Poor stupid BL

Posted by tecwrg on 10/14/2017 10:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/14/2017 9:27:00 PM (view original):
Of course not, they were very good at avoiding outs.

Better than every other team in the AL.

I'm guessing they made, on average, 24 or 27 outs a game.

Just like every other team.

Would they have scored more or fewer runs if more of their 24/27 outs per game were via strike out?

Feel free to consult John Smoltz if needed.

I used to think you were playing dumb so you could argue in bad faith. I've changed my mind. You aren't pretending to be stupid.

I'm talking about the rate at which they make outs. The Astros were better than every other team at reaching base. That's why they scored more runs.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:14:00 PM (view original):

Because they put the ball in play better than every other team. Could you be more dense?

Wait wait wait...are you arguing that a ball in play is better than a strikeout?

Posted by bad_luck on 10/14/2017 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:14:00 PM (view original):

Because they put the ball in play better than every other team. Could you be more dense?

Wait wait wait...are you arguing that a ball in play is better than a strikeout?

I think it's pretty clear what my position is on that and you're a moron if you think I'm getting sucked back into starting that whole debate again. If you've forgotten, there's a 50+ page thread you can go read to get caught up.

In regards to the Astros, they got on base more than any other team in part due to the fact that they put balls in play at a higher rate. You're the probability guy...which is more likely to get someone on base: a strikeout or a ball in play?

A ball in play could result in a double play, right? Worse than a strikeout, no?

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/14/2017 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:14:00 PM (view original):

Because they put the ball in play better than every other team. Could you be more dense?

Wait wait wait...are you arguing that a ball in play is better than a strikeout?

I think it's pretty clear what my position is on that and you're a moron if you think I'm getting sucked back into starting that whole debate again. If you've forgotten, there's a 50+ page thread you can go read to get caught up.

In regards to the Astros, they got on base more than any other team in part due to the fact that they put balls in play at a higher rate. You're the probability guy...which is more likely to get someone on base: a strikeout or a ball in play?

LOL *******.

A) You came into this thread.

B) No one is arguing or has ever argued that a strikeout is the same as a ball in play.

Whatever you say Mr. "An out is an out". I swear you really are Donald Trump. Blatant denials of things people can actually prove just by quoting you.

Like when you said "best = valuable" and "I don't vote MVP based on offense alone", and then voted Votto, who by your own admission was only an offensive consideration and not the best player in the league.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:41:00 PM (view original):
Whatever you say Mr. "An out is an out". I swear you really are Donald Trump. Blatant denials of things people can actually prove just by quoting you.

Like when you said "best = valuable" and "I don't vote MVP based on offense alone", and then voted Votto, who by your own admission was only an offensive consideration and not the best player in the league.

An out is an out is not the same thing as saying strikeout = ball in play.

Please confirm you understand.

"an out is an out" is the same as saying "a strikeout is the same as an out in play".

Please confirm you understand.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:47:00 PM (view original):
"an out is an out" is the same as saying "a strikeout is the same as an out in play".

Please confirm you understand.

You changed "ball in play" to "out in play."

Are you changing your argument?

I'm going to try a little logic train here. See if you can follow. If not, at least pretend so it's not even more painfully obvious what a moron you are.

1. The Astros put more balls in play than any other team
2. Not all those extra balls in play turned to outs
3. Therefore, striking out at a lower rate leads to more baserunners
4. Therefore, strikeouts are not "just another out".

Please confirm you understand.

PSBL. It's so easy to make him dance for our amusement.

The reason why these things go 50+ pages is because y'all argue what he's not arguing.

A strikeout isn't the same as a ball in play.

But a sac fly, and a sac bunt, and outs that move runners ARE better than strikeouts.

Please stay on those points, and don't start **** that he ain't arguin.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/14/2017 10:51:00 PM (view original):
I'm going to try a little logic train here. See if you can follow. If not, at least pretend so it's not even more painfully obvious what a moron you are.

1. The Astros put more balls in play than any other team
2. Not all those extra balls in play turned to outs
3. Therefore, striking out at a lower rate leads to more baserunners
4. Therefore, strikeouts are not "just another out".

Please confirm you understand.

LOL.

I completely agree that getting a hit is better than a strikeout.

Glad we had you here to help, sherlock.

Posted by d_rock97 on 10/14/2017 10:51:00 PM (view original):
The reason why these things go 50+ pages is because y'all argue what he's not arguing.

A strikeout isn't the same as a ball in play.

But a sac fly, and a sac bunt, and outs that move runners ARE better than strikeouts.

Please stay on those points, and don't start **** that he ain't arguin.

The point is, a team that strikes out at a lower rate puts more balls in play. bad_trump is refusing to acknowledge that correlation. You strike out less, you put more balls in play, which equals greater chance at baserunners.