And....booyah, got to page 6!

"My point was, it doesn't take a genius to understand this game, evidenced by so called veterans who are hovering at .500 or under and new players that are hovering at .500 or under."

Wow.  That's just really brilliant insight.

Let me quickly point out two things for you to consider.

1)  Take 32 "so called veterans" and put them together in a single world . . . would you expect all of them to play above .500?  Please explain that to me how that would be possible, mathematically.

2)  New guys come into worlds and pick up teams that were built by the previous owner.  Sometimes, those teams are already built to compete immediately.  Sometimes, new guys actually have winning records, even win division titles, in their first couple of seasons.  Sometimes, just by showing up and displaying minimal skills to keep the lineups and pitching staffs OK. 

So in short: looking at a very narrow slice of results from one or two owners, without understanding the context of those results, can be pretty misleading.  And it would be pretty foolish to believe that you can draw definitive conclusions from them.

Evidently you have a reading comprehension issue to go with your inflated sense of understanding.    I said, on the previous page, that I don't think I need to know pretty much all I need to know despite 70+ seasons.

Posted by rangerup on 4/1/2011 4:59:00 PM (view original):
Tec is a total dick, he still doesn't get it, and has become so wrapped up in protecting his initial embarassing reaction to the question it has now gone into the realm of entertaining just to see what asinine thing he will say next. 

Teccywerger running around in all his infinite wisdom, the venerable veteran, with three teams all with losing records and zero championships in his many years of really cracking down and learning the game.  He should open up a blog and teach us the finer aspects.

Actually...you're flat out lying man. Sorry. Admit that you thought they meant something and that you actually learned something in this thread.

Then, we'll call you an *** for lying, and THEN we can call tec a dick.  Then and only then.

Posted by rangerup on 3/31/2011 1:24:00 PM (view original):
I have seen pitchers that sport a 'nuck' in their arsenal of pitches.

Has anyone ever had or seen a true knuckleballer that was good?  Say (for simplicity Mike123456) a starting pitcher with OVR 80+ with only a knuckleball and fastball or something, with the 'nuck' rated as the major pitch?

I get why people read this as ranger up thinking the type of pitch is important to the sim, but I still do not think that interpretation is necessary or the only correct reading. Calling him a liar is just interpretive hubris.

Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2011 11:20:00 PM (view original):
If he had prefaced the initial post with "I know that pitch names are not relevant, but . . . " then this entire thread would have ended on page one.  But he didn't, and both he and isack24 then became all defensive and dickish.  So here we are.

Yeah, I get that too, which is why I only commented on the periphery in this thread. If he had said," I have seen players from NYC before, but none who were good, has anyone seen a player from NYC who is truly a good player," would you have assumed he thought player hometown's are relevant? I think because he was discussing pitch type it shaded your interpretation, which is fine, just saying that calling him a liar, and this was not directed toward you, might be a bit unwarranted because of the textual ambiguity.

I agree with ted. There's nothing in the OP that says ranger believes pitch type is at all important to the sim. It's easy enough to infer it, but it's not actually there.

Of course my opinion might be colored by the fact that I had a somewhat similar spat with tec a while ago when I mentioned having success with 'sinkerballers', even though I put the word in quotes and explicitly defined it as a pitcher with very high P1 and GB ratings. He still immediately assumed I was referring to the pitch type.

It was a while ago, so I don't think I can check. Perhaps it was someone else.

Posted by rangerup on 3/31/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There would be if said pitcher has however many pitches and the first one listed on his card as a knuckleball and P1 was rated the highest of all his pitches.  Maybe the question was too hard to grasp.

He does seem to insist that a "true knuckleballer" can exist in HBD. 

Posted by rangerup on 3/31/2011 1:33:00 PM (view original):
The whole game is cosmetic, the only thing that matters is the numbers.  I get that.  I'm assuming the answer is no then?

This was the fourth post of the entire thread.  I don't think there's much to infer.

she's got a knuckleball for ya.

Yep.  The post I quoted was AFTER that one.   And that post seems to insist a "true knuckleballer" can exist in HBD.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/3/2011 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Yep.  The post I quoted was AFTER that one.   And that post seems to insist a "true knuckleballer" can exist in HBD.

That's the problem. In one second he says its cosmetic and in the next he seems to believe that it isn't. He has no idea what he's doing.