ChiliIrishHammock24

Escobar is 1/3. Mitchell is 2/3. All singles.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 03:27 PM) J4L brought him up, and you said that both him and Morel dominated, and yes blanketing both of them into the same category is laughable. Only because you are hung up on the choice of word and the connotation you are giving it. That's why I decided to say "successful" so you would stop focusing on the adjective and more about the fact that Morel continued his offensive "insert whatever adjective helps bigruss sleep at night" from the AFL to the next season. That's the whole idea here, yet we have wasted a page or so because you don't like the adjective used.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 03:13 PM) It's a valid point, you said both player's dominated, which is simply not true. If you think an .850 OPS is dominating everything you said should be taken with a grain of salt. How Mike Stanton is in this argument at all makes no sense to me. And the fact that dominance has to be tied to one person instead being a blanket adjective is just laughable to me. Semantics, semantics, semantics.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 03:08 PM) If you think successful = dominant than why even bother talking about a player's performance? Ohhh boy, nevermind. Clearly we are not going to make a connection here.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 02:58 PM) Just because you dominate in the AFL doesn't mean it will carryover. Case in point, Flowers, Retherford, etc. The AFL has almost always been a hitting dominant league, as most star pitching prospect aren't sent there. Right, but it works both ways. You guys brought up a guy who was good in the AFL, but not the following year, and I brought up a guy who was good in the AFL and then good the following year. My example is just as valid as yours.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 02:55 PM) There is a difference between domination and a player who did well. If you can't see that than I don't know what to say. There are multiple players who dominated, Stanton being one of them. Then there are guys like Morel who played well, but in no way did he dominate (good average and decent power, but that doesn't mean he dominated at all). All you are arguing at this point is semantics. Choose whatever adjective you really want to describe success, and the point still stands that he was "successful" in the AFL, and "successful" in the minors the following year.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 01:41 PM) I'm about 100% sure it was the coach. It looked just like him and he was trying to teach Kenny a lesson that he learned the hard way. Yeah, it looked JUST like him, but I was wondering if they were going to allude to his dad being a former pitcher too. Or maybe his dad actually had a picture on that very same wall, and they will come back to that later.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) My point is I can't talk to some of y'all about our minor leaguers. Then I'll say something and a mod will threaten to suspend me. On what planet did Brent f***ing Morel dominate? My point is that Brent Morel was hailed as "all defense" non-prospect. Then he went to the AFL, dominated offensively, and then next year in the minors, continued to dominate offensively. Point being that his AFL success carried over to the next season, and now Morel is a legit prospect in baseball. Just because it's the AFL does not mean a player who succeeded won't succeed in the following season.... case in point, Brent Morel. So take your Mike Stanton references elsewhere because he is completely irrelevant to this conversation.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 12:53 PM) .313 .442 .729 1.171 vs. .322 .359 .480 .839 Ummm...yea, one dominated, and one played well. I don't know how the hell this turned into Morel vs. Stanton, or how only 1 player can be described as dominant. Is only the best player "dominant" and the rest are just "good"?? Makes no sense. Just because they both dominated in the minors doesn't mean they are equal.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 12:48 PM) LOL really? ........ *crickets*

It was a very predictable "twist" that Eduardo Sanchez was his dad, but I am interested to see where this goes. When the coach showed him the picture of that ambidextrous pitcher, it very much seemed that that pitcher is the coach, but who knows, maybe that was supposed to be Kenny's dad.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 12:04 PM) Dominate? Damn. What would u call what Mike Stanton did? Mike Stanton dominated too, so what's your point?

Just started getting into Terriers, and I really like it.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Oct 19, 2010 -> 10:43 AM) C.J. Retherford says hi. And Brent Morel would like to kindly point out how he won the batting title there last year, and went on to dominate the minors this year.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 05:56 PM) I want nothing to do with young players. Fixed your post.

I really like that he is a switch hitter too. When was the last time the Sox had a decent switch hitter that wasn't 40+ years old? (Swisher sucked). Too bad he plays SS though. We are pretty well set/deep at 2B, SS, and 3B.

Escobar is 3/4 with a 3-run HR, SB Mitchell is 1/4 with an RBI 3B.

Mitchell went 1/2 with 2 BB tonight. Still no Phegley.

Ouch, Mitchell has been pretty bad the last couple days, and how about that outing for Mabee? Yikes, good thing he is a nobody.

How can that guy suggest Rasmus for Stanton? That's insane.

‎"The times, they are a changing. There is no room in this fast paced world for an old school Venezuelan notario like myself. Hasta tus sueños." - Taco, The League. AHAHAHAHAHA. f***ing hilarious episode. Best one of the new season.

QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 03:05 PM) I'm not a huge fan of the show. The language and stuff just gets old and unfunny after awhile. I loved the Hulk Hogan entrance though. But would you say you hate the show? That's my point.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 04:00 PM) I think you just have to watch it all the way through. It's a very small time commitment since there are only 6 episodes in season 1 and they're 30 minutes each. It's a love it or hate it kind of show from what I've gathered from people. I agree w/ him needing to watch the show all the way through, but I disagree w/ people saying it's a love/hate show. I have yet to meet ANYONE who dislikes the show. Just like The League, it's a sport show that everyone I have come in contact loves (the ones that have seen the show, that is)

No Mitchell today.

Mitchell went 0-3, 2 Ks, and 1 BB. Ewww.