06-26-2010, 04:42 PM
<!--quoteo(post=103096:date=Jun 26 2010, 03:30 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 26 2010, 03:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Nice stat about most playoff appearances since '83 but you would trade all 6 for one WS ring. You know you would.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course I would. But that wasn't part of the discussion. I was responding to your claim that the Sox are usually better than the Cubs. I was offering a counterpoint. That's how arguments work. They don't typically unfold like:
"The sky is purple."
"I'm pretty sure the sky is blue -- here's a photo to support my argument."
"Clouds are white, and you know it!
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not sure why either of us are surprised. That's typically their answer to everything no matter what the discussion is about.
1 out of give or take 100 is only slightly less suck than 0 out of a 100. But who needs logic?
Of course I would. But that wasn't part of the discussion. I was responding to your claim that the Sox are usually better than the Cubs. I was offering a counterpoint. That's how arguments work. They don't typically unfold like:
"The sky is purple."
"I'm pretty sure the sky is blue -- here's a photo to support my argument."
"Clouds are white, and you know it!
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not sure why either of us are surprised. That's typically their answer to everything no matter what the discussion is about.
1 out of give or take 100 is only slightly less suck than 0 out of a 100. But who needs logic?