3 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Agreed that it wasn't a court of law, but these are the same evaluators that basically banned a CY Young winner for life. I don't believe they had any reason to protect Mike Clevinger - the king of mediocrity.

They also had Marcel Ozuna in the Home Run Derby.

4 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Neither of us know how those bruises were caused. 

Dude, seriously, cut the BS. You also don't know that "by all evidence, he didn't do what he was accused of". By all the evidence, MLB decided they didn't want to pursue further discipline. Clevinger could still be an incredibly selfish and shitty human being, and still not clear the bar for banishment. 

 

3 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

What do you think this proves? 

As with most abusers, that there's always more than one. That the White Sox should have stayed away from this guy and I will never let Chris Getz live this choice down.

2 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Dude, seriously, cut the BS. You also don't know that "by all evidence, he didn't do what he was accused of". By all the evidence, MLB decided they didn't want to pursue further discipline. Clevinger could still be an incredibly selfish and shitty human being, and still not clear the bar for banishment. 

 

MLB is full of selfish and shitty humans. Part of being a professional athlete is an exhibition of narcissistic and psychopathic attributes. This is well known, established and celebrated. Aaron Rodgers is a sociopath. Joe Montana is a sociopath. That doesn't make them criminals. There's literally no evidence of Mike Clevinger being an abuser other than accusations of an ex. By that metric, most exes are abusers according to family court. 

8 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Accusations aren't evidence. That's the logic America used to hang every black man accused of SA before 1964. We've established due process for a reason, and part of that is protecting people that we presume are pieces of s%*#.

Testifying under oath is evidence. Just stop. Are you seriously comparing a guy who abused his child and baby mama with innocent people who were hung for no reason as acts of terrorism? 

I really don't get why some guys dig in on this. This isn't "bros before hoes". If you don't believe that testifying under oath is evidence, you just blew your weepy "due process" BS out of the water. 

6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

As with most abusers, that there's always more than one. That the White Sox should have stayed away from this guy and I will never let Chris Getz live this choice down.

In that case, you should focus on Omar Vizquel and Getz support of him.

3 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Testifying under oath is evidence. Just stop. Are you seriously comparing a guy who abused his child and baby mama with innocent people who were hung for no reason as acts of terrorism? 

I really don't get why some guys dig in on this. This isn't "bros before hoes". If you don't believe that testifying under oath is evidence, you just blew your weepy "due process" BS out of the water. 

Testimony is evidence? Good luck with that. There's a reason Clevinger is still eligible to pitch, and it sure as hell isn't because he's so good that he's protected. I'm sorry, but you guys are just wrong here. MLB banned Bauer, who was way better and had a way higher profile, yet they're protecting Mike fucking Clevinger? Gmab.

11 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Agreed that it wasn't a court of law, but these are the same evaluators that basically banned a CY Young winner for life. I don't believe they had any reason to protect Mike Clevinger - the king of mediocrity.

Trevor Bauer choked a woman until she passed out, then he beat her up. He also admitted to all of that on a monitored phone call. However, MLB didn't find Bauer "guilty". MLB found that his behavior exceed their threshold for tolerance. People don't want to take their kids to a ball game and have their 7-year-old girl root for a guy who chokes a woman til she passes out, then beats her up. 

MLB made a business decision with Bauer, just as they did with Clevinger. 

5 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Testimony is evidence? Good luck with that. There's a reason Clevinger is still eligible to pitch, and it sure as hell isn't because he's so good that he's protected. I'm sorry, but you guys are just wrong here. MLB banned Bauer, who was way better and had a way higher profile, yet they're protecting Mike fucking Clevinger? Gmab.

Good luck? What are you even talking about? Do you understand why they have a witness stand in court? Because testimony is evidence. I'm getting the feeling you're playing a bro-dude word game, here. It's not my job to make you acknowledge reality. 

Nobody said that MLB was "protecting" Clevinger. This all seems to be hitting you in a personal way, because you're not making sense. 

6 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Trevor Bauer choked a woman until she passed out, then he beat her up. He also admitted to all of that on a monitored phone call. However, MLB didn't find Bauer "guilty". MLB found that his behavior exceed their threshold for tolerance. People don't want to take their kids to a ball game and have their 7-year-old girl root for a guy who chokes a woman til she passes out, then beats her up. 

MLB made a business decision with Bauer, just as they did with Clevinger. 

Yet Bauer has never faced a conviction and won every civil suit. Clevinger has also never been charged or convicted of a crime. The facts simply don't favor you guys. 

2 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Good luck? What are you even talking about? Do you understand why they have a witness stand in court? Because testimony is evidence. I'm getting the feeling you're playing a bro-dude word game, here. It's not my job to make you acknowledge reality. 

Nobody said that MLB was "protecting" Clevinger. This all seems to be hitting you in a personal way, because you're not making sense. 

Reality is that Clevinger has never been convicted of a crime and MLB has found no evidence to back any accusations. As such, he's faced no jail time or bans.

1 minute ago, TaylorStSox said:

Reality is that Clevinger has never been convicted of a crime and MLB has found no evidence to back any accusations. As such, he's faced no jail time or bans.

Please kindly share for me The MLB report that said "There is no evidence to back any accusations" as you have made a very specific defense claim here.

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Please kindly share for me The MLB report that said "There is no evidence to back any accusations" as you have made a very specific defense claim here.

That's not how this works in America. In America, one has to prove an accusation, not the other way around. Had MLB disciplined Clevinger, I'd be right there behind you, but they never did, because he didn't actually do the things he was accused of. 

Thankfully I live in a world where the pointy hats aren't able to just hang people at will. I live in a world where people are afforded the right to defend themselves. Maybe you guys will get your chance if Project 2025 comes to fruition.

20 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

That's not how this works in America. In America, one has to prove an accusation, not the other way around. Had MLB disciplined Clevinger, I'd be right there behind you, but they never did, because he didn't actually do the things he was accused of. 

Thankfully I live in a world where the pointy hats aren't able to just hang people at will. I live in a world where people are afforded the right to defend themselves. Maybe you guys will get your chance if Project 2025 comes to fruition.

Thats not what you claimed though. You claimed that there was “no evidence” and  “MLb has found no evidence.” Prove it. Show me where they said there is no evidnece. Please prove to me he didn’t, show me the report saying he didn’t.

You are claiming you are certain of innocence. This is far beyond “not suspended.” I believe this is bullshit and you are lying. Most domestic violence cases are hard to prove because they’re he said she said cases, but you are telling me there is affirmative proof it did not happen and she lied. Give it to us, or you’re lying.

This thread should be called

Bad Ideas Continue.  Getz makes Birmingham Better

7 minutes ago, kitekrazy said:

This thread should be called

Bad Ideas Continue.  Getz makes Birmingham Better

Or Balta, The Pro Bono Prosecuting Attorney Strikes Again

It’s interesting how the same poster who accused other posters on this site of “circle jerking around shitting on kids just because they play for the Chicago White Sox” is also a staunch defender of Mike Clevinger.

God forbid some posters may not think that Samuel Zavala will amount to anything but don’t throw baseless accusations around about Clevinger!

Anyways, please point me in the correct direction of the “FIRE GETZ” circle jerk.  I brought enough Jergens for everyone…

7 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

This thread should be called

Bad Ideas Continue.  Getz makes Birmingham Better

I thought you were finding a new team to root for?

This thread keeps getting better.

can’t wait for the Orioles fans to come douse it with gasoline

11 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Here’s the thing - aside from Getz, who made it personal first by accepting the job and second by rewarding a player for beating up women which apparently he is a huge fan of - saying “Drew Thorpe will not succeed with a strikeout rate worse than late career Jamie Moyer and a walk rate 3x that high” isn’t personal at all. Saying “Colson Montgomery had a terrible season and counting on him as your opening day SS is a clear mistake” is a well supported opinion. But daring to point this out gets you described as part of a “circle jerk”. 

So who is being cool and edgy?

 

10 hours ago, TaylorStSox said:

I'm not trying to change any minds. I'm just existing with you as a Sox fan with a different take, and stating my opinions. Yeah, I think it sucks that this site has become a refuge for a guy that openly rooted for Cleveland in 2005, and I wish it was still as funny and light hearted as it was in the past, but I still find it a valuable place for Sox fans. I don't dislike any of you. I just present a different, optimistic viewpoint of the team. Like I said, we disagree about just about everything, but I'd still let you buy me a beer.

Speaking of the good ol days, you put me in the camp of agreeing with Balta.  That should pretty much tell you that you are out in left field on this one.  For some reason you have decided to be the old man lecturing everyone how things should be, and how they used to be.  We get it you are different.  That quit being interesting like 10 lectures ago.  We are going to be beneath you over here.  If you feel the need to lecture, let the feeling pass. 

aka the Gran Torino thread

I can understand they were stuck with him last year but bringing him back is where the issues lies and shows Getz isn't very good at his job. 

13 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

By all evidence? TELL ME WHAT THE BRUISES ARE.

There’s no way to even confirm the identity of the subject of these photos let alone what the sources of those marks were

13 hours ago, WestEddy said:

Too many guys are too comfortable pretending that a victim of abuse testifying under oath isn't evidence. 

According to MLB’s statement: “The comprehensive investigation included interviews of more than 15 individuals, in addition to Mr. Clevinger and the complainant, as well as a review of available documents, such as thousands of electronic communication records.“

So your position is the evidence of the testimony of one individual outweighs the testimony of more than 15 others along with thousands of documents? Seems like one elephant in the room is substantially more massive than the other here

Edited October 10, 20241 yr by 46DidIt

1 hour ago, Harry Chappas said:

I can understand they were stuck with him last year but bringing him back is where the issues lies and shows Getz isn't very good at his job. 

[ding]