining about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're on the internet Trea. It's nice that some people on here have personal friendships. I've been fortunate to meet a couple posters myself. I'm sure you're a nice guy in person. I'm also sure you're probably no where near the annoyance you are in real life as you are on here.

For the most part your reputation on here is determined by your body of work. In your case that's basically a pile of trash. if you're a punching bag it's because you earned it. Either wear it or change. Don't expect people to accommodate you. In any event, stop whining about it.

He had me at "beleaguered."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to rehabilitate your image you can start by using facts and evidence. I have rarely seen a truly fact-based argument here overwhelmed by personality conflicts.

For instance....

Fact: The Orioles are 2-0 in games Schoop has started at second base.

Treaism: The Orioles would have been 162-0 had they started Schoop at second base every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For instance....

Fact: The Orioles are 2-0 in games Schoop has started at second base.

Treaism: The Orioles would have been 162-0 had they started Schoop at second base every game.

Or:

If they had started Schoop all season they would be showing the fans that they are serious about winning the World Series because they are 2-0 with him at second. But they only want to be "competitive" so they didn't.

I try to take each Treaism and evaluate on a case by case basis. His want for high priced FAs a couple of years ago was wrong but not crazy IMO. This campaign of splicing hairs between competitive vs World Series is nutty at best and disingenuous at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...