RagahRagah

Someone attempts to dig for a "gotcha" because of how things stand a quarter way into the season. I stated that it was way too early for that. That is not a bad argument, it is fucking correct. That's all there is to this, dude. You and others are the only ones trying to turn it into something else just because of an example I used when you know what the damn point is.

Not if you actually just take it as an example that anything can happen and not overanalyze it, FFS. Some of you guys just reach so far to find something to pick at and split hairs rather than just accept an obvious point. The Astros were 15-30 to start that year and ended up in the World Series and the same logic can apply backwards. IDK, is that any better an example for those of you who are anal-retentive or like to argue semantics?

I can't even wrap my head around the logic behind such a bizarre comment.

Fair point. We are not at full speed even, but neither are they. Cleveland is still a contender for the division as well, though IMO. I try to stay optimistic but if you're a White Sox fan and you pay attention you know that our track record supports the skepticism, due to a lot of factors. Luckily, the injury factor so far is less of a concern for us than usual because fucking EVERYONE is getting injured.

I'm merely using it as an example to snap people out of a fantasy that where they are standing in mid May means anything. Is thinking it does and trying to reach for a gotcha over that sample size any less ridiculous?

You mischaracterized my argument, so of course I'm going to say so.

In all honesty, as great as that would have been I think most of us would have been much happier to hear virtually anyone other than Joe Buck call that Series (and every one, honestly).

And someone posting a reaction before the post could have possibly been read thoroughly says everything. A conclusion is an end result. We aren't there yet and I never made any iron clad claims of any results as doing so would be ridiculous. Consult a dictionary.

The fact you are claiming anything I have said in this offseason was a conclusion proves either: A. You don't listen. B. You are cherry picking my offseason points and ignoring the ones that make this post look like exactly what it is: bullshit. C. You don't have any idea what "conclusion" means. My skepticism was based on things that were likely by weighing various circumstances we were facing. Nowhere did I ever "conclude" anything at all, including anything specific you listed. I might have thought that was most likely but never stated anything simply *was* anything; there is a difference and I think you know it. And if I had I would gladly state that that was not how it was intended and apologize to you.

Second poster in a row who says, "got it" who doesn't at all get it. History is always a big indicator and basis for where you continue to go. The Sox have a long history of failure, often when they were the "favorites." Being skeptical isn't "negative," it's rational. The Sox still have a lot to prove. But NONE of us should be making ANY conclusions, good or bad, about where this team will be at the end of September. Bottom line. THAT is what I am saying, and it's really wierd how people just seemingly have to insert a narrative into everything so they can be combative about something. Strawmen galore, knock yourself out. Person wants to try to tease a "gotcha" after a month and a half but I'm the questionable one for going to other way hypothetically? Fucking weird. Biases, I guess.

No, you definitely do not, "got it." Not at all. And it's quite baffling. You really must not have actually read and absorbed what you just quoted.

I got snubbed!

The simple point was just to learn to wait before making conclusions, which is a pretty common sense concept that is abandoned far too often on Soxtalk. 2005 has been in the books for over a decade. Only a fraction of this season is so far.

"Nicky Two-Homers/Two-Strikes," lol.

If we are using "scores" to judge umpires for this (and last) season I'd say the class is the equivalent of Trump University.

We ended up winning therefore there is nothing to ever learn from such an experience. Wow. Tunnel vision like a motherfucker.

The almost willful ignorance here is astounding. Doesn't really matter. Whatever team ends up being hotter usually wins. Cleveland and Minny quite often end up looking like the "weaker" team on paper yet end up kicking our asses, sometimes all season long. I'm glad so far it's been the opposite but it's still too early to really try to reach for "gotcha" moments (which is silly because it's the thought process that determines how logical something is, NOT the results). Do I think we are a better team? Yes. Has that been proven without a shadow of a doubt yet? Absolutely not. Does it even matter? Possibly not. TL;DR: It's way too early to say yet.

We're about 1/6th of the way into the season, so... Remember what Cleveland did to us in 2005? Luckily, right now things are looking good but only time will tell. Even in most of our best case scenario takes I don't think we envisioned our rotation being this good this year. That continuing would be paramount to our chances for success this year.

Rules are an illusion here.

He stated Nick isn't a good fit for the top of the lineup. My response was appropriate. What I've seen from Nick personally is working counts well. Guess I just haven't watched enough games. *Shrug*

I never said I thought he should be at the top. IMO he is a perfect 9 hole hitter. I think his position is what it is due to Eloy and Robert being out right now.

It feels so good to be able to beat up on the Twins. Really hoping when top teams play us we will have similar results.

It at least feels good to beat up on the Twins for once.

Yeah... maybe one of these days he can do that. ?

This I'll agree with. He'll definitely need to hit more than singles to be a great hitter. But even if he doesn't, he can be more than good enough to be our *worst* hitter, LOL.