On 13 Oct 2012 06:56:10 GMT, Band Beyond Desu <t...@aiko.com> wrote:
>Let's just all agree that the Nationals have all of the pieces in place for
>a longer run in 2013...
Agreed! Hopefully. Of course, no guarantees, but the Nats are the
second youngest team (and youngest credible team... Astros don't
count) in MLB. They did what they did this year with an amazing
amount of injuries; gotta be healthier next year, too.
Quite a letdown last night, though, esp. after the epic victory on
Thursday.
bzl...@aaool.com wrote:
> Band Beyond Desu wrote:
>> Let's just all agree that the Nationals have all of the pieces in place for
>> a longer run in 2013...
> Agreed! Hopefully. Of course, no guarantees, but the Nats are the
> second youngest team (and youngest credible team... Astros don't
> count) in MLB. They did what they did this year with an amazing
> amount of injuries; gotta be healthier next year, too.
> Quite a letdown last night, though, esp. after the epic victory on
> Thursday.
Congrats to the pesky Nats on a fine season and a big Cardinal
thanks for making possible the greatest comeback in the history
of Major League Baseball elimination games.
<kenfortenbe...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>bzl...@aaool.com wrote:
>> Band Beyond Desu wrote:
>>> Let's just all agree that the Nationals have all of the pieces in place for
>>> a longer run in 2013...
>> Agreed! Hopefully. Of course, no guarantees, but the Nats are the
>> second youngest team (and youngest credible team... Astros don't
>> count) in MLB. They did what they did this year with an amazing
>> amount of injuries; gotta be healthier next year, too.
>> Quite a letdown last night, though, esp. after the epic victory on
>> Thursday.
>Congrats to the pesky Nats on a fine season and a big Cardinal
>thanks for making possible the greatest comeback in the history
>of Major League Baseball elimination games.
>On to Frisco, four done, eight to go. 12 in '12 !
Man, I really think the Nats would've taken it to the Giants. We
dominated them during the regular season. So close...
I've got no problem with the Cards. Great team; those relievers are
all just flame throwers. (Wainwright is a dick, but what are ya gonna
do...)
Their fans are pretty easy to be around, too... esp. compared to rest
of NL East. Knowledgeable and polite. One traveling Cards fan called
in to the post-game talk show last night, and was so gracious saying
how much they enjoyed the park, fans, town here; took it as a
compliment.
On Friday, October 12, 2012 11:56:11 PM UTC-7, Band Beyond Desu wrote:
> Let's just all agree that the Nationals have all of the pieces in place for
> a longer run in 2013...
As Ken F knows I am no fan of the Cards but I am glad they won. Rizzo is an asshole. The whole point is to win. Put your best team on the field and do not hold a guy back when he wants to play.
2 Beers at the Giants ballpark were $19.00.
That really sums up the state of baseball today...
Just for THAT, I'm rooting for the Gnats..
Go Gnats <whoops>
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 13:53:58 -0700 (PDT), DanPopp <danp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Friday, October 12, 2012 11:56:11 PM UTC-7, Band Beyond Desu wrote:
>> Let's just all agree that the Nationals have all of the pieces in place for
>> a longer run in 2013...
>As Ken F knows I am no fan of the Cards but I am glad they won. Rizzo is an asshole. The whole point is to win. Put your best team on the field and do not hold a guy back when he wants to play.
I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e.
Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
and the individual.
Very strange; I think these people have been brainwashed by the sports
media.
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 3:29:08 PM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote:
> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e. > Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
> and the individual.
Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 18:22:11 -0700 (PDT), amuraw...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Saturday, October 13, 2012 3:29:08 PM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote:
>> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
>> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e. >> Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
>> and the individual.
>Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
Yes it was. History will prove it. No way Strasburg would have made
a difference this year, that much I am certain. He was wearing out...
getting shelled fairly regularly before he got shut down. Somehow he
was gonna morph into Justin Verlander in the playoffs? Sure.
> >> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
> >> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e. > >> Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
> >> and the individual.
> >Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
> Yes it was. History will prove it. No way Strasburg would have made
> a difference this year, that much I am certain. He was wearing out...
> getting shelled fairly regularly before he got shut down. Somehow he
> was gonna morph into Justin Verlander in the playoffs? Sure.
The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
bzl...@aaool.com wrote:
> amuraw...@gmail.com wrote:
>> bzlrbi wrote:
>>> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
>>> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e.
>>> Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
>>> and the individual.
>> Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
> Yes it was. History will prove it. No way Strasburg would have made
> a difference this year, that much I am certain. He was wearing out...
> getting shelled fairly regularly before he got shut down. Somehow he
> was gonna morph into Justin Verlander in the playoffs? Sure.
Adam Wainwright had the same surgery at the same time as Strasburg.
Wainwright didn't really help the Cards much in Game 5. I don't
know which team had the right approach but I can't find fault with
either one.
> > >> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
> > >> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e.
> > >> Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
> > >> and the individual.
> > >Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
> > Yes it was. History will prove it. No way Strasburg would have made
> > a difference this year, that much I am certain. He was wearing out...
> > getting shelled fairly regularly before he got shut down. Somehow he
> > was gonna morph into Justin Verlander in the playoffs? Sure.
> The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
DanPopp wrote:
> amur...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
> He's very right you know.....
No he's not. There is a rhythm to starting pitching and that rhythm
involves pitching for as long you're effective every five days. If
you're gonna shut a guy down after X number of innings you shut him
down after X number of REAL innings, not after coddling him through
a bunch of short starts and extra rest.
It's obvious neither one of you guys knows shit from shinola about
starting pitching. From the Cub fan, that's understandable.
> >> The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
> > He's very right you know.....
> No he's not. There is a rhythm to starting pitching and that rhythm
> involves pitching for as long you're effective every five days. If
> you're gonna shut a guy down after X number of innings you shut him
> down after X number of REAL innings, not after coddling him through
> a bunch of short starts and extra rest.
> It's obvious neither one of you guys knows shit from shinola about
> starting pitching. From the Cub fan, that's understandable.
> --
> Ken Fortenberry
My comment was about the second sentence not the first. I should have made that clear.
DanPopp wrote:
> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> DanPopp wrote:
>>> amur...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
>>> He's very right you know.....
>> No he's not. There is a rhythm to starting pitching and that rhythm
>> involves pitching for as long you're effective every five days. If
>> you're gonna shut a guy down after X number of innings you shut him
>> down after X number of REAL innings, not after coddling him through
>> a bunch of short starts and extra rest.
>> It's obvious neither one of you guys knows shit from shinola about
>> starting pitching. From the Cub fan, that's understandable.
> My comment was about the second sentence not the first. I should have made that clear.
I agree wholeheartedly with the second sentence so long as
the emphasis is on titleS, plural. Even if you want to argue
that shutting down Strasburg cost the Nats the title this year
it's hard to find fault with an organization protecting one of
their most valuable assets for the long haul.
On Sunday, October 14, 2012 12:12:18 PM UTC-7, Ken Fortenberry wrote:
> No he's not. There is a rhythm to starting pitching and that rhythm
> involves pitching for as long you're effective every five days. If
> you're gonna shut a guy down after X number of innings you shut him
> down after X number of REAL innings, not after coddling him through > a bunch of short starts and extra rest.
> It's obvious neither one of you guys knows shit from shinola about
> starting pitching. From the Cub fan, that's understandable.
Sorry man. After your amazing acceptance speech at Cooperstown last season, I'll defer to your expertise.
> >>>> The major fuckup is not shutting down Strasburg after however many innings he was shutdown after, it is allowing him to get to that many innings way before the playoffs. If you're not playing to win titles, why the fuck even play?
> >>> He's very right you know.....
> >> No he's not. There is a rhythm to starting pitching and that rhythm
> >> involves pitching for as long you're effective every five days. If
> >> you're gonna shut a guy down after X number of innings you shut him
> >> down after X number of REAL innings, not after coddling him through
> >> a bunch of short starts and extra rest.
> >> It's obvious neither one of you guys knows shit from shinola about
> >> starting pitching. From the Cub fan, that's understandable.
> > My comment was about the second sentence not the first. I should have made that clear.
> I agree wholeheartedly with the second sentence so long as
> the emphasis is on titleS, plural. Even if you want to argue
> that shutting down Strasburg cost the Nats the title this year
> it's hard to find fault with an organization protecting one of
> their most valuable assets for the long haul.
> --
> Ken Fortenberry
Fault is found in not giving it your all when (presumably) one wants to win the world series.
DanPopp wrote:
> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> I agree wholeheartedly with the second sentence so long as
>> the emphasis is on titleS, plural. Even if you want to argue
>> that shutting down Strasburg cost the Nats the title this year
>> it's hard to find fault with an organization protecting one of
>> their most valuable assets for the long haul.
> Fault is found in not giving it your all when (presumably) one wants to win the world series.
I guess we define "all" differently. To my way of thinking the Nats
did give it their all. They announced Strasburg's limits very early
on and they stuck to it. Whether I agree or disagree, I can't find
fault.
Corky wrote:
> Phil, Weir and Tim Flannery are singing the National Anthem tonight here in San Francisco. (Only a dumb shit calls it Frisco).
> Lets' Go Giants!!!!
Perhaps somewhere in Frisco those guys are singing the anthem
but at the Frisco ballpark it was Jose Feliciano.
On Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:02:39 PM UTC-7, Ken Fortenberry wrote:
> DanPopp wrote:
> > Ken Fortenberry wrote:
> >> I agree wholeheartedly with the second sentence so long as
> >> the emphasis is on titleS, plural. Even if you want to argue
> >> that shutting down Strasburg cost the Nats the title this year
> >> it's hard to find fault with an organization protecting one of
> >> their most valuable assets for the long haul.
> > Fault is found in not giving it your all when (presumably) one wants to win the world series.
> I guess we define "all" differently. To my way of thinking the Nats
> did give it their all. They announced Strasburg's limits very early
> on and they stuck to it. Whether I agree or disagree, I can't find
> fault.
> Ken Fortenberry
If they knew they were going to limit his innings, why have him start the season in April? Do you win championships at the start of the year or the end of the year? I forget...
<amuraw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:02:39 PM UTC-7, Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> DanPopp wrote:
>> > Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> >> I agree wholeheartedly with the second sentence so long as
>> >> the emphasis is on titleS, plural. Even if you want to argue
>> >> that shutting down Strasburg cost the Nats the title this year
>> >> it's hard to find fault with an organization protecting one of
>> >> their most valuable assets for the long haul.
>> > Fault is found in not giving it your all when (presumably) one wants
>to win the world series.
>> I guess we define "all" differently. To my way of thinking the Nats
>> did give it their all. They announced Strasburg's limits very early
>> on and they stuck to it. Whether I agree or disagree, I can't find
>> fault.
>> Ken Fortenberry
>If they knew they were going to limit his innings, why have him start
>the season in April? Do you win championships at the start of the year
>or the end of the year? I forget...
Well...nobody ever really expected the Nats to go this far this year. They've
never even had a winning record. We were hoping that with Strasburg back for most of the season we'd end up with a respectable, slightly-over-.500
record. "We're saving him for the playoffs" would have sounded ridiculous back in April.
Jim
-- *********************************************************
Jim McVey jmc...@panix.com
*********************************************************
>> On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 18:22:11 -0700 (PDT), amuraw...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 3:29:08 PM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote:
>>>> I continue to be amazed how mad people get over a GM of a team they
>>>> have no interest in, while those with an actual vested interest (i.e.
>>>> Nats fans) are very supportive of doing the right thing for the team
>>>> and the individual.
>>> Yeah, sure. But that wasn't the right thing for the team or the individual.
>> Yes it was. History will prove it. No way Strasburg would have made
>> a difference this year, that much I am certain. He was wearing out...
>> getting shelled fairly regularly before he got shut down. Somehow he
>> was gonna morph into Justin Verlander in the playoffs? Sure.
>I agree on Stras and on Rizzo; no one in town thinks ill of them (or at >least Rizzo). On another front, how many World Series tix you buying, >Beez?
>Nationals fans received information about buying World Series tickets >on Saturday morning
>By Kevin Kaduk | Big League Stew – 22 hours ago
>Q: What's the only thing worse than heading to bed after your favorite >team just suffered the indignity of losing the biggest lead in a >postseason elimination game in baseball history?
>A: Waking up to find that, due to a "stunningly stupid" error by a >third party, World Series tickets for your favorite team will be going >on sale soon.
>No, this is not a joke. Check out what Washington Nationals season >ticket holders found in their email inboxes at 7 a.m. on Saturday, just >hours after the team had been eliminated from the postseason by blowing >a six-run lead in a stunning 9-7 loss to the St. Louis Cardinals in >Game 5 of the NLDS on Friday night.
>As Nats Enquirer put it, this must have been "soul crushing" for any >loyal Nats fan:
>(@NatsEnquirer)
>As one of our tipsters pointed out, this is a true "Natinals" moment if >there ever was one. But Dan Steinberg of DC Sports Bog made a few calls >and found out that the team wasn't at fault. The email actually came >from Major League Baseball, which forgot to shut down its automated >message after the Cardinals made their ninth-inning comeback.
>"It was a stunningly stupid error on our part and we apologize to the >Nationals and their great fans," Bob Bowman, CEO of MLB Advanced Media, >told Steinberg.
>Hey, why not send out a Super Bowl offer for the Redskins or regular >season tickets for the Washington Capitals while you're at it, Bob? You >know, once you're done with your virtual tee-peeing of Nats' fans email >addresses?
>All of which actually leads me to a funny thought: Do you think there's >a poor Nationals fan out there who went to bed assuming the team won, >woke up to this email seemingly confirming that news and is making >plans to watch the NLCS right now?
We got that email. What a fucking drag it was to see that. :-(
Jim
-- *********************************************************
Jim McVey jmc...@panix.com
*********************************************************
