08-13-2009, 01:51 AM
<!--quoteo(post=57575:date=Aug 12 2009, 09:48 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Aug 12 2009, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=57406:date=Aug 12 2009, 02:49 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Aug 12 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Eh, Jody, I suppose you're right. I come off sounding like a deeply bitter man.
(although, guess what? Many Chicago Cub fans are exactly that, and for good reason. Still...)
I can see why some of you would like to forget about Jim's off-season boner. I would too. If DeRosa was quietly having a decent season for the Indians instead of blasting homers for our arch-rivals, I suppose the blunder would be easier to take.
It's kind of unrealistic for people to expect the DeRo talk to cease, however. How long did Red Sox fans talk about the scuttling of Babe Ruth? My dad talked about Lou Brock for <i>decades</i>. As Annie Savoy says in Bull Durham, "...and who can forget about Milt Pappas for Frank Robinson, for God's sake?"
A bad trade never goes away.
But at least for me, I'll try to shut up about it for now.
I'd be remiss, however, to not applaud Butch's recent outstanding post.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See, this is the problem with you sometimes KB. EVERY move you don't agree with is a "boner" on par with the Ruth or Brock trades. They aren't. You know what? Not signing Furcal wasn't the same thing as trading Brock (2 bad seasons and one fairly good one). Drafting Tyler Colvin was not the same as trading Brock (there are roughly 4 guys who are demonstrably better than Colvin who were drafted after him in the first round, none of them are stars yet, and only one, Drabek, can even hope to be one). Trading DeRosa wasn't the same as trading Ruth. Even if everything you and Butch have said was right. Which it wasn't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm assuming this post was tongue-in-cheek, correct BT? Please tell me you're being facetious.
I can see tom saying "KB thinks DeRosa is better than Babe Ruth!" because he's purposely trying to be an asshole, and he knows how preposterous his statement is, and he knows I'll chuckle, or get mad, or whatever.
But you actually sound serious. You're implying that I said that Mark DeRosa is the greatest player in the history of the sport, equal to Babe Ruth...that's what you're saying?
Uh-huh. Good one.
Is that really the best you can do, pretend that I said DeRosa is as good as Babe Ruth, and try to defend the Tyler Colvin draft pick? Weak sauce.
BTW, that's truly the last refuge of someone who's losing an argument: make outlandish, clearly absurd misrepresentations of what the other guy is saying, and turn the whole thing into a cartoon. (That's why I think you might be being facetious, because IMO, you weren't necessarily losing the argument; it was just a difference of opinion.)
(although, guess what? Many Chicago Cub fans are exactly that, and for good reason. Still...)
I can see why some of you would like to forget about Jim's off-season boner. I would too. If DeRosa was quietly having a decent season for the Indians instead of blasting homers for our arch-rivals, I suppose the blunder would be easier to take.
It's kind of unrealistic for people to expect the DeRo talk to cease, however. How long did Red Sox fans talk about the scuttling of Babe Ruth? My dad talked about Lou Brock for <i>decades</i>. As Annie Savoy says in Bull Durham, "...and who can forget about Milt Pappas for Frank Robinson, for God's sake?"
A bad trade never goes away.
But at least for me, I'll try to shut up about it for now.
I'd be remiss, however, to not applaud Butch's recent outstanding post.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See, this is the problem with you sometimes KB. EVERY move you don't agree with is a "boner" on par with the Ruth or Brock trades. They aren't. You know what? Not signing Furcal wasn't the same thing as trading Brock (2 bad seasons and one fairly good one). Drafting Tyler Colvin was not the same as trading Brock (there are roughly 4 guys who are demonstrably better than Colvin who were drafted after him in the first round, none of them are stars yet, and only one, Drabek, can even hope to be one). Trading DeRosa wasn't the same as trading Ruth. Even if everything you and Butch have said was right. Which it wasn't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm assuming this post was tongue-in-cheek, correct BT? Please tell me you're being facetious.
I can see tom saying "KB thinks DeRosa is better than Babe Ruth!" because he's purposely trying to be an asshole, and he knows how preposterous his statement is, and he knows I'll chuckle, or get mad, or whatever.
But you actually sound serious. You're implying that I said that Mark DeRosa is the greatest player in the history of the sport, equal to Babe Ruth...that's what you're saying?
Uh-huh. Good one.
Is that really the best you can do, pretend that I said DeRosa is as good as Babe Ruth, and try to defend the Tyler Colvin draft pick? Weak sauce.
BTW, that's truly the last refuge of someone who's losing an argument: make outlandish, clearly absurd misrepresentations of what the other guy is saying, and turn the whole thing into a cartoon. (That's why I think you might be being facetious, because IMO, you weren't necessarily losing the argument; it was just a difference of opinion.)
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance