I never said that in this thread.

Did you say it ever?

I have no idea, unless it was quoted, what you said in this thread before today.

Nonetheless, I'm sure you'll ask me to find the post you made where you said it. Or something similiar. I'm not inclined to do that. But everyone who's been around for a few years know you did and it's the reason you're the butt of jokes relating to "I have stats" or "I don't watch games."

So you admit that you're trying to change the subject of the discussion from "an out is an out?"

When you think of me, are you just hard, or do you actually finish in your pants?

Do you think you have to watch every play of every game to evaluate players?

Or do you use stats?

I think you've tried to change the subject. As I said a couple of days ago an out is an out. Until it isn't. You've admitted that some "outs", even the ones that look like outs in the box score but aren't, are more productive than whiffs in specific situations. You're still working under the premise of "it all evens out" when EVERYONE ELSE is arguing games/series. And it doesn't "all even out" in games series.

How often, per day, do you think of my *****?

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2016 2:03:00 PM (view original):
I think you've tried to change the subject. As I said a couple of days ago an out is an out. Until it isn't. You've admitted that some "outs", even the ones that look like outs in the box score but aren't, are more productive than whiffs in specific situations. You're still working under the premise of "it all evens out" when EVERYONE ELSE is arguing games/series. And it doesn't "all even out" in games series.

How often, per day, do you think of my *****?

And I've said, over and over again, that there are obviously situations where you'd prefer a fly out to a pop out, or a strikeout to a ground out.

And zero.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:00:00 PM (view original):
So you admit that you're trying to change the subject of the discussion from "an out is an out?"

When you think of me, are you just hard, or do you actually finish in your pants?

This right here is proof that you're a liar.

You were OBVIOUSLY thinking of my ***** when you typed this.

So, I'll ask again. How many times, per day, do you think of my *****?

It's kind of hard to avoid it when you start ******* all over the place anytime I post.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Do you think you have to watch every play of every game to evaluate players?

Or do you use stats?

?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:15:00 PM (view original):
It's kind of hard to avoid it when you start ******* all over the place anytime I post.

So you're changing the number of times per day you think about my ***** from zero to a higher number? How high is this number? Triple digits?

You're kinda creepy.

I'm just trying to avoid your ****.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Do you think you have to watch every play of every game to evaluate players?

Or do you use stats?

?

No answer?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Do you think you have to watch every play of every game to evaluate players?

Or do you use stats?

?

I'll answer this and put you back on block because, not surprisingly, this went exactly the same as it did two years ago when I decided to block you.

I only "evaluate" players in two situations. Mostly because who really gives a **** how I, or you, evaluate a player? Kenny Lofton and family do not give a rat's *** that you think he should be in the HOF and I think he should have to buy a ticket to view the monuments of the greats. Nor does anyone else unless it's tec and that's only because he likes to make fun of you.

1. This forum.
2. At a bar.

Both instances require blowhards who think they know more than the other guy. At a bar, it's usually a drunk just looking to argue. Here, it's just you looking to argue. At a bar, it's alcohol-fueled. Here, it's boredom and free time. But, at both, it's a HUGE waste of time because the other guy isn't changing his mind. For me, it's pointless discussion because I have nothing else to do. For others, it means something.

Anyway, I watch the CWS. I'm not evaluating Jimmy Doolittle, C-TCU. I'm watching the game. If Jimmy does something well, I might say "He hit behind the runner. Good on him." If he strikes out, I might say "He's gotta hit behind the runner if he hopes to play past this level." Then, on the odd chance I'm discussing Jimmy later, I might say "******* Joe Dowhat, the catcher for TCU, struck out with a runner on 2nd with 0 outs. If he just puts that ball in play, TCU might have won." And I never mention Jimmy/Joe or that AB again. But I ENJOYED watching the game. It wasn't about "evaluating" anyone. Scouts and drunks do that. I'm just trying to enjoy a baseball game.