TheBigHurt Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 You go right ahead... but be prepared for the worst. Ok, so you keep basing ur arguments on hunches and assumptions against facts. Real smart. Oh, and I'm the only person here who uses a little name call once in a while? LMAO! I think in this context it wasn't exactly "out of line." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 12:31 PM) His stuff has always looked medicore at best up until this year. His sinker had very little bite on it at all. This year his command and movement on pitches has been 180 from years past. I am afraid that he is gonna have a career year and get paid a kings ransom ( last year of arb and they will lock him up if he has a good career) and he will go back to his mediocore self. It happens all the time around baseball... i don't see why it can't happen to us. Garland has always had some of the best stuff on the staff. His command was rarely stellar, but his main problem was someone would hit off him and then he'd start nit-picking, trying to hit a corner instead of pounding the zone. The biggest difference IMO this year is that AJ has him throwing inside, something he rarely did in the past. I think this is no fluke, because most of what has changed was between the ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 02:04 PM) Ok, so you keep basing ur arguments on hunches and assumptions against facts. Real smart. Oh, and I'm the only person here who uses a little name call once in a while? LMAO! I think in this context it wasn't exactly "out of line." I have used facts many times in this thread. It is a fact that garland was nothing more than a average pitcher up until this year. It is a fact that garland's ''stuff'' has been weak up until this year. He would have some gems now and then and his ''stuff'' showed up that day but it was not consistent. Disagree if you like but you would be wrong. It is a fact that his control was not good before this year. It is a fact that many players have huge years before their contract year, rake in the money, and then regress. Rules are rules. Any sort of insults are not tolerated. I really could care less about being insulted but if i can't insult others without consequences why should others be able to? QUOTE(Jake @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 02:09 PM) Garland has always had some of the best stuff on the staff. His command was rarely stellar, but his main problem was someone would hit off him and then he'd start nit-picking, trying to hit a corner instead of pounding the zone. The biggest difference IMO this year is that AJ has him throwing inside, something he rarely did in the past. I think this is no fluke, because most of what has changed was between the ears. His ''stuff' showed up on rare occasions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Dude, ur talking about the PAST. Who cares? What's a RELEVANT "fact" is that he's awesome this year. It's called "getting better," ever heard of it? Nothing u say can confirm he will get worse. Past statistics are not relevant to the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 02:46 PM) Past statistics are not relevant to the future. Possibly the most asinine thing i have ever heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 (edited) What I'm saying is the fact he's been mediocre in the past doesn't mean he's not gonna get better. In fact u implying that shows a great lack of common sense. Either that, or ignorance. Or hell, even bitterness. Take your pick. Edited June 26, 2005 by TheBigHurt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 02:50 PM) What I'm saying is the fact he's been mediocre in the past doesn't mean he's not gonna get better. In fact u implying that shows a great lack of common sense. Either that, or ignorance. Or hell, even bitterness. Take your pick. None of the above. You have a hard on for garland and that is cool... i do not. How about he proves himself as an ace for more than 3 months before we annoint him one (you)? If people went by just three months or even a full years worth of stats that would be pretty retarded, to say the least. I will come back in this thread when there is some better discussion. Like something that doesn't suggest garland is the second coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Dude, you're the one twisting everything around and using every bit of irrelevant things u can come up with to try and convince urself what ur saying has any sense or relevance. I have a hard on for Garland becuase I am stating the simple fact he's good this year while YOU'RE the one ignorantly making him out to be a bad pitcher? YES u are LACKING COMMON SENSE. You are making assumptions and acting as though you are psychic by saying what's going to happen in the future, and trying to act as though that means anything. I would bet you are a Bush supporter, LMAO. Not many pitchers are hot from the start. MOST are mediocre and then EVOLVE INTO BETTER PITCHERS. HELLO. As I said, u are lacking common sense, and obviously have no arguing skills. Jesus....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 I can see why your age is not in your profile. How old are you? My guess is 11-14... if your older than that we have some problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 WTF you mean WE have some problems? YOU have some problems. I am 18. You are the one who can't argue worth anything, lol. I'm not trying to start anything, but u persistently argue with no grounds, using only the past, completely lacking common sense. Pitchers do get better, you know. That's basically the common nature of things. What he's done in the PAST doesn't signify a fluke run. If you think that u have serious problems. And it's not as if I'm the only person in this thread who realizes that. I used to laugh when I ehard people say this country is full of idiots. Not anymore, not after I've come to realize it's really true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wedge Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I hate Bush and am leary of Jon Garland. Not sure how that affects your argument, but for every guy like Jason Schmidt that just snapped it on one year, there's guys like Esteban Loiaza that have career years and fall off the map. Qwerty was right: Garland is more successful this year because he's better at pitching inside and isn't getting rattled when guys get a hit off of him, as he did in the past. In this case though, the cause of the cause is more important than the effect or the cause. Garland is pitching great, we can all see that. That is caused by the things that we've mentioned above. The question you should be asking yourself is what is causing the causes? Is the change coming from within or without of Garland? Is it because he grew up or quit doing drugs or got a girlfriend and has settled down on the mound (internal factors)? Or is it because of AJ and Widger calling better games (external factors)? QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 10:58 AM) I used to laugh when I ehard people say this country is full of idiots. Not anymore, not after I've come to realize it's really true. Be careful, lest you become one of them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Hasn't happened and won't happen. I happen to be good at arguing, at least where I CAN argue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 I like Bush... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChWRoCk2 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(Jake @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 02:09 PM) Garland has always had some of the best stuff on the staff. His command was rarely stellar, but his main problem was someone would hit off him and then he'd start nit-picking, trying to hit a corner instead of pounding the zone. The biggest difference IMO this year is that AJ has him throwing inside, something he rarely did in the past. I think this is no fluke, because most of what has changed was between the ears. when pitchers throw inside it pushes the batter off the plate and this makes the pitcher become successful, this was why nolan ryan and pedro are so good, sometimes you have to aim for the batter to scare him, garland is doing a good job of pushing guys off the plate and then next pitch throwing it away and the batter is chasing the pitch, this is why garland has been good edit: i agree with jake Edited June 27, 2005 by chi-guy2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 05:24 PM) Hasn't happened and won't happen. I happen to be good at arguing, at least where I CAN argue. "Past statistics are not relevant to the future" I'm sure that you've won plenty of debates in your time. Hit the road, man. You're just another terrible poster from the 2005 class. How many quality posters have registered on this site since the beginning of the year, maybe two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Trying to belittle me by my choice of basic words? Pathetic. You know what I am saying, but I guess I'll have to say it AGAIN. What has happened in the PAST, the idea he was mediocre in the PAST, does that mean he's not going to get better or that he is just a fluke? NO, otherwise, if you think about it, most pitchers would suck. It is possible it COULD happen, but you CANNOT say "well he's most likely going to end up being worthless" and call that an argument. That's an assumption. Use some commons sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 All right guys, that's plenty. Back on topic now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 12:34 PM) "Past statistics are not relevant to the future" I'm sure that you've won plenty of debates in your time. Hit the road, man. You're just another terrible poster from the 2005 class. How many quality posters have registered on this site since the beginning of the year, maybe two? Thanks. Though I'm sure I'm in your "terrible poster" class, I don't think you should bunch so many people into that group and belittle that many people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Enough arguing ladies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 12:34 PM) "Past statistics are not relevant to the future" I'm sure that you've won plenty of debates in your time. Hit the road, man. You're just another terrible poster from the 2005 class. How many quality posters have registered on this site since the beginning of the year, maybe two? Balta, bigsqwert, oil can, nvxplorer, milkman, kyle23, rock raines are some of the main ones from the last month or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 08:57 PM) Balta, bigsqwert, oil can, nvxplorer, milkman, kyle23, rock raines are some of the main ones from the last month or so. It seems like there are about 50 of them. Looking at the list of people who have registered this year, there are definitely more than just two quality posters, though. I regret saying that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 03:57 PM) Balta, bigsqwert, oil can, nvxplorer, milkman, kyle23, rock raines are some of the main ones from the last month or so. This must be the midseason preview for the Soxtalk Rookie of the Year award Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.