Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 10/08/2009So no one thought he could get the job done?  That they could pick a guy stuffing his face with a hot dog in the third row to do a comparable job?  Is that your contention?

Taking my point to an absurd conclusion is a logical fallacy on your part, not a robust argument.

Nevertheless, I was kind of just jerking you along. For the most part, your argument about 20 game losers is true. Jack Nabors is an exception.

Your overall mistake, though, is being suckered in by the most outs in postseason history comment. I don't remember who made it, but there was no need to make the 20 losses argument. Jeter's record stands on its own.

It was actually in response to the "losing the most playoff games in history" comment. That's why I thought 20 game losers was relevant.

Nonetheless, SOMEONE believed Jack Nabors was the best option or best chance to win those 30 games. Otherwise, they would have sent him home and brought in another arm to start those games. Which makes my point legit. It wasn't like there were a shortage of men with at least one functional arm in 1916. It's just that the rest of them not pitching in MLB weren't as good a Jack Nabor.

zzzzzzzzzzz

Quote: Originally posted by jvford on 10/08/2009Jeter already has the record for most outs in the postseason.

NUMBAHS DON'T LIE!

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/derek_jeter_honored_for_having?utm_source=facebook_1

OH HELL YEAH!!!!!!

CAPTAIN CLUTCH, *******!!!!!

A-ROID!!!!!!!

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

And my point is that SOMEONE believed he could get the job done. Unless your contention is that America was filled with men who were incapable of throwing a baseball 60'6" with a modicum of accuracy in 1916.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 10/09/2009A-ROID!!!!!!!

You know that King of Clutch, Alex Rodriguez.

You mean besides his mother?

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 10/09/2009And my point is that SOMEONE believed he could get the job done.  Unless your contention is that America was filled with men who were incapable of throwing a baseball 60'6" with a modicum of accuracy in 1916.

You keep ignoring the circumstances. Someone did believe he could get the job done ... for a desperate team. He doesn't touch the majors if that fire sale doesn't occur.

You keep ignoring the facts. There were 16 teams in 1916. Let's just over-ballpark and say 320 pitchers were used that year. It's probably closer to 250 but I'm feeling generous. Nabors pitched more innings than, again a ballpark, 50 of them. So, in the US of A, are you saying that there were no other options beyond that 320/50? That the Athletics couldn't find anyone in America to throw a baseball for money? Is that your contention?

Just to be clear, my point is if you keep getting opportunities, you have a talent that the vast majority of the population doesn't. You might be at the very bottom of your profession but you keep getting opportunities because there are no better options.