Is Atkins the Middle of Order Big Bat AM Promised or Not?

[waroriole]

Who said it was a majority? I was merely responding to someone who asked me to show even one person who thought that way!

You also said it was crystal clear.

[larrytt]

Posted by "Joldey" post #46 on this very thread:

"We do feel like we have young kids at first and third," said MacPhail. "Anyone that required a long-term commitment was something that wasn't ideal for us. Here we had the opportunity, in our view, to take a little bit of a risk on a guy that was one of the game's most productive hitters going into last season. We got the kind of right-handed bat we wanted on pretty much our terms, one plus an option. And it gives us the versatility to sort of gauge the first- and third-base market going out. The more we got into this, the more we learned about the potential cost for other options at first and third, the more attractive Garrett became." LINK

I have posted this before, and I am sure others have posted this also. IMO, the bold text says it all. It seems crystal clear to me. Atkins IS, I repeat..., IS the 'big bat.' Very disappointing.

Here you are. There are also 7 posters who voted that AM has made it clear that Atkins is the bat he was speaking of getting.

Oldfan, I'm not going to waste more time today responding to more of this stuff since all I'd be doing (again) is pointing out the obvious, such as the statement above that you posted where MacPhail says, "The more we got into this, the more we learned about the potential cost for other options at first and third, the more attractive Garrett became." Gee, I wonder what he meant? Or when he said he was a top hitter "going into last season"? Using past tense? With the whole discussion about options at the corner infield positions, which he'd made one of his three "priorities," which getting getting a "big bat" was not? And that we needed right-handed bats at those corner infield positions, since had too many lefties already? And most off all, not once saying Atkins was the "big bat" or "middle of the order hitter" you claim he thinks he is. Sorry, he's not saying what you want him to say, but your dislike of the O's blinds you from seeing anything but negative as you throw your wet blanket into thread after thread.

-Larrytt

[Old#5fan]

Oldfan, I'm not going to waste more time today responding to more of this stuff since all I'd be doing (again) is pointing out the obvious, such as the statement above that you posted where MacPhail says, "The more we got into this, the more we learned about the potential cost for other options at first and third, the more attractive Garrett became." Gee, I wonder what he meant? Or when he said he was a top hitter "going into last season"? Using past tense? With the whole discussion about options at the corner infield positions, which he'd made one of his three "priorities," which getting getting a "big bat" was not? And that we needed right-handed bats at those corner infield positions, since had too many lefties already? And most off all, not once saying Atkins was the "big bat" or "middle of the order hitter" you claim he thinks he is. Sorry, he's not saying what you want him to say, but your dislike of the O's blinds you from seeing anything but negative as you throw your wet blanket into thread after thread.

-Larrytt

I merely responded to your challenge to show me one other person who thought that AM might be using Atkins as his "big bat." I did so and now you are spinning my response into me calling AM stupid or whatever which I have not done anywhere here. Instead of being a novel writer you should be a propagandist. You are correct about one thing, arguing with you is a waste of time.

[Old#5fan]

You also said it was crystal clear.

Yeah, it is crystal clear that at least one person thought that way!!!

[larrytt]

I merely responded to your challenge to show me one other person who thought that AM might be using Atkins as his "big bat." I did so and now you are spinning my response into me calling AM stupid or whatever which I have not done anywhere here. Instead of being a novel writer you should be a propagandist. You are correct about one thing, arguing with you is a waste of time.

Oh, I'll openly admit that it turns out that out of 125 or so responders, it turns out there are 7 who think MacPhail believes Atkins is the "big bat." That's 5.6%, probably about the same number that believe in Leprechauns. I hope you like that company. As to arguing with me being a waste of time, perhaps you should look in the mirror. Nobody else has said this about me, while a huge number of posters have concluded this about you, many of whom simply have put you on "ignore." Someday you'll explain why you spend your days here when you so obviously do not like the Orioles, say you've had no enthusiasm for them since the early 1990s, and do everything you can to irritate others and bring them down to your level of misery when others come here to enjoy their team. I will now try not to feed the you know what.

-Larrytt

[RShack]

Oldfan, I'm not going to waste more time today responding to more of this stuff...

Wanna bet?

As to arguing with me being a waste of time, perhaps you should look in the mirror...

See?

He's just doing this to get people to argue with him. His goal is not anything about substance, it is about nothing more or less than to get people to respond to him, so he can keep it going. Shirley, you know this by now...

[TonySoprano]

He promised nothing, but he definitely said, "We're looking for a middle of the order bat." http://scott-miller.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/view/6270335?tag=Hideki%20Matsui

Which, by definition, could mean Atkins if they bat him anywhere from 4th-6th. Trembley did suggest 6th as a possibility.

ETA: Andy did say, "we will be bat shoppers," which sounds pretty definite. I don't see where he needed to add "I promise," to make it one.

[Old#5fan]

Which, by definition, could mean Atkins if they bat him anywhere from 4th-6th. Trembley did suggest 6th as a possibility.

ETA: Andy did say, "we will be bat shoppers," which sounds pretty definite. I don't see where he needed to add "I promise," to make it one.

Unless he signs Delgado or makes some unforseen trade it would appear that Atkins is going to be it.

[larrytt]

Which, by definition, could mean Atkins if they bat him anywhere from 4th-6th. Trembley did suggest 6th as a possibility.

Technically, that's true. I think most people in baseball think of the 3-4-5 hitters when they think of a "middle of the order" bat or "big bat." A "big bat" isn't going to bat 6th for the O's! Either way, Atkins (.OPS last year .650) shouldn't be batting even #6 unless he hits well in Spring Trainiing, i.e. shows he's back to his 2006-2007 form. Until then, he should be batting #8 (unless Wigginton starts, which could bump Atkins to #7). I'm sure Trembley will be watching him closely, though of course that's hopefully true of all his players.

-Larrytt

[SilentJames]

Unless he signs Delgado or makes some unforseen trade it would appear that Atkins is going to be it.

So if I got to the store after saying "I will shop for some pants today" and don't find any my size I am a liar?

What about LaRoche? Oh wait, that's right - star power and what not. Nevermind the fact that Delgado is having trouble running.

Basically what you are saying that unless Andy does something else, this is all he will do. Groundbreaking analysis there OldFan, you truly are the HL Mencken of the messageboard.

[DrungoHazewood]

If you approach these kind of threads like you do Roadhouse, Point Break, or Con Air (in other words, fantasic for their over-the-top unintentional comedy) you'll get a lot more out of them.

[TGO]

If you approach these kind of threads like you do Roadhouse, Point Break, or Con Air (in other words, fantasic for their over-the-top unintentional comedy) you'll get a lot more out of them.

I am not drunk, so I can't be sure of my judgment at this point, but I think this thread is way more epic of a fail than that. It's Snakes On a Plane.

[larrytt]

Wanna bet?

I wrote, "Oldfan, I'm not going to waste more time today responding to more of this stuff..." It's a good bet for you, but I'm going to fight the urge. What makes it hard is that he often posts stuff that simply misquotes or misleads about what was said before, and it's tough not pointing this out in outrage. But it's a never-ending thing, since any response gets the same type of response. But we all know this - it's called trolling. There's a chance he doesn't even know he's doing this, but who knows. I guess I need to join the legions of others who have put him on ignore. And then I can win this "bet"! (EDIT: He's now on ignore. Suddenly things are a lot more pleasant! )

-Larrytt

[RShack]

I wrote, "Oldfan, I'm not going to waste more time today responding to more of this stuff..." It's a good bet for you, but I'm going to fight the urge. What makes it hard is that he often posts stuff that simply misquotes or misleads about what was said before, and it's tough not pointing this out in outrage. But it's a never-ending thing, since any response gets the same type of response. But we all know this - it's called trolling. There's a chance he doesn't even know he's doing this, but who knows. I guess I need to join the legions of others who have put him on ignore. And then I can win this "bet"!

-Larrytt

It's easy to admit that he's mainly doing it so people will argue with him. It's way harder to ignore it.

You're not alone. I know I should ignore most of what JTrea says, and often I can do it, but then I fall off the wagon.

It mainly comes down to how much [asterisks here] you can stand...

[Old#5fan]

It's easy to admit that he's mainly doing it so people with argue with him. It's way harder to ignore it.

You're not alone. I know I should ignore most of what JTrea says, and often I can do it, but then I fall off the wagon.

It mainly comes down to how much [asterisks here] you can stand...

I wish I could find a photo of some violins being played. I would insert it here right now!