D-Cab Still Bad

[The Wedge]

How am I doing so? He posted an inflamatory "take" of what he has read which was all wrong but one item. If anything you should be acusing him of this, not me. I could do the same to him but I would view that as a rule violation. However, I am merely responding to his attempt to insult me because he totally miscomprehends my posts if that is what he truly believes (which I highly doubt). Now I am the villan? How so????

You said he didn't have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler! You don't realize how insulting that is?

[O'sFanThruJune]

I can't believe I read the whole thing.

While I am on the same side as the legions of posters united against Old#5Fan, I don't think that the absolute terminology of "No out is productive" and "Every walk is good" is exactly helping. The concession by Wedge of the game-winning sac fly, and the concessions by Drungo of the 9th-inning useless IBB to set up the DP with a weak hitter are legitimate counterexamples.

However, getting back to the crux of the argument, the player who walks 70 times in a season is not getting 70 walks in the 9th inning with the winning run on 3rd base, where a sacrifice fly would have been better. The vast majority of those walks were of the normal "productive" type, in that they produced a base runner without losing an out that had the potential to score. Regardless of the amount of "skill" necessary to draw those walks, the fact is that player improves your teams chances of winning much more than a player with the same average and slugging percentage that draws only 20 walks.

Also, arguments from hindsight are not valid arguments. A suicide squeeze with a runner on third and no outs in the first inning does not become an intelligent and good play just because the team ends up winning 1-0. A walk in that situation yields a much larger increase in expected runs scored, and is a better use of that at-bat, even if hindsight shows that the next three guys struck out.

[BaltimoreTerp]

You said he didn't have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler! You don't realize how insulting that is?

Oh god, I could so go with that, but I would completely deserve to be banned for what I would say, because it would be just as bad as what he did!

[byrdz]

You said he didn't have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler! You don't realize how insulting that is?

It's not insulting, it's productive criticism.

[Old#5fan]

First of all, how is a walk or hit non-productive? If a person gets on base, it's productive.

It's the batter(s) that fails to knock those runners in that is unproductive.

Just thought I'd clear that up, since that really can't be argued with. It's common sensical logic.

I am not going to insult your intelligence by copying an pasting Webster's dicitionary definition of "productive" but the word is derived from produce. In the game of baseball when you talk about "producing" something it normally would be a run which is the object of the game (to score runs in total more than your opponent over a span of innings.) So if the walk either drives in a run or "produces" a run as with the bases loaded or ends up scoring a run - the walker crosses the plate, I view this as a productive walk or hit for that matter. If it doesn't, it simply is "non-productive" because it failed to "produce" a run and essentially other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher accomplish nothing as far as the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I just ate a sandwich but it was unproductive cuz I'm still hungry :-(

[NewMarketSean]

I am not going to insult your intelligence by copying an pasting Webster's dicitionary definition of "productive" but the word is derived from produce. In the game of baseball when you talk about "producing" something it normally would be a run which is the object of the game (to score runs in total more than your opponent over a span of innings.) So if the walk either drives in a run or "produces" a run as with the bases loaded or ends up scoring a run - the walker crosses the plate, I view this as a productive walk or hit for that matter. If it doesn't, it simply is "non-productive" because it failed to "produce" a run and essentially other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher accomplish nothing as far as the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

Say a batter walks to lead off the inning and the rest of the batters ground/fly/strike out without moving the runner over.

Is the walk unproductive? Was it productive at the time? What makes it unproductive?

[Flip217]

You said he didn't have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler! You don't realize how insulting that is?

You're failing to see the value of "productive insults".

If I insult you but in the end you realize how clever I am, then it's a "productive insult", which is always more valuable than an "unproductive but better-mannered statement".

*sigh* Another thread thrown helplessly off the tracks...

EDIT: byrdz beat me to the joke...can't give out more rep, sorry...

[RShack]

Well, I see that FakeCodgerDude has succeeded once again at suckering people into trying to reason with him. Hilarious.

Everybody thinks they're gonna make some Good Point, and then he's gonna suddenly see things your way. Guess what, he's not. Sometimes, when people are about ready to quit paying attention, he'll almost-but-not-quite concede a point. But he's not really conceding a point, he's just fooling you you into thinking there's *hope*. But he's just giving you false hope, so you'll keep standing in line to try to reason with him, you dummies!

Also, on the theme of saying things for no apparent benefit, I'd like to point out one factual error (not that it's gonna change anybody's mind about anything)...

For example, reaching base via an error is nothing to credit a batter for whatsover.

That's clearly BS, as anybody who has supposedly watched baseball forever would know. A speedy guy who hits ground balls will hit into way more E's than a slow slugger guy who hits fly balls. It's a fact. Just like a GB pitcher will pitch into more E's (and more DP's) than a FB pitcher. So, for both hitters and pitchers, E's are not simply some random thing. Some hitters and some pitchers do play a key role in creating them.

The ways E are handled is one of only a couple things about baseball that are clearly silly. But all of them are about stats-accounting, not about the actual game on the field. The game on the field is perfect.

ps: Here's a hint for people who like trying to reason with him. When he takes some all-or-nothing position, the worst possible thing you can do is take the opposite all-or-nothing. The minute you do that, he's got you for another 2 pages, you dummies! ;-)

[Old#5fan]

You said he didn't have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler! You don't realize how insulting that is?

I don't think so. I think I wrote that he should have paid better attention in grade school as every item he posted was a wrong interpretation but number 2. I guess the converse to that would be I should have paid better attention and learned how to write better. To that I plead guilty!

[BaltimoreTerp]

I am not going to insult your intelligence by copying an pasting Webster's dicitionary definition of "productive" but the word is derived from produce. In the game of baseball when you talk about "producing" something it normally would be a run which is the object of the game (to score runs in total more than your opponent over a span of innings.) So if the walk either drives in a run or "produces" a run as with the bases loaded or ends up scoring a run - the walker crosses the plate, I view this as a productive walk or hit for that matter. If it doesn't, it simply is "non-productive" because it failed to "produce" a run and essentially other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher accomplish nothing as far as the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

Raising the pitch count tires the pitcher faster and will cause either the earlier entrance of a reliever (usually an inferior pitcher) or a decline in the quality of the pitches, which leads to a better chance at runs.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I am not going to insult your intelligence by copying an pasting Webster's dicitionary definition of "productive" but the word is derived from produce. In the game of baseball when you talk about "producing" something it normally would be a run which is the object of the game (to score runs in total more than your opponent over a span of innings.) So if the walk either drives in a run or "produces" a run as with the bases loaded or ends up scoring a run - the walker crosses the plate, I view this as a productive walk or hit for that matter. If it doesn't, it simply is "non-productive" because it failed to "produce" a run and essentially other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher accomplish nothing as far as the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

Mmmm..all this talk about produce. I'll go have an orange! Oranges are good.

Let's non-sequitur the hell out of this thread!

[NewMarketSean]

Well, I see that FakeCodgerDude has succeeded once again at suckering people into trying to reason with him. Hilarious.

Everybody thinks they're gonna make some Good Point, and then he's gonna suddenly see things your way. Guess what, he's not.

Wait... are you talking about Oldfan? Or yourself?

[BaltimoreTerp]

Mmmm..all this talk about produce. I'll go have an orange! Oranges are good.

Let's non-sequitur the hell out of this thread!

I used to like Non Sequitur, but haven't read it much lately.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I used to like Non Sequitur, but haven't read it much lately.

I'd say my top 3 comics are:

-Calvin and Hobbes

-The Far Side

-Dilbert

They're all productive comics, except that rascal boss of Dilbert's! He's not productive at all!