Pre-Series Postmortems: Around the Blogs

As the Sox and Yanks look to begin another big series in the Bronx tonight (in Brooklyn right now it is pouring, so fingers crossed), we took a quick journey around some Yanks and Sox blogs.  Here are some highlights:

64 comments… add one

  • Hughes did as well as anyone could have expected last night. He might not have righted the Yankees’ listing ship (they’ll be fine), but he did what he needed to do.
    Who cares what the RS bid. That ship has sailed, and our No. 18 is healthy and contributing. $51 million? Yeah, it was a lot, but LET IT GO!!
    SF, I called his homer, too. Look it up.
    Skip it. What more is there to say?
    Got to hand it to the Schiller. The whole thing was blown way out of proportion (I was a participant), and he responded in kind. But his response is on the money. Anyone who think the blood is fake is a complete idiot. And I think his $1M is safe.
    I’m off to work.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 27, 2007, 9:05 am
  • Hughes wasn’t awful, but he did go into high counts with everybody.
    Actually, I thought the Blue Jays (and they might do this regularly, I don’t know) were patient yesterday, making both Hughes and Henn work for those outs. It worked in their favor, obviously.

    Lar April 27, 2007, 9:06 am
  • On the Sock: Hard to choose between Shrill and the sports media. But I’ll choose Shrill. And bottom line: What he did that night of Game 6 is still amazing to this day. The guy risked his career and came through with the performance of a lifetime – for himself, his team, and Sox fans everywhere.
    On Yankees: It’s not funny to me but the Yankees old Pedro Strategy (wait him out) is what the best AL teams are doing today right back at the Yanks. They take as many pitches as possible and that strength of a bullpen is continuing to show it’s seedy underside. Here’s hoping they turn things around this weekend.

    jim - YF April 27, 2007, 9:21 am
  • Has anyone looked at the Yankees schedule the first two weeks of May? Texas and Seattle, Texas and Seattle for 13 games straight! How awesome is that! The Yanks could seriously go on a huge tear.

    Andrew April 27, 2007, 9:35 am
  • jim – Not to be a total cynical asshole, didn’t Schill have something like, he gets an extra year (of 15 mil or so?) if they won or something?
    Obviously, he still has to come through (and unforunately did), but that’s a pretty damn good reason.
    Though of course, in retrospect, his decline still hasn’t quite come yet, so it didn’t turn out bad at all!

    Lar April 27, 2007, 9:39 am
  • Maybe Lar. But I don’t think that. He wanted the ball in that game regardless of everything else.
    Meanwhile, maybe it’s just me, but that performance is the epitome of sport. And that performance is probably the most, gulp, heroic of the sport we love. Sure, Gibson’s shot is an easy hightlight reel. But for what Game 6 meant, and how Schill came through, that performance is tops IMHO. It only took 2.5 years for me to realize it.
    Still, the Sock should be in the HoF but I’m not convinced the player should be. But he probably will be.

    jim - YF April 27, 2007, 10:02 am
  • Tonight’s game isnt gonna be played. Thunderstorms in forecast through midnight. I guess the rainout helps the Sox by getting taking Tavarez out of the rotation and the Yankees by delaying a game from now to some time when the presumably wont suck so much. I think the affect on the yanks pen is a wash, rest is nice but some of these players need some work ie-Mo. Also worried about Pettitte pitching on 2 extra days of rest.

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 10:07 am
  • I’d rather they play the game tonight, because I really wanted to face Tavarez. Ah well, maybe this means the Yankees won’t have to push Karstens out there, and can start him instead against a shitty Seattle team.

    Andrew April 27, 2007, 10:08 am
  • I kept the book on Hughes and looking at it this morning, I don’t understand a few things being said about Hughes:
    1- He only walked 1 batter. He only went to a 3 ball count on 3 batters. His strike to ball ratio was 53/38. He faced 21 batters. 38 balls to 21 batters and he struck out 5, I’ll take that. (Yes I know I am a geek. Who keeps the book at home?)
    2- Bob Klapisch (The Record/ESPN) this morning said he was good, but not dominant. If you expected dominance you were misled. This kid is 20+, first game at the stadium, facing a good hitting team. On top of that the weather was less then ideal last night and he still put together an effort to be happy about. Just because he didn’t mow down 12 in a complete game effort doesn’t mean it was a dissapointment at all.
    3- Having Leiter in the booth last night was awesome! The insight he provided was first class and very enjoyable to hear.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 10:09 am
  • I was at the game last night and I thought he pitched great.
    – He got beat in the first inning by jitters and the Jays 3 best hitters: Rios, Wells and Thomas.
    – Then proceeded to get 11 of the next 13 batters with Wells again getting a hit.
    – The 5th inning began with a terrible call by the first base ump which came around to score. The fourth run scored on a sac given up by Bruney.
    Joe hooked him after 91(?) pitches which i felt was too soon, he should have been given the opportunity to work out of that Jam. Ill take the 5K and 1 BB. That all said, Id like this guy to get a little more experience down in the minors. He didnt do a great job hold runners and just needs more experience. However, if the yankees need him in the bigs due to the imploded staff, I think he can contribute.
    In a side note, how much better would it have been if they had signed Lily instead of throwing all that Igawa money down the toilet. ugh.

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 10:25 am
  • I agree Sam, Lily was the safer move talent wise. You know what you are getting. Problem is his health is always a concern and the one thing worse then signing Igawa would have been signing another guy with injury issues who doesn’t contribute at all (Pavano).
    Just throwing this out there I get the feeling Pavano has thrown his final pitch as a Yankee. It’s unfortunate because his stuff is good, he is just a mess physically. Look for him to be traded or released.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 10:30 am
  • another comment from last night, WTF was Doug Mientkiewicz doing batting second? Is Joe even trying to win these games? I dont care if he was “trying to get him going”, which is what i assume he was doing as i cant think of any possible strategic reason to do so, now is not the time to baby our players. Put the best lineup out there, so simple. That pissed me off to no end.

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 10:35 am
  • Who keeps the book at home?)
    Don’t worry, Trisk. I do, too. When I was a kid, I’d score games off the radio. Somewhere, I still have Roger Clemens’ base hit (before interleague play, when that was something special) hanging around…

    Paul SF April 27, 2007, 11:19 am
  • People forget that Lily was 40% (on half his contract) more expensive because of the the posting fee being non-taxed.
    Still, it’s a amazing fans give up on the guy so easily. I’m not sold, but I can’t say yt he’s a total bust. Two decent outings (first pitch wise) and two piss poor ones show he’s just inconsistent. It’s still an open book in my mind.

    jim - YF April 27, 2007, 11:21 am
  • I would not expect the Sox to get more than one game out of three against the Yankees here, because:
    (A) It’s in the Toilet;
    (B) Pettitte is pitching extremely well;
    (C) Tavarez is Ta-garbage;
    (D) No way the Yankees’ overloaded lineup drops 7 or 8 of 9.
    But no matter what happens, the Sox stay well ahead of NY in the standings.

    Hudson April 27, 2007, 11:23 am
  • >>>Bob Klapisch (The Record/ESPN) this morning said he was good, but not dominant.
    Four runs in four innings is “good”? Then what’s mediocre? What’s bad?
    >>>It’s unfortunate because [Pavano's] stuff is good, he is just a mess physically.
    To the extent that chronic injuries often have a mental component, I would just add that he seems to be a mess mentally.
    On a new topic, it will be very interesting to see whether Tito throws Coco or Whiffy Mo out there this weekend. The former has been disappointing and the latter has been absymal, but there may be a sentimental feeling that last’s salami might mark a turnaround for WMP.

    Hudson April 27, 2007, 11:31 am
  • Interesting note from Dale and Holley (they have mentioned it before).
    NYY this year dropped their advance scouts. Instead they have Joe Kerrigan (the first and only RS manager to be fired by the triumvirate) breaking down video. Unless Kerrigan is Bill Belichick, advantage AL.
    By comparison, RS have two advance scouts.
    When did GS get so damn cheap? This makes no sense to me, especially with NYY.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 27, 2007, 11:32 am
  • Interesting, Bill.
    Also, how much can an advance scout really cost? About the price of a minor league right fielder, I’d guess.
    (Heck, there are about 500,000 NYC metro area residents who would be willing to do the job for free.)

    Hudson April 27, 2007, 11:39 am
  • C) Tavarez is Ta-garbage
    well, once the game is cancelled tonight, that won’t matter. And, as good as Pettitte is pitching, so is Matsuzaka, so giving that win isn’t automatic.
    On top of that, when was the last time Wakefield didn’t step up in Yankee stadium and throw a good game? I’m really asking there – I don’t know, and don’t have time to look, but it seems to me that Wake always performs at Yankee stadium.
    My guess is that The Yanks win one, The Sox win one, and one team’s bullpen blows the third one.

    Brad April 27, 2007, 11:55 am
  • “Four runs in four innings is “good”? Then what’s mediocre? What’s bad?”
    Hudson, sure the line didnt look good but I think that he was refering to actually watching the kid pitch. Its no different that SFs who were happy with the way that beckett pitched last saturday vs. the yankees despite a medicore line.
    I cant belive that the yankees got rid of the advanced scouts. Why would they do this? Makes no sense. They certainly arent penny pinching…

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 12:01 pm
  • Nick-YF April 27, 2007, 12:05 pm
  • Hudson did you watch the game?

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 12:07 pm
  • Sam, I’m sorry I missed Dale and Holley’s source on this.
    And I don’t really have time to google it.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 27, 2007, 12:15 pm
  • Bill it wasnt that i didnt belive you. I just cant understand why they would do this.

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 12:27 pm
  • >>>>Hudson, sure the line didnt look good but I think that he was refering to actually watching the kid pitch. <<<
    So, am I to understand that Yankee fans will be satisfied if their pitching this weekend “looks good” but gives up one run per inning like Hughes?

    Hudson April 27, 2007, 12:32 pm
  • Hudson, ill repeat trisk’s question, did you watch the game?

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 12:38 pm
  • Hudson you are way off base. Overall performance is what we are referring to, not results. Over course winning is best, but the kid looked good. But again you didn’t watch game and are a rabid Sox fan, so I need not wonder why you make such statements.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 12:38 pm
  • I watched Hughes, and I’d say that he looked very good at moments. But he did have a tough time with the meat of the Blue Jays order, and you can either chalk that up to jitters (maybe) or his having trouble with the better players on the team (likely). He was good against the weaker guys but he struggled against the better guys. That to me is a mixed bag: he certainly didn’t look like a guy who is just going to saunter into the Majors and be a top-of-the-rotation guy (not that anyone claimed that, but the expectations are certainly high). It looks like he’ll have trouble with smart, deep lineups (like most pitchers!), and he clearly is going to have to gain stamina to be really effective; 90 pitch counts are going to seriouly restrict his abilities in the short term if his control isn’t picture-perfect.
    But really, if we SFs watched Hughes throw what he threw last night in a Sox uniform, we’d be saying the same things that YFs are saying: there was most definitely promise there, and we’d be looking at the bright side, not the poorish numbers. I think it’s unfair for Sox fans to crap on YFs for seeing the good things that Hughes did and highlighting them. On the other hand, forgetting that he is a rookie for the moment, there is no comparison between what Beckett did last weekend (gutting out 7 innings against a ferocious lineup and retiring 14 of the last 15) and what Hughes did last night, which was to show flashes of skill amidst a mediocre, losing, and quite short outing.

    SF April 27, 2007, 12:54 pm
  • SF i wasnt trying to compare Hughes’ performance to Beckett’s but was using thats start to simply illustrate that looking at a pitcher’s line does not always tell the full story of his start.
    Hudson’s previous comment would be no different that saying so if
    SFs were happy with Beckett’s start last week would that mean they would be happy with any Sox starter giving up 4 runs in the first 2 innings of games this weekend?

    sam YF April 27, 2007, 1:00 pm
  • I am done…all things Sox are good all things Yankees are bad. Orel Hershieser called his start impressive/as advertised, but what does he know. Beckett can grind it out because he doesn’t have a pitch count…dumb argument.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 1:02 pm
  • Jeez, Trisk, does everyone have to agree with 100% of what you think before you quit a discussion? I agree that most SFs who are ragging on Hughes are pretty off-base and also pretty disingenuous. But the pitch count IS a factor: he’s not allowed to go longer, because he’s not mature enough, strong enough, polished enough to make those pitches count. That’s NOT a criticism of him as a prospect or as a pitcher, it’s a fact. He is simply not able to do certain things yet because he neither has the polished control to do so or the long physical leash needed to go deeper into games. In two months that might change, and we may see a different pitcher.

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:10 pm
  • “On the other hand, forgetting that he is a rookie for the moment, there is no comparison between what Beckett did last weekend (gutting out 7 innings against a ferocious lineup and retiring 14 of the last 15) and what Hughes did last night, which was to show flashes of skill amidst a mediocre, losing, and quite short outing.”
    I don’t need anyone to agree with me. Problem is you get all defensive, but you make comments like the one above and expect me grin and take it. One positive, now two negative, this way it looks like you are rational. Just like you did last night, admit when you are needling, don’t be a skirt.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 1:25 pm
  • Nice, Trisk. So mature.

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:29 pm
  • What was immature about what I said???

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 1:31 pm
  • Me, I’m wondering how the needle manages to find the nutsack.
    I’ve got no problem with what Hudson is saying (and then SF juumps in to help him out). On some level he’s right. Hughes’ line is just as unimpressive as any of those the Sox starters showed last weekend. And the YF’s rightly called that.
    The difference being, Hughes was pitching the first game of his MLB career. I’ve got no problem with those results. If he’s still pitching that way in September I may start to worry.

    jim - YF April 27, 2007, 1:32 pm
  • But Trisk, it wasn’t needling, it was observation. Hughes may have done ok for who he is, but his effort wasn’t an absolute success. He was inefficient, he gave up runs, he didn’t pitch great against the better hitters in the Blue Jays lineup, and he took a loss. These are all TRUE things. And all those things being true doesn’t lessen his promise. He looks to be a very talented pitcher, and that middle stretch against the bottom/very top of the Jays’ order was extremely impressive. But that doesn’t immunize him from criticism or disallow anyone (SF or YF) from observing what were definitely weaknesses in his game. The issue is that you see any observation coming from a non-YF as “needling”, when in fact it might just be observation.

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:33 pm
  • “There is a Sox thread, where mostly Sox fans hang out, why come here where we are discussing the Yankees and be a J.O. or needler? I am not saying Yankee fans don’t do it, but I don’t and won’t so to me when you act like this it really gets my blood boiling.” -Trisk
    “Because I am immature, despite being a father of two, a business owner, and nearly 40 years old. And also because I have had a tad too much Malbec. Sorry.” -SF
    That’s what I was referring to Teflon Don.

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 1:34 pm
  • Trisk, you’ve seriously got no sense of humor at the moment. Not that I don’t understand why – if my team was buried below the Devil Rays and had a rotation populated with a $50M door prize, a guy who should be in AAA, and a couple of beer leaguers I’d be humorless too.
    And a “skirt”? Who are you, Frank Sinatra?
    (I jest)

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:39 pm
  • “He was inefficient, he gave up runs, he didn’t pitch great against the better hitters in the Blue Jays lineup, and he took a loss.”
    *Only Wells hit him well, check the box score.
    **He only walked 1 batter. He only went to a 3 ball count on 3 batters. His strike to ball ratio was 53/38. He faced 21 batters. 38 balls to 21 batters and he struck out 5, I’ll take that. HOW IS THAT NOT EFFICIENT?

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 1:42 pm
  • I didn’t see the game last night, but based on those numbers and what people are saying, it seems that Hughes was too much in the zone. He had good control, but perhaps not good command. But like I said, I didn’t see the game. Just based on how many hits he gave up, but the incedible ball-strike ratio, I’d say it was a matter of command.

    Nick-YF April 27, 2007, 1:46 pm
  • ” One positive, now two negative, this way it looks like you are rational.”
    Trisk, that’s our friend SF’s MO – construct a faux rationality so your arguments appear less biased and weightier…

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 1:48 pm
  • ” I’d say it was a matter of command.”
    Nick, that’s how I saw it, especially in the 4th and 5th, but not that he was too much in the zone – he fell behind hitters consistently then, which resulted in 2 of the ER’s.

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 1:52 pm
  • WAIT – SF WEARS A SKIRT???? HOLY CRAP!!! DOES IT HAVE TURTLES ON IT???
    I watched the first couple innings of Hughes. I loved right before
    Wells came up in the first, someone in the booth (Leiter perhaps) said “Hughes about to face the best hitter he’s ever seen…” And then Wells proceeded to crush it. And how about that Thomas hit in the first? Man. NO minor leaguer could have hit that pitch. That was great hitting.
    But Hughes looked pretty good, considering, and down the road he’ll be solid. If I were Torre I’d be concerned about putting too much pressure on him, both physically and mentally. It’s got to be hard to develop a pitcher in this environment.

    Tyrel SF April 27, 2007, 1:54 pm
  • “if my team was buried below the Devil Rays and had a rotation populated with a $50M door prize, a guy who should be in AAA, and a couple of beer leaguers I’d be humorless too.”
    My, my, aren’t we full of ourself? History should have taught you to refrain from chest-thumping in April, no? :)

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 1:56 pm
  • HOW IS THAT NOT EFFICIENT?
    Um, it was in 4.1 innings? 21 batters in 4.1 innings doesn’t qualify as efficient in my book. But you can have your book. I think Joe Torre has that same book. It’s good reading, at the moment.
    Man, you guys are so f*cking testy, it’s kind of great. I can’t say I’m not enjoying how bitter and irritable you guys are at the moment, I kind of am – it’s a collateral benefit, at the very least. And seriously, it really seems that you want to argue even with those who are (mostly) in agreement with you. I came into this thread calling out SFs for their disingenuousness over Hughes (who, as I said, looked really promising last night, just like you guys think!), though I don’t think it’s fair to overlook what were, at times, struggles. How’s THAT for a controversial statement!? He struggled! He didn’t make it 5 innings! He threw 91 pitches in under 5 innings and thus I termed it “inefficient”! Wow, I am SUCH THE RABBLE ROUSER!!
    And, for the record, I am not the one who called someone a “skirt”, as if that’s even remotely funny or dignified.
    Andrews: what’s the “faux rationality” here? Care to articulate?

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:56 pm
  • Jeez, Andrews – did you read the entire post? Or did you stop before the “I jest” line? My god…I’d be frustrated at the lack of interest in actually consuming the contents of these comments if it weren’t so enjoyable.
    You guys need a rainout tonight like we needed a rainout after Game 6 in ’86, get these bad feelings out of your system, take a breather.

    SF April 27, 2007, 1:59 pm
  • A serious question: is what you guys sound like now what we SFs sound like when the Sox are facing similar adversity? Because if so, I now understand why everyone thinks of us as embittered, angry, and occasionally thin-skinned.
    I think the difference is that we usually get this way in September or (historically, worse,) October, not April.

    SF April 27, 2007, 2:07 pm
  • I was out to lunch, so this is way old.
    Sam, I knew you weren’t questioning me on the advanced scout thing. I was just realizing that I didn’t have their source. Sorry for the mixup.
    Jay Mariotti called Frank Thomas the “Big Skirt” and then wouldn’t return to the White Sox lockerroom.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 27, 2007, 2:09 pm
  • Trisk, you’re barking up the wrong tree if you’re looking for rationality. We’re talking about a fanbase of people who endured 86 years of loserdom before being blessed with one of the greatest postseasons ever and a really smart, forward thinking front office. It’s like giving a bitter, asshole homeless guy a billion dollars. How do you expect them to behave? A team and rivalry that was at most an afterthought to us until it picked up media steam about five years ago is now a team we have to worry about constantly because the fact is, they’re really good and here to stay. When the Sox are hot, like they are now, and the Yankees are playing like crud, you can’t frequent a site called YF vs. SF and not expect to not eat a little irrational shit. Expect to eat a lot of it, because our front office is getting outdueled, our health and conditioning staff appears to be incompetent, all while we’re starting to pay the price for 6 years of the worst team constructing strategy ever. Dark days loom ahead, comrades. Let’s go down with the ship with some dignity.

    jm April 27, 2007, 2:10 pm
  • In all seriousness, If someone could please explain what it is about my Hughes observations that can reasonably be qualified as “irrational” (not “arguable”, but “irrational”) I’d be happy to try to explain my irrationality. Or is that a philosophically unsolvable conundrum. Better consult my Heidegger Bill James.

    SF April 27, 2007, 2:17 pm
  • Matsuzaka’s pitching great, he only gave up 6 runs? I guess that is better than a run an inning!

    Lar April 27, 2007, 2:20 pm
  • By the way, I was at the game. I thought he looked okay. I mean, he is 20, and it’s silly to overanalyze over ONE start. Talk about small sample size.
    The pitch limit at 90 is reasonable, considering he’s 20. I thought he probably should’ve at least given the chance to get out of his own jam, but then Torre has _a lot_ of people to answer to if he pitches 105-110 and blows out his arm..

    Lar April 27, 2007, 2:22 pm
  • JM: Proving SF’s points about the anger of Yankee fans. I would dial back the outrageousness there, guy. You made it pretty clear you’re just taking out your own frustration on us with such ridiculous, inaccurate bile. I expect a press conference from Joe Torre at any moment.

    Paul SF April 27, 2007, 2:23 pm
  • Ladies, ladies…heh. Understand the sensitivity from YF’s…but let’s be fair. You’re doing the same thing we did when your boys hit Beckett and Matsuzaka around: looking at the positives over the final line. Sure, he’s a rookie, but it’s still the same essential thing. Nothing wrong with it, that’s what fans–and coaches, and the players themselves–are supposed to do. There was plenty to be happy about; the kid didn’t really get rocked to the tune of, say, 4 homers in a row, and he did go through a dominant stretch in the middle of the game. Maybe he tired out a little, who knows. Keep in mind that this is probably the first time in his professional career he’s ever had to go at %100 for an entire game; in the minors, a guy with his talent can more or less coast through most lineups. In any case, it wasn’t a bad performance.
    That said, there doesn’t look like anything particularly controversial in SF’s original statement; 21 pitches per inning is inefficient, there’s no other word for it. He didn’t say the kid sucked or anything like that–though the bit about Beckett at the end was something of a dig–but this wasn’t all roses. (Not that anyone said it was)
    Now I’m going to point something out that will probably piss you off: Of his 5 K’s, three came against Adam Lind, a rookie himself. I noticed this looking through the box score last night…I know, a K is a K, but I thought this was kinda interesting.

    desturbd1 April 27, 2007, 2:23 pm
  • Paul, that was directed at the other YFs not you…please go about your usual business of contributing nothing to this site.

    jm April 27, 2007, 2:29 pm
  • “Andrews: what’s the “faux rationality” here? Care to articulate?”
    As I have an early gig (in my old home & your new one, “Beautyful Brooklyn By De Sea”) no, I don’t care to articulate – I have every confidence that you’ll be able to figure this one out by yourself.
    (The gig is at a studio in the Navy Yard – afterward, I might ride thru Dumbo and serenade you with a few anti-sox chants:))

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 2:30 pm
  • Honestly, Andrews, I don’t understand. When you’re on your way back from the gig just egg my window (corner of Washington and York, the Sox game might be illuminating a mostly darkened apartment) and we can communicate via semaphore…

    SF April 27, 2007, 2:37 pm
  • You got it. Brown or white eggs, have a preference?

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 2:48 pm
  • Oddly enough, the gig is on Washington Ave…

    Andrews April 27, 2007, 2:49 pm
  • “It’s like giving a bitter, asshole homeless guy a billion dollars. How do you expect them to behave?”
    jm, that was pretty much just a bunch of sour grapes nonsensical bullshit.
    Maybe a few SFs are not so humble and gracious at winning, but there are just as many YFs who are not so humble and gracious at losing. As a longtime SF, one thing I DO know is that humility and grace are important components of both. I suggest you try it.
    Winning might be expected with NYY, and that’s fine. But winning is not an entitlement of NYY.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 27, 2007, 2:59 pm
  • JM = Troll.

    Paul SF April 27, 2007, 3:04 pm
  • I think JM is a different species of troll, but while surfing a political blog I came across a description of a certain type of troll that I got a kick out of.
    “Probably the most successful kind of internet troll, the kind of troll unaware that it is actually attempting to troll, is the truly stupid person. They attract an immense amount of attention, bringing out all of our inner teachers. We cannot believe they are actually that stupid. We believe that maybe, somehow, if we explain things to them very slowly they will actually have the capacity to learn. But they don’t. They are giant honking ignoramuses who don’t know anything about anything and likely never will.
    Yet we can’t resist them, because we are fascinated by their stupidity. Fascinated that they manage to be that profoundly dumb yet still manage to tie their shoes, string complete sentences together, etc”
    Again, not applicable to JM, I just thought it was funny.

    Tyrel SF April 27, 2007, 3:38 pm
  • My apologies to those who come here to talk baseball. I by NO MEANS was trying to start a pissing contest. I think my assessment of Phil was fair and accurate. Done defending it. It’s over, let’s move on.
    PS- SF I am “testy” not because of the Yankees, trust me not nervous one bit about them, but rather that it’s almost May and I have played SIX games. The weather has been AWFUL. So yes I am testy, very, very testy, but it has ZERO to do with the Yankees. I am also sorry for calling you a skirt, you had me fired up from your rants last night and I attacked you without reason. Can we PLEASE talk sensible baseball now?

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 4:11 pm
  • And to boot, I went all the way to school to conduct practice indoors and Joseph the technicolor something or other was preparing for their production this evening…..AHHHHHHH!

    Triskaidekaphobia April 27, 2007, 4:14 pm

Leave a Comment