Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:47 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 6243
Location: Keystone State
Image

_________________
The Bucs are going all the way, all the way this year!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5517
Location: Pittsburgh
Bucfan wrote:
sisyphus wrote:
Comedy gold to me is you assuming every criticism I make of any poster is actually aimed at you.


(1) You did not dispute making the claim about me originally.

As I said, if the shoe fits....

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 7:59 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 5893
Location: 120 miles west of Iowa City
Substitute2 wrote:
Very cute.

I don't understand the function of the gentleman in the rear (excuse the implication).

I know the front row is responding to bladder issues but the other guy??


Me thinks that the answer lies in the shadows . . . .

_________________
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
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 10:55 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:22 pm
Posts: 2495
No. 9 wrote:
Substitute2 wrote:
Very cute.

I don't understand the function of the gentleman in the rear (excuse the implication).

I know the front row is responding to bladder issues but the other guy??


Me thinks that the answer lies in the shadows . . . .


Correct!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:36 am 
LaRoche had a good day yesterday. Cue the cheerleaders.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:40 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:22 pm
Posts: 2495
Elmer wrote:
LaRoche had a good day yesterday. Cue the cheerleaders.


GIMME AN "L"........................




Image


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5517
Location: Pittsburgh
No. 9 wrote:
Substitute2 wrote:
Very cute.

I don't understand the function of the gentleman in the rear (excuse the implication).

I know the front row is responding to bladder issues but the other guy??


Me thinks that the answer lies in the shadows . . . .

Good eye there, No. 9.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5517
Location: Pittsburgh
Elmer wrote:
LaRoche had a good day yesterday. Cue the cheerleaders.

No Elmer, some of us understand the importance of sample size.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:56 am 
sisyphus wrote:
Elmer wrote:
LaRoche had a good day yesterday. Cue the cheerleaders.

No Elmer, some of us understand the importance of sample size.


April, May and June isn't a big enough sample size for you?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:08 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
That was great. I didn't see the problem he was having So, thanks No.9 for pointing it out for all of us.

Me thinks he has the four hour problem and should contact a doctor immediately. (lucky dog)

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5517
Location: Pittsburgh
Elmer wrote:
sisyphus wrote:
Elmer wrote:
LaRoche had a good day yesterday. Cue the cheerleaders.

No Elmer, some of us understand the importance of sample size.


April, May and June isn't a big enough sample size for you?

Those of us who are paying attention know that LaRoche hit okay in May. LaRoche has basically had 6 bad weeks and 4 decent weeks.

Three months is certainly better than two weeks. A full season is better than three months. A career is better than a full season.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 6:21 pm 
sisyphus wrote:
Those of us who are paying attention know that LaRoche hit okay in May. LaRoche has basically had 6 bad weeks and 4 decent weeks. Three months is certainly better than two weeks. A full season is better than three months. A career is better than a full season.


6 bad weeks and 4 decent weeks does not warrant being a full-time starter, in my opinion. You can only help yourself by playing hot bats and resting struggling bats. I see no downside to that.

I'd play Nady (with Michaels in right) a little at first, Mienkiewicz here and there and LaRoche here and there until -- or if -- LaRoche starts hitting consistently. I'd do the same thing with Gomez/Rivas/Freddy at second.

It's win win. If Michales/Minky/Gomez/Rivas don't hit much, then stop giving them playing time. If Freddy/LaRoche start hitting, give them more playing time. It's win win.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche Sucks
PostPosted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5517
Location: Pittsburgh
Elmer wrote:
sisyphus wrote:
Those of us who are paying attention know that LaRoche hit okay in May. LaRoche has basically had 6 bad weeks and 4 decent weeks. Three months is certainly better than two weeks. A full season is better than three months. A career is better than a full season.


6 bad weeks and 4 decent weeks does not warrant being a full-time starter, in my opinion. You can only help yourself by playing hot bats and resting struggling bats. I see no downside to that.

I'd play Nady (with Michaels in right) a little at first, Mienkiewicz here and there and LaRoche here and there until -- or if -- LaRoche starts hitting consistently. I'd do the same thing with Gomez/Rivas/Freddy at second.

It's win win. If Michales/Minky/Gomez/Rivas don't hit much, then stop giving them playing time. If Freddy/LaRoche start hitting, give them more playing time. It's win win.

It's a lose/lose. Both Michaels and especially Rivas have already proven that they are not every day major leaguers. Why you would consider Minky at all is beyond me, as his OPS+ is barely higher than LaRoche's.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche (Sigh)
PostPosted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:45 pm
Posts: 1296
Location: Bowie, Md
LaRoche SUCKS!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: LaRoche (Sigh)
PostPosted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:19 am
Posts: 1511
It's Capps time, gents!


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [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:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits