19 Apr 09
Originally posted by shortcircuitHe had 108 pitches in 6 innings because the Reds worked the count and also had 5 hits. So, the Reds effectively knocked him out after 6 even without scoring a run.
He was lifted due to pitch count moron. He pitched 6 complete and had over 100 pitches on the evening.
19 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYep, no doubt all of those heavy hitters weilding mighty batting averages in the REDS dugout contrived this brilliant strategy. Next thing you know, YOU will be taking credit for the startegy.
He had 108 pitches in 6 innings because the Reds worked the count and also had 5 hits. So, the Reds effectively knocked him out after 6 even without scoring a run.
I suppose this is YOUR idea of DOMINATION? LMAO
19 Apr 09
Originally posted by shortcircuitIf you knew anything about baseball, you'd know that is a common strategy of teams these days to take a lot of pitches to run up the starters' pitch count to get into the other team's middle relievers (normally the weakest part of a pitching staff). The Red Sox and Yankees were big proponents of this strategy. Your LMAO! just shows more of your incredible ignorance of present day MLB.
Yep, no doubt all of those heavy hitters weilding mighty batting averages in the REDS dugout contrived this brilliant strategy. Next thing you know, YOU will be taking credit for the startegy.
I suppose this is YOUR idea of DOMINATION? LMAO
YOU used the word "dominance" (not me) to describe Oswalt's performance. But it was hardly dominant for the reasons and given the stats already pointed out. All he got was a ND and my Reds got a win. I'll take it and you can LYFAO all you want.
19 Apr 09
Originally posted by no1marauderYou are not only an idiot, but you are a liar too.
If you knew anything about baseball, you'd know that is a common strategy of teams these days to take a lot of pitches to run up the starters' pitch count to get into the other team's middle relievers (normally the weakest part of a pitching staff). The Red Sox and Yankees were big proponents of this strategy. Your LMAO! just shows more of your incredibl ...[text shortened]... . All he got was a ND and my Reds got a win. I'll take it and you can LYFAO all you want.
You want me to pull up your quote "The Reds will DOMINATE Oswalt this season"?
Secondly, don't even attempt to preach baseball strategy to me. You haven't got the slightest inkling into the true strategy of the game.
19 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by shortcircuitYes, please do.
You are not only an idiot, but you are a liar too.
You want me to pull up your quote "The Reds will DOMINATE Oswalt this season"?
Secondly, don't even attempt to preach baseball strategy to me. You haven't got the slightest inkling into the true strategy of the game.
I've just shown what a fool you are; stop embarassing yourself. Taking a lot of pitches against a starter struggling to find the plate (like Oswalt was) is a strategy even if you are unaware of it.
19 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauder04 Apr '09 10:39 :: 0 recommendations
Yes, please do.
I've just shown what a fool you are; stop embarassing yourself. Taking a lot of pitches against a starter struggling to find the plate (like Oswalt was) is a strategy even if you are unaware of it.
Originally posted by whodey
Indeed!! Going against my Reds, Oswalt has only lost one game in like about 20 appearances. I call him the assassign.
We'll OWN him this year. Take it to the bank (they do still have banks in Cincinnati, right?).
There was your quote.
As far as strategy goes....DUH you must be a real genius. This strategy has been in use since 1920 numbnuts!!
19 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by shortcircuitSC: You want me to pull up your quote "The Reds will DOMINATE Oswalt this season"?
04 Apr '09 10:39 :: 0 recommendations
Originally posted by whodey
Indeed!! Going against my Reds, Oswalt has only lost one game in like about 20 appearances. I call him the assassign.
[b]We'll OWN him this year. Take it to the bank (they do still have banks in Cincinnati, right?).
There was your quote.
As far as strategy goes....DUH you must be a real genius. This strategy has been in use since 1920 numbnuts!![/b]
I'm still waiting.
Really? They yanked starters who threw 108 pitches after 6 innings in 1920 if they had a shutout?
You really are a fraud.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by no1marauderYou can't read? It was posted just above your last post. What a loser you are.
SC: You want me to pull up your quote "The Reds will DOMINATE Oswalt this season"?
I'm still waiting.
Really? They yanked starters who threw 108 pitches after 6 innings in 1920 if they had a shutout?
You really are a fraud.
Boy, you really must be a simpleton. They din't use relievers back in those days like they do in the modern game, or didn't you realize that?
However, they did try and make the pitchers throw as many pitches as they could to tire them out. They used to do things fundamentally like taking automatically on a 3-0 count, Sometimes they would take every pitch until the first strike was thrown when the pitcher was wild or tiring.
This really is fundamentals. You should have known this. Guess you aren't nearly as knowledgeable as you thought you were. You are a legend in your own mind.
You are also dead wrong when you call me a fraud. You also prove your ignorance further by popping off with stupid accusations that you can't back up.
Oh, and by the way jughead, in the baseball vernacular, when you say a team will OWN another player or team, you are saying they will dominate. That is why I asked you the question after your statement. Get a grip, but your ass just got ripped. Now do I need to explain that to you as well?
I sure haven't seen one shread of evidence to support your claims, but miine have been right on the money.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by shortcircuitYou keep making a fool out of yourself; the macho bluster can't hide that you've been consistently shown to be an a**hole.
You can't read? It was posted just above your last post. What a loser you are.
Boy, you really must be a simpleton. They din't use relievers back in those days like they do in the modern game, or didn't you realize that?
However, they did try and make the pitchers throw as many pitches as they could to tire them out. They used to do things fundam ...[text shortened]... een one shread of evidence to support your claims, but miine have been right on the money.
When you put something someone else supposedly said in " ", that means they said it verbatim (sorry that might be too big a word for you - it means you're claiming they used the exact words quoted). You claimed I said "the Reds would dominate Oswalt". But I didn't, did I, jerk? So you were WRONG. I know your pea brain can't wrap itself around that concept, but YOU WERE WRONG.
Now as to the pitch count, whodey pointed out that Oswalt couldn't go deeper than six. You called him a "moron" because Oswalt was removed because he had thrown 108 pitches. What you seem too incredibly stupid to understand is that he threw 108 pitches because the Reds worked the count on him knowing that he would get pulled once he got around 100 pitches or so. This is precisely what happened Friday and, in fact, it happened again today. Of course, the Reds would also have liked to get some runs off the starters, but still the plan worked. Your ridiculous claim that Oswalt "dominated" was far from "on the money" as anybody who watched the game knows. Perhaps you've never seen a dominant pitching performance but 5 hits and 3 walks in 6 innings ain't one.
No one paid attention to pitch counts in the 1920's, jerkwad. If you think they did, you're even more of an imbecile than I thought (which is hard to believe).
You can get banging on your chest and pretending you were Roger Clemen's towelboy if you want. But stop blathering about your "expert" knowledge and start actually showing that you have the faintest clue about MLB. So far, you've miserably failed to offer any indication that you are anything more than a ignorant blowhard.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWhether you believe people or not, you make a fool out of yourself a lot. You're an intelligent person, no doubt about it. But people who have played this game at a high level vs people who study it at a high level always creates a problem. I'm much more on shortys side of the stick, we both played at high levels. I'm not saying I always disagree with you, or always take his side. You have many good points.
You keep making a fool out of yourself; the macho bluster can't hide that you've been consistently shown to be an a**hole.
When you put something someone else supposedly said in " ", that means they said it verbatim (sorry that might be too big a word for you - it means you're claiming they used the exact words quoted). You claimed I said ...[text shortened]... ffer any indication that you are anything more than a ignorant blowhard.
But you make it easy not to agree with you, because you typically are a jerk. I stay out of many baseball threads because I don't feel like wasting my time dealing with you, you act like you know it all. But how many MLB players have you played with, played against, or could pick up the phone and call to talk to? I have those things, I'm sure shorty does. That absolutely means we know more than a thing or two about the game.
I'm not taking sides in this argument. I as usual didn't read this conversation. I took a peek at your last post and saw your Clemens towell boy line. That's a piece of crap thing to say man. I could throw names at you to, and you know what, it means something. But you would take it as some kind of challenge and try to one-up me with words about how much you know.
It could be fun to talk baseball with you, you really seem to have some interesting angles and I would enjoy discussing them with you. To bad your an arrogant a$$.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWhen you can't back up your arguements, you always seem to start throwing out nebulous accusations and pounding your chest like a gorilla in heat. You consistently doubt evryone who disagrees with you.
You keep making a fool out of yourself; the macho bluster can't hide that you've been consistently shown to be an a**hole.
When you put something someone else supposedly said in " ", that means they said it verbatim (sorry that might be too big a word for you - it means you're claiming they used the exact words quoted). You claimed I said ...[text shortened]... ffer any indication that you are anything more than a ignorant blowhard.
You start mincing words just as you are here and now.
You know damn good and well what you intended when you made your initial claim. You danced around it and refused to back up your initial claim with a bet, but instead tried to twist it into something it was not. This is your usual M.O.
Get over it. You are not now, nor will you ever be my equal in the topic of baseball. PERIOD. Got it?
I also never claimed to be Clemens' towel boy. I was his teammate. I know this rankles you to no end. That has no bearing on this discussion, but in your typical fashion, you try to cast doubt on anyone who opposes you. I really can't believe I am wasting as much time as I have busting your chops. Probably because I don't like how you attack everyone who doesn't kiss your ass.
20 Apr 09
How did this thread turn into a debate over 2 NL central teams that haven't done much, nor are expected to? I know, hometeam pride, faves whatever. Not many people at all want to talk about the 11-1 Marlins, I can understand that.. but the stats, and the guts of what they've done (so far) are simply damn amazing!
C'mon spankies, you both keep on repeating yourselves sprinkled between the same material.. Next!
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by SmookiePI have to admit, I am envious of the Marlin fans. They have accomplished so much in over such a short period of time and have been running circles around teams that have been around forever. The front office of the Marlins sure knows what they are doing. No doubt, we will see them playing in October.
How did this thread turn into a debate over 2 NL central teams that haven't done much, nor are expected to? I know, hometeam pride, faves whatever. Not many people at all want to talk about the 11-1 Marlins, I can understand that.. but the stats, and the guts of what they've done (so far) are simply damn amazing!
C'mon spankies, you both keep on repeating yourselves sprinkled between the same material.. Next!