Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Christ, I'm sorry i didn't stay home and follow this thread after I started it...This will be fun to read from the beginning. So is Tony sitting around waiting for a call right now... a call that will never come...(cue Lifetime Channel music) ahh so your the trouble maker here startin all this s***.......shame on you......... bad boy.... take your punishment...... oooh..yeah right there...work the lower back... i always knew you were a little on the kinky side ..... .... heres another just for good measures........ While you're whippin, reach over a grab me a cold one too. Thanks! uhh youll have to get your own or ill have to stop i dont multi task to well.........lol........not after a few beers anyhow....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 heres three now catch up to the rest of us......... Three, come on now thats barely a start and next time don't bring me that American stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Three, come on now thats barely a start and next time don't bring me that American stuff. dude look beggars cant be choosers.. just be thankful i didnt pass that s***ty old style off on ya....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 since I had so many diverse answers on what this thread is about, I thought I'd throw something ad hominen in just for the hell of it. Might bring new dimensions to the conversation as it has religion, and why PK is getting no sex right now, and an alluison to the Foulke-Koch trade. I believe in the Church of Baseball. I've tried all the major religions, and most of the minor ones. I've worshipped Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan. I know things. For instance, there are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I heard that, I gave Jesus a chance. But it just didn't work out between us. The Lord laid too much guilt on me. I prefer metaphysics to theology. You see, there's no guilt in baseball, and it's never boring... which makes it like sex. There's never been a ballplayer slept with me who didn't have the best year of his career. Making love is like hitting a baseball: you just gotta relax and concentrate. Besides, I'd never sleep with a player hitting under .250... not unless he had a lot of RBIs and was a great glove man up the middle. You see, there's a certain amount of life wisdom I give these boys. I can expand their minds. Sometimes when I've got a ballplayer alone, I'll just read Emily Dickinson or Walt Whitman to him, and the guys are so sweet, they always stay and listen. 'Course, a guy'll listen to anything if he thinks it's foreplay. I make them feel confident, and they make me feel safe, and pretty. 'Course, what I give them lasts a lifetime; what they give me lasts 142 games. Sometimes it seems like a bad trade. But bad trades are part of baseball -- now who can forget Frank Robinson for Milt Pappas, for God's sake? It's a long season and you gotta trust. I've tried 'em all, I really have, and the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 since I had so many diverse answers on what this thread is about, I thought I'd throw something ad hominen in just for the hell of it. Might bring new dimensions to the conversation as it has religion, and why PK is getting no sex right now, and an alluison to the Foulke-Koch trade. you didnt like the bit of the lava lamp and the black velvet oil painting of elvis singing?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 since I had so many diverse answers on what this thread is about, I thought I'd throw something ad hominen in just for the hell of it. Might bring new dimensions to the conversation as it has religion, and why PK is getting no sex right now, and an alluison to the Foulke-Koch trade. I love that quote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 since I had so many diverse answers on what this thread is about, I thought I'd throw something ad hominen in just for the hell of it. Might bring new dimensions to the conversation as it has religion, and why PK is getting no sex right now, and an alluison to the Foulke-Koch trade. you didnt like the bit of the lava lamp and the black velvet oil painting of elvis singing?????? you know the lava lamp and the black velvet elvis (or at least, black velvet) had their role in that movie - I went for that quote because it included your conversational threads!!!!!!!!!!!! gees, try to be inclusive and you get beaned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 since I had so many diverse answers on what this thread is about, I thought I'd throw something ad hominen in just for the hell of it. Might bring new dimensions to the conversation as it has religion, and why PK is getting no sex right now, and an alluison to the Foulke-Koch trade. you didnt like the bit of the lava lamp and the black velvet oil painting of elvis singing?????? you know the lava lamp and the black velvet elvis (or at least, black velvet) had their role in that movie - I went for that quote because it included your conversational threads!!!!!!!!!!!! gees, try to be inclusive and you get beaned. lol sorry......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Because it got BROUGHT UP What are you gonna tell me Koch has had ONE good year too? No Koch has had 2 good years out of 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Yas among 1st basemen, those numbers are really only average, if you exclude his best year. On the sox? Sure they were above average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Yas among 1st basemen, those numbers are really only average, if you exclude his best year. On the sox? Sure they were above average. I just went through some stats. Over the 4 year period of 99-02 that we are talking about, I see 7 firstbasemen who's numbers were superior to PK's. Those are Bagwell, Delgado, Giambi, Helton, McGriff (maybe), Sweeney and Thome. There are 3 guys with numbers similar to PK's: Klesko, Olerud, Sexson. Out of 30 teams, I'm finding 10 1B's who are better than or as good as PK. I'm talking strictly offensive numbers for those 4 years here. Paulie fits in there somewhere between 8th best and 11th best offensive producing firstbaseman in the big leagues for the four year period of 99-02. Out of 30 teams, that, by definition, is above average. There are at least 19 other ML teams that didn't get the production at 1B that PK supplied the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Yas among 1st basemen, those numbers are really only average, if you exclude his best year. On the sox? Sure they were above average. I just went through some stats. Over the 4 year period of 99-02 that we are talking about, I see 7 firstbasemen who's numbers were superior to PK's. Those are Bagwell, Delgado, Giambi, Helton, McGriff (maybe), Sweeney and Thome. There are 3 guys with numbers similar to PK's: Klesko, Olerud, Sexson. Out of 30 teams, I'm finding 10 1B's who are better than or as good as PK. I'm talking strictly offensive numbers for those 4 years here. Paulie fits in there somewhere between 8th best and 11th best offensive producing firstbaseman in the big leagues for the four year period of 99-02. Out of 30 teams, that, by definition, is above average. There are at least 19 other ML teams that didn't get the production at 1B that PK supplied the Sox. Dont mean to split hairs, but the arguement was excluding his best season. I do think Pauly is above average, but not much. Also, you probably didnt factor in speed and defense, so.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Yas among 1st basemen, those numbers are really only average, if you exclude his best year. On the sox? Sure they were above average. I just went through some stats. Over the 4 year period of 99-02 that we are talking about, I see 7 firstbasemen who's numbers were superior to PK's. Those are Bagwell, Delgado, Giambi, Helton, McGriff (maybe), Sweeney and Thome. There are 3 guys with numbers similar to PK's: Klesko, Olerud, Sexson. Out of 30 teams, I'm finding 10 1B's who are better than or as good as PK. I'm talking strictly offensive numbers for those 4 years here. Paulie fits in there somewhere between 8th best and 11th best offensive producing firstbaseman in the big leagues for the four year period of 99-02. Out of 30 teams, that, by definition, is above average. There are at least 19 other ML teams that didn't get the production at 1B that PK supplied the Sox. Dont mean to split hairs, but the arguement was excluding his best season. I do think Pauly is above average, but not much. Also, you probably didnt factor in speed and defense, so.... Granted ... And I emphasized "offensive production" in my post. I also looked at the 4 year time period, which was what I was refering to in my original post. And in that post, I was refutting HSC's claim that he didn't produce as well as his teammates. You brought up a point that I thought had some merit, so I checked it out. I'm not saying you were wrong, because average and slightly above average are pretty damn close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Dont mean to split hairs, but the arguement was excluding his best season. Just thinking back at the stats I looked at ... if you take away each firstbaseman's best season, like you say I should do with PK, the results would be very similar, if not identical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Oh my god you gotta be KIDDING ME Is this BIZZARO Soxnet?? look at that .294 24 hr 81 rbi .298 21 hr 97 rbi .282 32 hr 99 rbi .304 27 hr 104 rbi ?? You find a PROBLEM with those numbers? Im not even arguing, those are good numbers SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ I have to interject here. Those 4 years 99-02, Paulie roughly averaged .290 - 26 - 95. I'm sorry ladies, but to me those are pretty solid numbers. Other than Magglio, what teammates are you comparing him to over this period? Who else has put up that numbers that solid over those four years other than Ordonez? .... Frank? Carlos? Jose? .... NOT Until this season, Paulie has been a solid, productive first baseman. The numbers you posted actually prove this. Not everyone has the talents of Magglio Ordonez and not everyone gets paid like him either, including PK. Yas among 1st basemen, those numbers are really only average, if you exclude his best year. On the sox? Sure they were above average. I just went through some stats. Over the 4 year period of 99-02 that we are talking about, I see 7 firstbasemen who's numbers were superior to PK's. Those are Bagwell, Delgado, Giambi, Helton, McGriff (maybe), Sweeney and Thome. There are 3 guys with numbers similar to PK's: Klesko, Olerud, Sexson. Out of 30 teams, I'm finding 10 1B's who are better than or as good as PK. I'm talking strictly offensive numbers for those 4 years here. Paulie fits in there somewhere between 8th best and 11th best offensive producing firstbaseman in the big leagues for the four year period of 99-02. Out of 30 teams, that, by definition, is above average. There are at least 19 other ML teams that didn't get the production at 1B that PK supplied the Sox. Dont mean to split hairs, but the arguement was excluding his best season. I do think Pauly is above average, but not much. Also, you probably didnt factor in speed and defense, so.... Granted ... And I emphasized "offensive production" in my post. I also looked at the 4 year time period, which was what I was refering to in my original post. And in that post, I was refutting HSC's claim that he didn't produce as well as his teammates. You brought up a point that I thought had some merit, so I checked it out. I'm not saying you were wrong, because average and slightly above average are pretty damn close. Ahhh dont mind HSC, she just rants and rambles about things because she has a personal agenda. She knows a lot about baseball, she just lets little things like emotions get in the way of facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 I don't have a problem with HSC. Love her to death! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Hsc says...........SUB f***IN PAR COMPARED TO THE REST OF HIS TEAM MATES.. EXCEPT FOR CLAYTON IN THOSE TWO SEASONS........damn........ Need i say more? LOL sorry hsc, just messing with ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Unless Billy has at least a 95MPH fastball when and IF he comes back, he should be rested for the rest of the season. We cannot afford to have a guy who has to throw breaking balls just because he lost some velocity on his No. 1 pitch. He's just too much of a Liability in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafacosta Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Frank should play 1st and Paully should DH... Not Daubach PK on DH??? No way! Did you ever take a look at his numbers this season??? HE will finish the year with more DP than HRs. OK, Maggs grounds into a lot of DPs, right, but look at his numbers: AVG .318, 23 HRs, 77 RBIs. If at least PK had put this numbers, he should be in DH, but he is sucking this, much more than KOCH, IMO. And Daubach is a LH hitter that would have grat match ups with RH, i think if he had get the PT that PK gets, he would be with much better numbers than what PK has now. JM is so stupid...i think PK has cost us a lot of games this season, with a all that DP that he has, 21 DPs...it has cost us... hmmm...10 games. I want PK out of the town after this season. He is slow and sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafacosta Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 there is no way we are comparing konerko and daubach...thats like comparing jose lima and greg maddux... PK sucks! Are you having a love affair with PK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 This might have been one of the funniest threads I have ever read. Here are my random thoughts on it, in no particular order -I don't know who said it, but I would agree Roman=Anthony -Looking at Konerko's #'s he was probably middle of the pack if you leave out his best year, but what is the logic of leaving out the best year? Doesn't that mean you should leave out his worst year to balance it? -My original question was never answered, how does Konerko's bad year, have any bearing on how bad Billy Koch has been? -It took 21 pages, but Yansy finally actually brought some stats to an arguement about a player... how it took that long, I don't know. -Maybe that thread rating idea wasn't so bad after all We could have it like homeland securitites rating system so people would know that there is a war going on within a thread and not need to waste their time reading it -Just for giggles Limas 2003 stats http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/prof...le?statsId=5212 Madduxs stats http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/prof...le?statsId=3933 Lima is having a much better year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 maybe instead of looking at how a player has done in the last game u should look how they have done the past few years... Why Mike.. is that going to help us get into the post season THIS YEAR...?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 I just spent nearly an hour working my way through this mess, and I can honestly say it's the most pointless thread that I've read so far in my few months as a member here. And Bmr, your stat-padding tactics are sickening. Just a month ago, you were like 300 posts ahead of me -- now it's nearly 1,000 . You need to get your ass off the lazyboy and into an office . I know these 2 guys, John and Mike, maybe they can help you get a job. Give em a call at 555-LMAO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Quick somebody start a Konerko thread so we can discuss Koch or Botch 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.