god damn fucking yankees. Dayv, I'm going to borrow your straight razor for a few seconds . . *borrows Dayv's straight razor, slices own throat, falls into pool of own blood*
YANKEES WIN !!!
"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide
[ghost of Warbler]
yeah, no kidding. What was your first clue? Before you gloat, please remember how many championships the Rangers have.
[/ghost of Warbler]
I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE RANGERS' LACK OF CHAMPIONSHIPS. ALL I CARED ABOUT WAS THE PHILLIES NOT GETTING ANOTHER ONE.
"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide
A certain cheating Pitcher pal of Clemens pulled out a win for the Yankees, and is it a wonder almost their entire bullpen is on the juice, the cheaters won.
You won't hear any excuses from me either on the Red Sox cheating with Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz, or the cheatriots.
I hate all cheaters they all should be stripped of trophies thrown out of professional sports, face fines and prison time and be barred from the hall of fame.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
They'd have to shut down most of the leagues lol.
Matsui for mayor.
In a 7-3 win, those 6 runs were the championship. Matsui was a one-man wrecking crew last night. No bravado, no swaggering, no BS - the guy just goes about his job. That's how a role model should behave.
I'm glad the Yankees won, of course - but it's because I like Pettitte, Jeter, & Posada. I'm sorry A-Roid gets to go along for the ride. He already has the biggest ego on the planet, hard to imagine there's room for any more self-love. But, I have no doubt he'll make room.
My real emotion today is - I hate that baseball is over until next year. It's the only sport I care for, so baseball's off-season is also my own. This is the part of the year where I go back to books in the evenings. Looking forward to the Han Solo adventures. That will be a nice change of pace through the winter months.
Hey, any of you guys play fantasy baseball? A little late for this year obviously, but maybe we do a league next year?
I've never done that before, how does it work?
Anchorhead said:
My real emotion today is - I hate that baseball is over until next year.
your team won the World Series. go celebrate. Hate another day.
TV's Frink said:
Hey, any of you guys play fantasy baseball? A little late for this year obviously, but maybe we do a league next year?
Warbler said:
I've never done that before, how does it work?
Ah cool, a newbie to take advantage of!
J/k Warb. At the beginning of the year we have a draft. With each pick you can take any player from any team that hasn't been picked by someone else yet. For hitters, you have to have someone at every position, so you would pick at least one 1B, one 2B, etc. Typically you also have a extra "utility" spot that you can play any position player in. For pitchers, you normally have several starting pitchers as well as a few relievers (normally closers). You also have several bench spots you can use for either extra hitters or extra pitchers, in case of injury or bad performance by your starting players. The actual roster you have to fill varies from league to league - for instance in the outfield, some leagues make you pick LF, RF, and CF, while other leagues just make you pick 3 OF players. But this is the basic idea.
For scoring, there are two different types of leagues. My personal favorite it roto scoring. Your starting players accumulate stats, which depend on the league. Traditional stats are R, HR, RBI, SB, and AVG for hitters, and W, K, ERA, WHIP, and SV for pitchers. All teams in the league get points depending on what their cumulative stats are compared to the rest of the league. For instance, let's say there are 10 teams in the league. At the end of the year, if you have the most home runs in the league, you get 10 points for the HR category. If you have the least home runs, you get 1 point for that category. You get points for each category, and whoever has the most total points wins.
The other scoring system is head-to-head. It's more common in fantasy football but a lot of people like it for baseball (I don't). Each week you play one other team, so let's say in Week 1 you and I play. The winner of each category for the week wins that category. So let's say I have more R, HR, RBI, and SV than you for the week. And you have more SB, W, and K, and a better AVG, ERA, and WHIP. You win the week 6-4. Near the end of the season, the teams with the best records make the playoffs, and you play each other in individual matchups to determine who advances and who ultimately wins.
I love fantasy baseball because when the Cubs are sucking in August, I can still root for the players on my fantasy team.
Just so I understand, you draft real players and use their real statistics for scoring in the fantasy league, right? I assume that playoffs for the fantasy league must be held before the real regular season ends, correct? If not, what happens if a team in the fantasy makes the playoffs, but none of its players are playing in the real playoffs?
This could be fun. I'd be willing to consider it.
Warbler said:
Just so I understand, you draft real players and use their real statistics for scoring in the fantasy league, right? I assume that playoffs for the fantasy league must be held before the real regular season ends, correct? If not, what happens if a team in the fantasy makes the playoffs, but none of its players are playing in the real playoffs?
This could be fun. I'd be willing to consider it.
You got it all right. Draft real players, use real stats. The last day of the regular season is the last day of the fantasy season, regardless of if you are playing roto or head-to-head. If playing head-to-head, the last few weeks of the real regular season are the playoffs for the fantasy season.
But I would almost insist on roto instead of head-to-head. I hate head-to-head.
Either way would be fine by me.
yay Yankees!! Matsui for Mayor!
(it's a tad late. so sue me. :P)
I won't sue you, but I will slap you! *slaps Ricardo*
Continued from the Polanski thread:
Warbler said:
I'm willing to debate the subject. I suggest posting your arguments here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/OFFICIAL-MLB-THREAD/topic/7821/page/4/
C3PX said:
vote_for_palpatine said:
*Dammit, man, stick to the topic! Don't let Frink bait you!*
Palps, not meaning to be a spelling nazi or anything, but you wrote Fink's name wrong, you put an unnecessary "r" in there.
WRONG! The "r" is quite necessary, CP3S.
I like how you chose the MLB thread, the one thread you knew I'd never even bother to look at, to continue this conversation. But your stealthy little plan was foiled! You didn't count on me getting a PM from yourself telling me to check this thread, did you? Ha ha! Nice try, Fink! Better luck next time.
"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape
Fink and Threepiess aside, here is my argument against Pete Rose for the HOF.
If Pete Rose had simply left baseball, cold turkey, after his playing days had ended, he was a HOF shoo-in. He was one of those rare athletes who squeezed talent out of every square inch of his body. He wanted to win every game he played in. He may have shortened another player's career trying to win the All-Star game. I don't necessarily believe that there is one and only one best way to play the game, but Pete Rose's approach to the game left me doubting myself on that score.
But then there is Pete Rose the manager. Pete Rose compromised the integrity of the game of baseball through his gambling activities. One might argue that steroids also compromise the integrity of the game, and it is unavoidable that multiple steroid users will enter the Hall. Since steroid cheats will surely be in the HOF, why not Rose?
I wouldn't care to see Mark McGuire, Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds in the HOF, among others. But let's say I was forced to cast a vote for one player and my choices were Bonds or Rose. Bonds cheated, true, but the selfish motivations he had for using steroids did have the beneficial side effect of helping his teams win ballgames. He could react quicker, hit the ball harder, stay healthy and recover more quickly from fatigue or injury. If I was a teammate of Barry Bonds', it wouldn't bother me that he was using steroids. The guy is hitting getting on base all the time and slugging balls like crazy.
On the other hand, my manager Pete Rose bet on us to win the first two games against San Diego and didn't place a bet on the last two games against them. Not hard to figure out which of his starting pitchers he has confidence in. And it's easy to see that he's going to work his best relievers like crazy during those first two games and they'll get all the rest they want during those last two games. The first two games of that 4-gamer with the Padres will be managed like games 6 & 7 of the World Series, the last two like a split-squad Grapefruit League game against the University of Florida. And all of that so Pete Rose (who makes a very good living as a major league manager) can make an extra $10,000.
Both Bonds and Rose did damage to the game of baseball, but Rose did much more damage to his team through his actions - and non-actions - than did Bonds. And that is the heart of my problem with Pete Rose: in a team sport, he cheated his team. If you must cheat, at least help your team win.
Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!
I'm not sure that you can prove that gambling effected Rose's managing of games. It is pretty certain that Bond's taking of steroids effected his playing of the game. Yeah, maybe players on Bond's team wouldn't be bothered by his use of steroids(unless these are players competing for Bond's job). But what about players on opposing teams? What about pitchers who weren't on the juice who had to pitch to Bonds? What about the relatives of Babe Ruth, Roger Maris, Hank Aaron, and Aaron himself. This guys that took steroids f___ed with the integrity of the game and it's record books. What about kids who've said "Barry Bonds is taking steroids, they all are. Why not me?" and took steroids? All we can prove about Rose is that he placed bets on games. We can't prove he effected the outcome of games to win them. There is no prove he bet against his team.
We can allow greed selfish people in the HOF. We can allow racists in. We can allow people in who cooperated in closing down baseball for an entire season just to get more money. We allow racists, wife beaters, and dog torturers to play in professionals sports. We allow drunks in to the HOF and we allow cheaters in. We can allow all sort of bad people in the HOF, but we can't allow a gambler in even though he may be the best player to ever play the game. Gambling is something millions of people do each day. I honestly feel like Rose is being punished for a crime another group of people commited: the blacksoxs. If the blacksox scandal had never happened, I think Rose would be in the HOF right now and the blacksox scandal is not his fault.
Another thing that bugs me about this that no one ever talks about is how different this whole Rose thing would be if Rose had been African American. Can you imagine the reaction of the African American community if an African American baseball player as good as Rose was given lifetime ban from the game and McGwire wasn't? They'd be outraged and they'd protest and there is no way Rose's ban would still be in place today.
We can't prove he effected the outcome of games to win them. There is no prove he bet against his team.
If Rose was only betting on his team to win, then obviously - it logically must follow - the days he did not place a bet on his team is a bet against. A bet is a statement of confidence - no bet, no confidence.
And again, speaking of logical conclusions - as manager, Rose decides who plays and who doesn't. If Rose has 5,000 riding on Reds vs. Astros, suppose he uses his best reliever for a third straight night when that reliever needs the night off, just in the hope that he can cover his bet? That taints the game and could jeopardize the health of that player or any player he rides too hard in the interests of covering his bets. That's just wrong.
We can allow all sort of bad people in the HOF, but we can't allow a gambler in even though he may be the best player to ever play the game. Gambling is something millions of people do each day.
Do you know why people gamble on sporting events? They gamble on the assumption that they are watching something honest. If those people in 1987 who laid down hard-earned money on the Reds knew the manager of the team did not place a bet on his team on one night or other, do you think they would do the same? Let's say Joe Torre gambled on games, present day. If I knew next season that Joe Torre didn't bet on the Dodgers vs. Brewers, July 11th, I would also not place a bet to that effect. Because I know that Torre believes his team won't get it done that night, and that he will not push as hard for a win when he didn't place a bet.
Did Player X beating his wife or Player Y's racism effect the outcome of baseball games? Highly unlikely. Did Pete Rose, playing certain players on certain days and withholding certain players on other days, effect the outcome of baseball games? Most likely. And he wasn't doing that for the good of the Reds, he was doing it for his own personal gain. Putting his goals ahead of the team.
Pete Rose is not banned from baseball because he gambled. Pete Rose is banned because he broke the rule against gambling.
Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!
well, isn't being banned for breaking the rule against gambling the same as being banned for gambling?
If you can prove for certain that Rose's betting effected the way he managed his team, then I would say the lifetime ban should stick. But I don't think we can prove it for certain, we can only suspect it. Whatever happened to reasonable doubt?
You ask about player x beating his wife or player y's racism effecting the outcome of a game, what about the juicers? Surely it can be argued that they effected the outcomes of games? I'd say the results of any game, where the runs that Bonds or McGwire scored effect the outcome, is in question. They have tainted the most significant records in baseball and are not given a lifetime ban and Rose is. How is that fair?
Whatever happened to reasonable doubt?
Steroid apologists go to this all the time - we are not depriving Pete Rose of rights here. Resaonble doubt is a legal standard, something which must be taken into account before the state deprives a man of his constitutionally recognized rights. No one has the right to enter the Hall of Fame. Yes, Pete Rose's play did merit entry into the HOF in my opinion, but he denied himself entry by breaking baseball's most serious rule.
well, isn't being banned for breaking the rule against gambling the same as being banned for gambling?
Wife-beaters aren't banned from baseball for beating their wives because baseball has no rule expressly forbidding wife-beating. But baseball does have a rule, established long before Rose made the major leagues, against gambling. That is the difference.
But getting back to Rose's style of managing - does it not seem logical that if Rose had a bet riding on a particular game that he would manage it differently? Let's say I managed the Yankees and I bet on them to win tonight against Boston. I've got a one-run lead in the ninth with the heart of the Red Sox order coming up. I shouldn't use Rivera here because he's been overworked lately, but I do have $50,000 riding on it. Why wouldn't I use Rivera? What's three more outs here, two innings there? This is what happens.
Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!
I realize reasonable doubt is only a legal standard, I was referring it to it because we are just assuming Pete Rose changed how he managed his based upon whether or not he had a bet on the game. Should we really ban him for life without solid evidence? As for the steroid apologists, its scientifically clear that taken them with make your stronger and therefor improve your athletic performance. I think it is also clear beyond a reasonable doubt Bonds and McGwire took steroids. McGwire admitted it. As for Bonds, all you have to do is take a look at pictures from when he began his career to when he was breaking records. Its pretty clear was on the juice. As for breaking baseballs most serious rule, shouldn't rules against cheating by taking drugs be just as serious?
I agree with what you say about the use of Rivera in your scenario, maybe Rose did this sort of thing, but maybe he didn't. How can you tell for certain that Rose did that kind of thing?
Hey, first of all my first scenario was a weird hypothetical, that if I was forced to vote between Bonds and Rose, I would vote for Bonds. But if I had a real-world vote, one I could give to (or withhold from) anyone, neither Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, nor any steroid cheat would get my vote. I agree with you that they cheated the game.
How can you tell for certain that Rose did that kind of thing?
I can't. But certainty is not necessary in this case. Since Pete Rose admitted to betting on baseball games, he has kept himself out by breaking the biggest of all baseball rules.
Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!