Can we take a little rest from the trade talk?

[ejf1025]

Well, face it, according to some people, smelling the roses doesn't count for much. They think you can just get on the internet, see some rose pictures, count some petals, and know everything you need to know. Plus, while people might talk as if trading roses is easy, in actual fact, it's not easy at all. How many people really want whatever roses you wanna get rid of? Not many. It's not like you can just pick up the phone and get a good deal for mediocre roses. Some folks seem to think you can, but they're just dreaming. Working out a good deal for even your best roses is hard to do.

As for the wisdom of getting seeds and bulbs, it comes down to exactly which ones you're talking about. Now, I fully agree that most seeds are younger and cheaper. The hard part is judging in advance whether they're better. How many seeds actually turn out to be blooming flowers anyway? Some folks talk like acquiring a few seeds means you're guaranteed to get a flower, but that's just not true. With bulbs the odds are better, but you're never sure exactly how old they are. However, I fully agree that, either way, seeds or bulbs, if you choose wisely and have a little luck, you can get perennials that produce year after year. The thing that hacks me off is when people say you should load up on annuals. While I can see how you might wanna do that to get some vibrant color around the edges, the simple fact is that any annual you get now is not gonna be worth a flip in 2010, much less 2011. You'd think people would realize that, but some folks don't make that distinction. It makes you wonder what they're thinking.

Question: Would it be possible for you to stop creating groups and acting like the vast majority of the people on this board can't grasp rational thought?

Try this: instead of utterly painful, long analogies about generic "people" and their misguided outlooks, try addressing specific posters and the specific things they've said. You may look like less of a condescending ass...altho I doubt it.

[RShack]

Question: Would it be possible for you to stop creating groups and acting the vast majority of the people on this board can't grasp rational thought?

Try this: instead of utterly painful long analogies about generic "people" and their misguided outlooks, try addressing specific posters and the specific things they've said. You may look like less of a condescending ass...altho I doubt it.

Jeez, dude, I was goofing about flowers and doing a parody of my very own attitude about things. Sorry I didn't spell that out concretely enough for you.

Is it even possible to be light-hearted around here without somebody finding a way to "be offended"?

For all the tough talk people throw out, there sure are some mighty thin skins around here.

[ejf1025]

Jeez, dude, I was goofing about flowers and doing a parody of my very own attitude about things. Sorry I didn't spell that out concretely enough for you.

Is it even possible to be light-hearted around here without somebody finding a way to "be offended"?

For all the tough talk people throw out, there sure are some mighty thin skins around here.

Ha. Typical.

Look take it or leave it, but I'm not buying what you are selling. You mask snide comments and unfair generalizations behind your long winded analogies and tonge-in-cheek remarks. You've been called out on this before, and you always get defensive and paint yourself the victim.

There's a reason most board arguments center around you. You can either choose to keep going as is and blame others for being thin-skinned and not getting it, or you can look in the mirror and try to correct what you do.

Frankly, my guess is you enjoy prodding and provoking. Which is fine, but stop being a baby when you get called out. At least, SG--who can be equally obnoxious--stands there and doesnt cry poor me.

[Go Baby Birds!]

Well, if you are going to continue to be content with a losing franchise, go right ahead.

Personally, I will always look for ways to make us better because personally I enjoy winning.

Can I ask how exactly your trade ideas are going to make the Orioles a winning franchise? It isn't like you are in the front office, any of these trades you throw out their are pure fantasy, it's not like Andy Mac will stumble upon the OH see one of your trades and go "Man let me call ________ and try and work out this trade that this user posted here"

I understand talking trades if there are some solid rumors linking us to another team, but when the trades are pure fantasy conjured up from within your brain that will not help the real life franchise. Half the time you throw trades out there the player you have us trading isn't even on the trade block.

[Frobby]

If you do a search, posts made by rshackelford, and keyword: "trade" you get 500 results. Just from your trade-related posts you'd have to pay to keep posting.

Ooh, now this will be fun!

I guess 500 results is as high as the system counts, because when I plugged in Sports Guy and "trade" I also got 500 results, dating back to July 19, 2008. That's not 500 posts, it's 500 different threads in which SG has mentioned the word "trade."

RShack, over the last 12 months, has mentioned "trade" in 145 threads.

I've mentioned "trade" in 230 threads in the last year.

I'm not sure how you did your search. What time period, and do "results" mean threads, or posts?

[Roll Tide]

Really? Like when Roch says he'll do whatever they ask, to the best of his ability, without a complaint, because that's just how he is?

The complaints will likely come when he slumps. I'd imagine until then everything will be Peachy-Keene. Really Jim ...Scott should be traded if we can get a nice return. A player like Hicks & a pitching prospect would do it for me. Lets face it you'd have Reimold & Montanez if Pie fails & Salazar could do as well at DH IMO ...I know I know Salazar's a Righty ... I like Scott & If the Orioles didnt appear to be headed in a different direction I'd say keep him. But we should treat the guy right & deal him if we can get a fair trade.

[mweb]

Uhh, you do realize that no matter what you say, it doesn't have any effect on what the Orioles do, right?

Haha, exactly what I was thinking. I get what SG is trying to say, but to say that he talks trade because he looks for ways to make the team better, and he enjoys winning is hysterical imo.

[DrungoHazewood]

Ooh, now this will be fun!

I guess 500 results is as high as the system counts, because when I plugged in Sports Guy and "trade" I also got 500 results, dating back to July 19, 2008. That's not 500 posts, it's 500 different threads in which SG has mentioned the word "trade."

RShack, over the last 12 months, has mentioned "trade" in 145 threads.

I've mentioned "trade" in 230 threads in the last year.

I'm not sure how you did your search. What time period, and do "results" mean threads, or posts?

I thought 500 was an awfully round number - it probably is capped. My search was just like I said, all posts from shack that had the word trade. No timeline, nothing else.

Go back and modify the search, and he has 104 posts with the word trade in the last three months. That's out of 500+ total.

In the last month he has 378 posts in the baseball section of the board. 43 contain the word trade. So about 15% of shack's baseball posts appear to be trade-related, and almost all of those appear to be highly critical of the suggested deal or the very idea of suggesting deals.