Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Thu Oct 30, 2014 7:56 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 11:43 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
How in the world do we know that Bay "wouldn't have signed with us"?

I have yet to hear Jason say, "You know what?, I really liked playing in Pittsburgh, but let's face it, I was not going to sign with the Pirates, so I'm happy here in Boston..."

The next time I hear that, then I'm on board with ya.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 3173
Location: Darlington, Pennsylvania
Rod Serling wrote:
How in the world do we know that Bay "wouldn't have signed with us"?

I have yet to hear Jason say, "You know what?, I really liked playing in Pittsburgh, but let's face it, I was not going to sign with the Pirates, so I'm happy here in Boston..."

The next time I hear that, then I'm on board with ya.


We wouldn't offer him the money other teams would.
He is going to be a free agent at the end of the season, and i think coming back to Pittsburgh is at the bottom of his list.
Even if he wouldn't have been traded, after this season he would have 20 offers better than the ones the Pirates put on the table. Thats why i think they had to make a move, granted they did make a bad move with LaRoche and Moss.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 12:32 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Rod Serling wrote:
How in the world do we know that Bay "wouldn't have signed with us"?

I have yet to hear Jason say, "You know what?, I really liked playing in Pittsburgh, but let's face it, I was not going to sign with the Pirates, so I'm happy here in Boston..."

The next time I hear that, then I'm on board with ya.

Oh don't be so naive. We know that Bay would not have signed with Pittsburgh because star players who reach free agency in their 30's do not sign contracts or extensions with moderate income, non-contending teams. It just does not happen. Such players would be throwing away their most valuable and lucrative years in baseball if they did so. Again, the Washington Nationals offered the most money for Mark Teixeira last offseason, and he still ended up going to the Yankees.

I'm sure Bay really did like playing in Pittsburgh, but like every other player in the league, he is a self-interested business man that wants to win a World Series and make a lot of money. He was not going to do that with the Pirates regardless of how much money the Pirates could have offered him. Thinking that Bay would have seriously considered signing an extension with the Pirates is pure fantasy. You might as well believe in the tooth fairy.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 12:35 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Rod Serling wrote:
"Me"=Uneducated conspiracy theorists who feel Bob Nuttings' ownership is based on making money by cutting salary.

"Them"=People who support an ownership that is not interested in putting a winning product on the field.

Fixed.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 12:58 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
Willton wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:
"Me"=Uneducated conspiracy theorists who feel Bob Nuttings' ownership is based on making money by cutting salary.

"Them"=People who support an ownership that is not interested in putting a winning product on the field.

Fixed.


I'm coming right at you apologist, and I'm never stopping.

Ask Adam Dunn about how free agents never sign with non contending teams to take lower salaries for contending teams.

Unlike you, I do not pour over baseball books and statistics and search obscure baseball writers that nobody knows or cares about and then manipulate their findings to support an ownership that is the laughingstock of major league baseball.

To all of us who see the entire landscape of baseball, anyone who spends every waking second in support of an owner with an overwhelming history of losing, is a fool.

Lets see those wins and losses again, Wilton?

It's about WINS, AND LOSSES, WILTON. WINS, AND LOSSES.

Which is why I am right, and you can't take it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 1:09 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
Colin21 wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:
How in the world do we know that Bay "wouldn't have signed with us"?

I have yet to hear Jason say, "You know what?, I really liked playing in Pittsburgh, but let's face it, I was not going to sign with the Pirates, so I'm happy here in Boston..."

The next time I hear that, then I'm on board with ya.


We wouldn't offer him the money other teams would.
He is going to be a free agent at the end of the season, and i think coming back to Pittsburgh is at the bottom of his list.
Even if he wouldn't have been traded, after this season he would have 20 offers better than the ones the Pirates put on the table. Thats why i think they had to make a move, granted they did make a bad move with LaRoche and Moss.


Not, "we".

Bob Nutting.

There are 29 other owners who would have been more than happy to write that check.

Bob Nutting is cheap, and he makes money by losing baseball games.

Bob Nutting doesn't care about message boards though, because if Wilton and his two buddies stopped praying to his shrine every two hours, and suddenly grew some common sense, Bob still wouldn't know they exist.

They don't make 400,000 Dollars per year and hit .229.

THOSE are the kinda guys that are IMPORTANT to Bob. Those guys are the reason he pockets all the profits of his joke of a franchise.

Well, that, and Bob Walk Bobbleheads.

Those are the Bobble heads that not only bobble their heads, but also make up ridiculous excuses and apologies and spin for pathetic pirate baseball teams in the broadcasting booth.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 1:28 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 3173
Location: Darlington, Pennsylvania
Quote:
Those are the Bobble heads that not only bobble their heads, but also make up ridiculous excuses and apologies and spin for pathetic pirate baseball teams in the broadcasting booth.


I have noticed that the announcers don't say how they really feel as much anymore. Bob walk comes off as the worst at it because he is a color guy. In games that we lose 13-1 they still try to make it sound like some positive came out of the game. Here is one i remember from the Mets series from Bob after Yates got tattooed. He said something along these lines, " even though Yates gave up a few tonight it was nice to see him hit 99 on the gun". Thats not very much of a positive. We need Lanny to come back and tell it like it is.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 3:42 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4240
Location: Zelienople, PA
Rod Serling wrote:

Anytime, anyplace, we can have this argument. Respond, or shut up.



I'll be at the ballpark tomorrow. Care to show? If that is not good enough, name a time and place. I work in the city, I can get there.

I look forward to a face to face with someone so "sophisticated" as yourself.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 3173
Location: Darlington, Pennsylvania
ZelieMike wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:

Anytime, anyplace, we can have this argument. Respond, or shut up.



I'll be at the ballpark tomorrow. Care to show? If that is not good enough, name a time and place. I work in the city, I can get there.

I look forward to a face to face with someone so "sophisticated" as yourself.

ZM


You have quite a drive to work everyday then ZM if you work in the city. Happy Birthday by the way. Birthday topic coming soon!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 11:31 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
ZelieMike wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:

Anytime, anyplace, we can have this argument. Respond, or shut up.



I'll be at the ballpark tomorrow. Care to show? If that is not good enough, name a time and place. I work in the city, I can get there.

I look forward to a face to face with someone so "sophisticated" as yourself.

ZM



He'll have to check to see if his mom can take him.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 12:56 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
BBF wrote:
ZelieMike wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:

Anytime, anyplace, we can have this argument. Respond, or shut up.



I'll be at the ballpark tomorrow. Care to show? If that is not good enough, name a time and place. I work in the city, I can get there.

I look forward to a face to face with someone so "sophisticated" as yourself.

ZM



He'll have to check to see if his mom can take him.



You can come along to sweetheart. It'll be fun seeing both of you ladies in one place.

That is, if both of you can take two seconds to get off Nuttings' jock.

:lol:


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 1:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
Rod Serling wrote:

Ask Adam Dunn about how free agents never sign with non contending teams to take lower salaries for contending teams.



Ask Adam Dunn how it felt not to have 29 other teams really interested in signing him? Ask him how it feels to have the D'Backs let him go for nothing? Ask him how playing for the Nationals and that big money he's making is working out? What's their record? But hey, he can be traded at the deadline for 10 prospects and a Dodger Dog...or thats the story we heard from our friends at CIA...

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
ZelieMike wrote:
My lord, what idiocy.

You simply cannot make a logical arguement. You have no facts, you can't get your timelines right (Bay as rookie of the year - how many years after?).

This is the equivalent of a 14 year old using the internet to hide behind, because he knows he will never have to make this type of "arguement" in person.

ZM


Attachment:
toughguy.jpg
toughguy.jpg [ 108.41 KiB | Viewed 316 times ]


Rod Serling in his mom's basement...

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 1:38 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
nad69dan wrote:
ZelieMike wrote:
My lord, what idiocy.

You simply cannot make a logical arguement. You have no facts, you can't get your timelines right (Bay as rookie of the year - how many years after?).

This is the equivalent of a 14 year old using the internet to hide behind, because he knows he will never have to make this type of "arguement" in person.

ZM


Attachment:
toughguy.jpg


Rod Serling in his mom's basement...


Lame. That joke is older than the pirate fan base, pal.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Rod Serling wrote:
Willton wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:
"Me"=Uneducated conspiracy theorists who feel Bob Nuttings' ownership is based on making money by cutting salary.

"Them"=People who support an ownership that is not interested in putting a winning product on the field.

Fixed.


I'm coming right at you apologist, and I'm never stopping.

Oooh, I'm shaking in desk chair. You sure do talk a big game.

Quote:
Ask Adam Dunn about how free agents never sign with non contending teams to take lower salaries for contending teams.

When non-contending teams are the only teams that offer you a contract, you sign with a non-contending team. I promise you that Bay would not be in the same situation as Dunn was last year.

Quote:
Unlike you, I do not pour over baseball books and statistics and search obscure baseball writers that nobody knows or cares about and then manipulate their findings to support an ownership that is the laughingstock of major league baseball.

That's because such baseball books and statistics are probably over your head. It's easy to dismiss something when you don't understand it.

Quote:
To all of us who see the entire landscape of baseball, anyone who spends every waking second in support of an owner with an overwhelming history of losing, is a fool.

And to those of us who actually have an ounce of baseball intelligence, anyone who likewise spends every waking second badmouthing a team without actually taking the time to understand what he is commenting on is an idiot.

Quote:
Lets see those wins and losses again, Wilton?

It's about WINS, AND LOSSES, WILTON. WINS, AND LOSSES.

Which is why I am right, and you can't take it.

No, it's about recognizing problems within the organization that cause the losing, and executing decisions that redress those problems. You obviously don't recognize the problems, so you have no idea what the solutions should be.

The key to turning a losing franchise into a winning franchise starts with the farm system. It always has, and it always will. Spending money is only prudent if you know which assets are worth the money that they cost.

But go ahead and keep thinking that you're right. The problem is that you don't even know what the question is.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 12:29 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:25 pm
Posts: 119
nad69dan wrote:
Ask Adam Dunn how it felt not to have 29 other teams really interested in signing him? Ask him how it feels to have the D'Backs let him go for nothing? Ask him how playing for the Nationals and that big money he's making is working out? What's their record?.

Hold on just a second there. Are you suggesting Adam Dunn is the reason for the Nationals having the worst record in the National League? Dunn is having a very good offensive year and the problem with the Nats is their pitching as it ranks dead last in the NL. Offense hasn't been the problem in our nation's capital as they arguably have the league's best offense, party due to Dunn's contributions. So if you want to blame someone for their poor record, I'd start with three former Pirates, Beimel, Tavarez, and Wells along with the rest of their staff.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 12:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
Alexandria Dukes wrote:
nad69dan wrote:
Ask Adam Dunn how it felt not to have 29 other teams really interested in signing him? Ask him how it feels to have the D'Backs let him go for nothing? Ask him how playing for the Nationals and that big money he's making is working out? What's their record?.

Hold on just a second there. Are you suggesting Adam Dunn is the reason for the Nationals having the worst record in the National League? Dunn is having a very good offensive year and the problem with the Nats is their pitching as it ranks dead last in the NL. Offense hasn't been the problem in our nation's capital as they arguably have the league's best offense, party due to Dunn's contributions. So if you want to blame someone for their poor record, I'd start with three former Pirates, Beimel, Tavarez, and Wells along with the rest of their staff.



I am not suggesting Dunn is the problem...It was a comment back to how free agents dont sign with noncontending teams...

I was stating that no other team really wanted him at his high demands and then had to sign with a noncontending team...
Signing high priced free agents, alone, wont bring you championships...

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 12:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4240
Location: Zelienople, PA
... and is not helping the Nats rebuild, or just build, at all. His purpose, and the only one I see, and the one I liked for him here, is to put people in the seats to watch the occasional monster HR. He wanted too much to do this in PIT, and I'm glad NH is too smart to fall for that temptation.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 1:02 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:25 pm
Posts: 119
ZelieMike wrote:
... and is not helping the Nats rebuild, or just build, at all. His purpose, and the only one I see, and the one I liked for him here, is to put people in the seats to watch the occasional monster HR. He wanted too much to do this in PIT, and I'm glad NH is too smart to fall for that temptation.

ZM

We are in agreement about how Dunn doesn't help the Nats rebuild and how it was a curious signing at best. However, it really wasn't a bad signing either as he's only making about a million more than Adam LaRoche this year. I would also suspect Dunn's trade value would be higher at this point.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 5831
Location: 120 miles west of Iowa City
Alexandria Dukes wrote:
I would also suspect Dunn's trade value would be higher at this point.


I'll raise the point that I did during the CIA invasion . . . if no team was willing to meet Dunn's contract demands in free agency when they would not have to give up any players in return . . . why would any team take on Dunn's contract in a trade which would now require them to give up key prospects?

_________________
Reflexively, obsessively and tastelessly submitted,
No. 9
Obsessive proponent of situational bunting and 2 strike hitting approaches, reflexively pro-catchers calling good games and tasteless proponent of the value of a RBI.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits