Nomadsfest Sox Fans

A forum for the old AOL board Sox fans and others.


    Matt Wieters

    Share
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:30 pm

    PSS, SPARE ME THE SEMETIC ARGUMENT >>
      No, I'm not Jewish.  Very Happy Very Happy I'm assuming you meant "semantic"
    avatar
    alohafri
    Pope Malort I

    Posts : 7215
    Join date : 2009-04-03
    Age : 50
    Location : Southwest Suburbs

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by alohafri on Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:05 pm

    rmapasad wrote:PSS, SPARE ME THE SEMETIC ARGUMENT >>
      No, I'm not Jewish.  Very Happy Very Happy I'm assuming you meant "semantic"

    cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers

    frank bonifacic
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2470
    Join date : 2009-04-05

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by frank bonifacic on Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:18 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:54 am

    frank bonifacic wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    Frank, I completely understand your sentiments.  There are times that I want to retaliate to Kark and show what an asshat he's been.  But have come to realize that the venom and ad hominem stuff is just noise.  I will grudgingly admit that his arguments spur discussion and cause me to delve further to find the truth.  So it's worth engaging in discussions.  It's pointless to hold animosity.
    Since my wonderful elderly Mom lives in Northern Indiana and I fly into Chicago on the way to visit, I will plan to come to a Nomadsfest and meet some of you fine people if you will have me.  Kark may veto that idea, but I will have no problem sharing some brews and laughs at our mutual expense.  Hope to see you and all the gang at some point soon. 

    frank bonifacic
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2470
    Join date : 2009-04-05

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by frank bonifacic on Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:57 am

    rmapasad wrote:
    frank bonifacic wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    Frank, I completely understand your sentiments.  There are times that I want to retaliate to Kark and show what an asshat he's been.  But have come to realize that the venom and ad hominem stuff is just noise.  I will grudgingly admit that his arguments spur discussion and cause me to delve further to find the truth.  So it's worth engaging in discussions.  It's pointless to hold animosity.
    Since my wonderful elderly Mom lives in Northern Indiana and I fly into Chicago on the way to visit, I will plan to come to a Nomadsfest and meet some of you fine people if you will have me.  Kark may veto that idea, but I will have no problem sharing some brews and laughs at our mutual expense.  Hope to see you and all the gang at some point soon. 
    Would enjoy meeting you. Kark wouldn't object (you should see Hus female friend who came one time!!)
    You will need to be a little more specific than "at some point in time" so we can make sue yo attend.
    avatar
    alohafri
    Pope Malort I

    Posts : 7215
    Join date : 2009-04-03
    Age : 50
    Location : Southwest Suburbs

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by alohafri on Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:59 am

    rmapasad wrote:
    frank bonifacic wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    Frank, I completely understand your sentiments.  There are times that I want to retaliate to Kark and show what an asshat he's been.  But have come to realize that the venom and ad hominem stuff is just noise.  I will grudgingly admit that his arguments spur discussion and cause me to delve further to find the truth.  So it's worth engaging in discussions.  It's pointless to hold animosity.
    Since my wonderful elderly Mom lives in Northern Indiana and I fly into Chicago on the way to visit, I will plan to come to a Nomadsfest and meet some of you fine people if you will have me.  Kark may veto that idea, but I will have no problem sharing some brews and laughs at our mutual expense.  Hope to see you and all the gang at some point soon. 

    Kark has no veto power when it comes to Nomadsfest. I rule with an iron fist. You are more than welcome.
    avatar
    Cream1953
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 6166
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 64
    Location : Elkhart, IN.

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Cream1953 on Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:29 am

    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    ***********************************************************************

    Actually, he does. It's not enough that he's run several people off this board. Apparently he won't be happy until he runs off the rest. Hell, I've got one foot out the door and find myself checking up on things here less and less. He loves to brag how smart he is but it's obvious he's not smart enough to figure out that his "persona" gets old and it's done real damage to the board.  He'll deny it, but because of him some very decent posters have left. I've certainly come to the conclusion that I have better things to do with my time.

    Hey Roger, let me know next time you're gonna be in Goshen. Maybe we can hook up.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 10:51 am

    Cream1953 wrote:Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    ***********************************************************************

    Actually, he does. It's not enough that he's run several people off this board. Apparently he won't be happy until he runs off the rest. Hell, I've got one foot out the door and find myself checking up on things here less and less. He loves to brag how smart he is but it's obvious he's not smart enough to figure out that his "persona" gets old and it's done real damage to the board.  He'll deny it, but because of him some very decent posters have left. I've certainly come to the conclusion that I have better things to do with my time.

    Hey Roger, let me know next time you're gonna be in Goshen. Maybe we can hook up.


    MORE LIKE I GET PISSED OFF WHEN LIED TO

    ROGER INVENTED 1 IN 4 OUT OF THIN AIR

    ZERO BASIS IN FACT.

    HAS HE ADMITTED TO THAT YET?
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 10:55 am

    rmapasad wrote:
    frank bonifacic wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    Frank, I completely understand your sentiments.  There are times that I want to retaliate to Kark and show what an asshat he's been.  But have come to realize that the venom and ad hominem stuff is just noise.  I will grudgingly admit that his arguments spur discussion and cause me to delve further to find the truth.  So it's worth engaging in discussions.  It's pointless to hold animosity.
    Since my wonderful elderly Mom lives in Northern Indiana and I fly into Chicago on the way to visit, I will plan to come to a Nomadsfest and meet some of you fine people if you will have me.  Kark may veto that idea, but I will have no problem sharing some brews and laughs at our mutual expense.  Hope to see you and all the gang at some point soon.


    EXCUSE ME, BUT I DIDN'T LOSE MY TEMPER UNTIL YOU INVENTED THIS 1 IN 4 NONSENSE.

    ITS ONE THING TO HAVE AN OPPOSING OPINION.

    ITS QUITE ANOTHER TO TOUT IMAGINARY STATS AS FACTS
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:08 am

    Cream1953 wrote:Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    ***********************************************************************

    Actually, he does. It's not enough that he's run several people off this board. Apparently he won't be happy until he runs off the rest. Hell, I've got one foot out the door and find myself checking up on things here less and less. He loves to brag how smart he is but it's obvious he's not smart enough to figure out that his "persona" gets old and it's done real damage to the board.  He'll deny it, but because of him some very decent posters have left. I've certainly come to the conclusion that I have better things to do with my time.

    Hey Roger, let me know next time you're gonna be in Goshen. Maybe we can hook up.


    BUT IT WAS OK WHEN YOU BUDDY TIMMY DID IT.


    AT LEAST I TRIED TO APOLOGIZE


    AND I CAN FIND COUNTLESS POSTS WHERE HE WENT OFF THE DEEP END FIRST.  NOT TO MENTION HIS OBSESSION WITH AL IN CAL.  I NEVER TRIED TO FIND ANYBODY'S HIGH SCHOOL YEAR BOOK PICTURE


    AS FOR ROBZ, YOU YOURSELF MENTIONED HIS ARROGANCE AND ELITISM.  HE'S ANOTHER GUY THAT WOULD JUST OUTRIGHT INVENT STUFF AND NEVER ADMIT IT.  DEFICIT DECLINING AT A HISTORIC RATE MY ASS.  THIS GUY WOULD CONSTANTLY CONTRADICT HIMSELF FROM ONE POST TO THE NEXT.  NOT A WORD.  THE KARK SAYS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T QUITE ADD UP, THEN ITS TIME TO PUNCE


    MAYBE YOU AND FRANK SHOULD HAVE CHASTIZED THOSE TWO OCCASIONALLY.  BUT I GUESS NOW YOU'LL CLAIM I'M JUST PLAYING THE VICTIM CARD.


    MORE LIKE POINTING OUT THE BLATANT DOUBLE STANDARD.  ROSEBOWL CAN CALL THE GOP F'ING MORONS ALL DAY LONG.  THE SECOND THE KARK DOES IT, ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE


    FINALLY, I NEVER POSTED THE PHRASE, I REALLY DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SUBJECT, BUT I JUST KNOW YOU ARE WRONG.  BUT SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT TO ME, INCLUDING YOU CREAM.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:10 am

    Would enjoy meeting you. Kark wouldn't object (you should see Hus female friend who came one time!!)


    **********************************************************


    YOU CLOWNS BETTER KEEP YOUR PAWS OFF MY TRIXIE!!!!
    avatar
    alohafri
    Pope Malort I

    Posts : 7215
    Join date : 2009-04-03
    Age : 50
    Location : Southwest Suburbs

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by alohafri on Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:15 am

    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:
    frank bonifacic wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:Throw the washed up clowns out there on one year deals.  EMULATE THE CUBS.>>
    The Cubs didn't sign a bunch of 30+ yr old vets on one year deals so the team would lose fewer games or to keep younger players' service clocks from running.  They knew the team would suck and they held  auditions -  22 yr old Rizzo got the 1b job,  young Castro and Barney started in the MIF,  Campana played  OF and they got 26 yr old Valuena off waivers to play 3b.  Then later flipped him to Houston in the Dexter Fowler deal.

    Cubs lost 101 games that year experimenting but they found out who swam (Rizzo, Castro, Valbuena) and who sank (Campana, Barney, etc.)  Those are the things the Sox should be doing.


    The only 30+ yr old free agent they signed that year was DeJesus and that was a waste.  He never got traded for anyone.  While it didn't hurt the Cubs it was of zero help and value in their rebuild. Finding out who could make it and then letting them get seasoning was key to their rebound though.

    Win 72 games instead of 68 games now!


    THANK YOU ROB JUNIOR

    I WOULD THINK A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY GOES TO THE GAMES WOULD SEE RIGHT THRU THE REVISIONIST HISTORY AND DISTORTED ARGUMENTS OF THE CLOWN THAT CAN'T GET HIS HEAD PULL OUT OF THE STAT BOOK.

    BTW, THE CUBS NEVER HELD AN AUDITION FOR RIZZO.  HE WAS TARGETED, ACQUIRED, AND ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT THE MLB LEVEL.  THAT IS NEITHER AN EXPERIMENT, NOR AUDITION.  BUT IT IS HOW ROGER LIES

    MAYBE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH TEACHER SHOULD BE CORRECTING ROGERS IMPROPER WORD USAGE INSTEAD OF DELIBERATELY DISAGREEING WITH THE KARK
    You really are unbelievable. Even when discussing a subect that your DO know something about, you can't have a fucking discussion without calling people names and making nasty comments.
    Its no wonder you're a trump fan. You're the same fucking people. Anyone who disagrees is a liar, or pushing fake news.
    Do you really feel that insulting people makes your argument stronger?

    Frank, I completely understand your sentiments.  There are times that I want to retaliate to Kark and show what an asshat he's been.  But have come to realize that the venom and ad hominem stuff is just noise.  I will grudgingly admit that his arguments spur discussion and cause me to delve further to find the truth.  So it's worth engaging in discussions.  It's pointless to hold animosity.
    Since my wonderful elderly Mom lives in Northern Indiana and I fly into Chicago on the way to visit, I will plan to come to a Nomadsfest and meet some of you fine people if you will have me.  Kark may veto that idea, but I will have no problem sharing some brews and laughs at our mutual expense.  Hope to see you and all the gang at some point soon.


    EXCUSE ME, BUT I DIDN'T LOSE MY TEMPER UNTIL YOU INVENTED THIS 1 IN 4 NONSENSE.

    ITS ONE THING TO HAVE AN OPPOSING OPINION.

    ITS QUITE ANOTHER TO TOUT IMAGINARY STATS AS FACTS

    One in four is total bullshit.


    It's more like one in ten.


    https://chasingmlbdreams.com/about-chasing-the-dream/
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:00 pm

    alohafri wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:PSS, SPARE ME THE SEMETIC ARGUMENT >>
      No, I'm not Jewish.  Very Happy Very Happy I'm assuming you meant "semantic"

    cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers




    100% CORRECT


    THE KARK IS ANTI - SEMANTIC WHEN IT COMES TO ARGUING
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:18 pm

    alohafri wrote:
    EXCUSE ME, BUT I DIDN'T LOSE MY TEMPER UNTIL YOU INVENTED THIS 1 IN 4 NONSENSE.
    ITS ONE THING TO HAVE AN OPPOSING OPINION.
    ITS QUITE ANOTHER TO TOUT IMAGINARY STATS AS FACTS

      ne in four is total bullshit.


    It's more like one in ten.


    https://chasingmlbdreams.com/about-chasing-the-dream/

    Since " 1 in 4" has taken a life of its own, let me explain.  Wasn't referring to all guys who get drafted, but about guys who get make the majors, even for a cup of coffee then go on to be useful major leaguers (regulars/good backups).   Not "make it" as in becoming Hall of Famers as someone has suggested Very Happy .

    1 in 4 was just a ballpark estimate and I threw both good prospects and suspects into the same pool.  Granted, good prospects have better odds of "making it" than marginal callups. But since I've been repeatedly called out on this, looked at more closely.  Here are the facts:

    -  First as to the study you cited.  It talked about ALL guys who were in the minors.   MLB drafts 1200-1300 guys in 40 rounds every year, but nearly all the cream is in the first 6 rounds.  Roughly 3/4 of first round draft picks see major league time. Second rounders about 1/2 and only 1/3 of fifth rounders. By tenth round, it's less than 5% and the last thirty rounds is almost nil. Which is why the 1 in 10 figure of all guys drafted even seeing the majors makes perfect sense. Might even be less.

    - But of the guys who actually get called to the majors, how many "make it" ?  That is what I was talking about.    Depends on how to define "making it"     Of the 1182 guys drafted in first five rounds from 1999-2012 who saw any major league time, 290 of them (or 24.5%) had 5 WAR or more in the majors.  5 WAR is a guy who sticks around for 3-4 seasons.   If we up the bar and say at least 10 WAR as "making it" it goes to 18.5% or not quite 1 in 5.

    But 10 WAR is a pretty high bar.  It would disqualify Beckham who had 3000 AB's who definitely "made it" even though he was shitty.  But it would also disqualify Nate Jones.  I think that 1 in 5 or
    1 in 4 (whatever) of those who get a sniff actually "make it" is pretty dead-on. 
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:11 pm

    Well since you are now providing a basis for 1 and 4, I apologize for calling you a liar.


    However, is this study of yours applicable?!?!?!?


    Of the 5 catchers not named Zach Collins, how many were drafted in the first five rounds?


    Another problem with your study.  Of the 4 catchers under 30 not named Zach Collins, I believe only Narvaez managed to reach MLB b4 the age of 25.  My guess is that the overwhelming number of players that qualify for "1 in 4" had at least a cup of coffee in the bigs b4 their 25 birthday.


    If you were to exclude these players from your study, which I believe would be the logical thing to do, I'm guessing 1 in 4 becomes 1 in 400.


    Then there is the definition of making it.  I think a definition that excludes Gordon Beckham would be a good one.  Your Nate Jones problem is obvious.  Have a different bar for pitchers.  Might even need to split that between starters and relievers.


    Finally, why are we even doing this study when all these players have track records we can look at and three of the six catchers in camp have stat lines that read like garbage.  Maybe the real study needs to be what are the chances Matt Wieters will be better than any White Sox catcher not named Zach Collins come 2020.  From where I'm sitting, only Narvaez has a chance to be better.  And as luck would have it, the White Sox are in a position to audition both if they can get Wieters to sign a lowball offer
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:52 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Another problem with your study.  Of the 4 catchers under 30 not named Zach Collins, I believe only Narvaez managed to reach MLB b4 the age of 25.  My guess is that the overwhelming number of players that qualify for "1 in 4" had at least a cup of coffee in the bigs b4 their 25 birthday.
    If you were to exclude these players from your study, which I believe would be the logical thing to do, I'm guessing 1 in 4 becomes 1 in 400.
    Then there is the definition of making it.  I think a definition that excludes Gordon Beckham would be a good one.  Your Nate Jones problem is obvious.  Have a different bar for pitchers.  Might even need to split that between starters and relievers.
    Finally, why are we even doing this study when all these players have track records we can look at and three of the six catchers in camp have stat lines that read like garbage.  Maybe the real study needs to be what are the chances Matt Wieters will be better than any White Sox catcher not named Zach Collins come 2020.  From where I'm sitting, only Narvaez has a chance to be better.  And as luck would have it, the White Sox are in a position to audition both if they can get Wieters to sign a lowball offer

    Agree, each player has his own odds.   Good prospects may have a 1 in 2 shot of making it where suspects may be 1 in 8.  But throw them all into one big pool (which I did) and the entire pool's  average is 1 in 4.
    All I'm saying is that it's OK to play the longshots this year.  Keep the  Moncadas in the minors longer so their service clocks don't run but the longshots' clocks don't matter.  So use them instead and you lose more games which in turn helps your draft position next year.
    I consider Narvaez to be a true 1 in 4.  Certainly not a good prospect but not a total suspect either.  He's respectable enough to try.  Sure, Wieters is better than any other Sox option now.  If Sox wanted to win more games, he'd be a great choice.  But it isn't in Sox's best interest to win a few extra  games  in 2017.



    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:19 am

    Again, there s a difference hetween a long shot and a no shot

    Plus why wouldn't Wieters be considered a long shot?

    Good chance SOX have no catcher for 2018 either

    Why do you automatically assume one and done with Wieterrs

    The KARK can see a Wieters Collins platoon in 2019 has the White SOX return to the post season

    PS, you sampled wrong for this analysis
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by rmapasad on Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:21 am

    <The KARK can see a Wieters Collins platoon in 2019 has the White SOX return to the post season >>
    Your whole premise was based on Wieters on a 1 yr deal.  Now you want to give him a 3 year contract ?
    To an already 31 yr old Catcher when Catchers have a history of fading in their 30's ?
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2017
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:26 am

    rmapasad wrote:<The KARK can see a Wieters Collins platoon in 2019 has the White SOX return to the post season >>
    Your whole premise was based on Wieters on a 1 yr deal.  Now you want to give him a 3 year contract ?
    To an already 31 yr old Catcher when Catchers have a history of fading in their 30's ?



    EITHER YOU ARE MISREADING OR I SIMPLY WROTE IT WRONG.


    SO LET ME CLARIFY


    1 YEAR DEAL WITH AN OPTION


    IF HE SUCKS AFTER 1 YEAR, BYE BYE


    IF NOT, AND HE ISN'T FLIPPED, CONSIDER PICKING UP THE OPTION.


    AND WHO KNOWS WHAT THE WHITE SOX LOOK LIKE AT THE END OF 2018?


    IF ANDERSON AND MONCADA FORM THE DYNAMIC DUO AND RYMER LIRIANO PASSES THE AUDTION AND QUINTANA BRINGS IN SOME IMPACT HITTERS AND RODON TURNS INTO STEVE CARLTON WITH KOPECH, GIOLITO AND FULMER LOOKING READY FOR PRIME TIME....


    THEN MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, WIETERS GETS RESIGNED AFTER 2018 TO MENTOR ZACH COLLINS IN 2019 AND THE WHITE SOX PLAN TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT THEY SOLD AWAY FOR 30 PIECES OF SILVER 100 YEARS AGO


    YOU KNOW ROGER, YOUR REALLY NEED TO LEARN HOW TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND LEARN HOW TO EXPLORE PARRALLELL UNIVERSES

    Sponsored content

    Re: Matt Wieters

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:46 am