Turn Off Ads?
Page 14 of 33 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516171824 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 489

Thread: On the declining quality of the ORG

  1. #196
    No half measures, Walter RedEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    8,447

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Sheed View Post
    I know... especially after the controversial "State of California vs Internet Dude" Supreme Court ruling, stating that anyone's opinion on internet forums must be construed as absolute truth.

    Oh wait... that never happened. Silly me. But hold on a sec. I'm starting to wonder if people posting comments on internet forums MIGHT just be able to do so, without having to justify said comments with endless stats and linked sources.

    Happy days...

    And consider the alternative:

    A: I think the Reds might fizzle out this year. I don't think Dusty can take them to the next level.
    B: Dude?!?!!!1111 Link? Sources? Man, the quality has really fallen off here at the ORG.
    A: Ummm, I'm just saying I don't think the Reds have it this year.
    B: Can we ban this guy? 5000 post rule, please? I remember when the ORG was something to be proud of. Blah blah blah hijack thread with incessant whining, blah blah blah.
    Thanks for the entertaining read. Unfortunately, this has little to do with anything anyone has said on this thread.
    "Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #197
    Custodial Engineer Bob Sheed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    348

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by RedEye View Post
    Thanks for the entertaining read. Unfortunately, this has little to do with anything anyone has said on this thread.
    It's not just a river in Egypt, my friend.
    "And why do false truths persist, getting passed down the decades as if they were fact? It comes back to the same point: People believe things that are wrong because, individually, people rarely investigate their own beliefs, particularly when what they believe makes sense intuitively. Even more so when those around them agree with them." -K.F.

  4. #198
    No half measures, Walter RedEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    8,447

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Sheed View Post
    It's not just a river in Egypt, my friend.
    Right -- because asking people to back up their claims is tantamount to censorship. I guess we just have different ideas about what this forum should be about. Then again, the sarcasm is so thick in what you wrote that I am not sure whether there is an actual argument there or just a personal attack posing as cynicism. If you have something concrete to add to the conversation, please do so. So far, I am not seeing it.
    "Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

  5. #199
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,135

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Stats aren't gossip. Stats are hard, verifiable facts. In other words, evidence. Before and after pictures aren't gossip. Before and after pictures are hard, verifiable facts. In other words, evidence. They might not prove a point, they might not make a strong argument, but that's what message boards are for, to debate such matters.

    Just because you don't like an argument doesn't mean it's invalid, or not ORG worthy.
    All arguments are not equal. Claiming someone is a cheater requires a compelling argument, perhaps even a more compelling argument, than any other typical claim given that the nature of the argument is also an attack on the player's character and the integrity of his performance.

    That a professional athlete has gotten in better shape and improved his performance as he's aged from 25 to 31 years old is NOT compelling evidence that he is also a cheater. It certainly doesn't prove a point and isn't even a weak argument because it frankly is the embodiment of the normal developmental trajectory for major league ball players. It's the lowest common denominator of "proof" and that has never been ORG worthy at least given the culture of the ORG since I've been a member.

    Do some on the ORG want to speculate about PEDs use? No doubt. But lets not pretend that just because there is some desire to suppose this player or that player is a cheat that doing so is somehow a noble discussion and is really anything but a tangent to the notion of discussing baseball in a reds-centric manner and a subject matter that tends to provoke poor quality discussion threads.

    In other words, the quality of the ORG would be undeniably better without such lowest common denominator types of threads.
    Last edited by jojo; 06-28-2013 at 02:13 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  6. Likes:

    HokieRed (06-28-2013)

  7. #200
    Custodial Engineer Bob Sheed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    348

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by RedEye View Post
    So far, I am not seeing it.
    I know you aren't. But gosh bless you for trying so hard.
    "And why do false truths persist, getting passed down the decades as if they were fact? It comes back to the same point: People believe things that are wrong because, individually, people rarely investigate their own beliefs, particularly when what they believe makes sense intuitively. Even more so when those around them agree with them." -K.F.

  8. #201
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,135

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Sheed View Post
    The real downturn in quality with the ORG is due to one thing:

    A bunch of people whining about the downturn in quality with the ORG.

    If you want some real comic relief, pick the 4 or 5 biggest whiners, and look at the "quality" of their past 5 or 10 posts.

    I'm just glad there is a thread like this, so that all the neighing high horses can be confined to one stable.

    SITE SUGGESTION: Lets create another forum here... we'll call it "The Super Elite ORG." Only the biggest complainers about the quality here can post there, and they can't post anywhere else.

    Then let them dazzle us with their superior posting ability, so that us lesser beings may be schooled in the ways of superior forum opinion making.
    Would the quoted post be one of those bellwether posts in a person's past 5 or 10 posts? BTW, this is a feedback thread. The topic is the recent quality of the ORG.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  9. #202
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,468

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    All arguments are not equal. Claiming someone is a cheater requires a compelling argument, perhaps even a more compelling argument, than any other typical claim given that the nature of the argument is also an attack on the player's character and the integrity of his performance.

    That a professional athlete has gotten in better shape and improved his performance as he's aged from 25 to 31 years old is NOT compelling evidence that he is also a cheater. It certainly doesn't prove a point and isn't even a weak argument because it frankly is the embodiment of the normal developmental trajectory for major league ball players. It's the lowest common denominator of "proof" and that has never been ORG worthy at least given the culture of the ORG since I've been a member.

    Do some on the ORG want to speculate about PEDs use? No doubt. But lets not pretend that just because there is some desire to suppose this player or that player is a cheat that doing so is somehow a noble discussion and is really anything but a tangent to the notion of discussing baseball in a reds-centric manner and a subject matter that tends to provoke poor quality discussion threads.

    In other words, the quality of the ORG would be undeniably better without such lowest common denominator types of threads.
    You continue to make this mistake. No one is arguing that just because a player has gotten better, there is reason to speculate about PED's. The argument is that if a player increases his power significantly at an age when most humans stop getting stronger naturally, there is reason to speculate about PED use. We have empirical evidence that doing PED's increases one power, so it is a logical, rarional argument to make, based on data.

    As to the quality of discussion that this topic generates, I suggest you re-read the thread.

    In the debate, posters brought forth other data to suggest that there were other factors in play. Brought forth was:

    That Molina started his MLB career at a very young age.
    That Molina started working out more.
    That the Molina family has been known for late career improvement.
    That Molina had always been a good line drive hitter.
    That Molina's wOBA showed a steady improvement
    That Molina's BABIP might explain his improvement.
    WOY brought forth many other players from MLB history that had similar imporvements at the same age.
    And that's off the top of my head. There was more great points made on both sides.

    The thread itself is proof that such a topic doesn't represent the lowest common denominator of the ORG. In fact, except for the thread police who kept trying to derail it by claiming it wasn't ORG worthy, the thread has provided some of the most intelligent, logical, fact based discussion that this board has seen in awhile.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  10. #203
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,593

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by RedEye View Post
    Right -- because asking people to back up their claims is tantamount to censorship. I guess we just have different ideas about what this forum should be about. Then again, the sarcasm is so thick in what you wrote that I am not sure whether there is an actual argument there or just a personal attack posing as cynicism. If you have something concrete to add to the conversation, please do so. So far, I am not seeing it.
    Kind of sounds like some people are treating this as a jury trial, where others are merely looking for a search warrant or to face a grand jury.

    Not everyone sees a message board as a place where a demand for hard evidence is required to convict in the court of public opinion.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  11. Likes:

    foxfire123 (06-29-2013), jimbo (06-28-2013)

  12. #204
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,925

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Firt, most of the guys you mentioned have not been linked to PED's except by speculation. None of them have failed a publicly released drug test. There is no hard evidence proving that they used PED's. McGwire and Giambi confessed, but the others deny using to this day. All we have on these other guys is speculation.

    Speculation can be convincing. It's not a dirty term that means untrustworthy.

    If you enter a room to find me with a bat in my hand, standing over a broken lamp, it would be valid for you to speculate that I broke the lamp with the bat. It is the most logical conclusion from the scant evidence you have.

    I may or may not have broken the lamp with the bat, but that is irrelevant. What's relevant is that you can speculate that I did, and no one would criticize you for it. You don't know if I did, but you have every right to speculate that I did.

    There is nothing wrong with speculation based on evidence.
    When congress calls you in to testify, there is a link. I didn't see Derek Jeter called in. Or Ken Griffey Jr. Or Albert Belle. Or Frank Thomas. Why? Because there was no link. The others were called in because there was some sort of link and it wasn't "oh man, he hit a lot of home runs" or "oh man, he got bigger quickly".

    The difference with your lamp analogy is that well, you saw me next to the broken lamp with the bat. You never saw a lot of those guys near steroids with a needle. In your scenario, you saw them with a bat somewhere and thought, man, a bat could certainly break my lamp. STEROID USERS!

  13. #205
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,593

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    To me, the lowest common denominator is constantly harping on appealing to the lowest common denominator.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  14. Likes:

    Bob Sheed (06-28-2013)

  15. #206
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,925

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    Kind of sounds like some people are treating this as a jury trial, where others are merely looking for a search warrant or to face a grand jury.

    Not everyone sees a message board as a place where a demand for hard evidence is required to convict in the court of public opinion.
    Maybe they should. I mean they are suggesting that someone broke the laws of this country. This isn't like suggesting they are stealing signs. It is suggesting they are breaking the law. Huge difference.

  16. #207
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,593

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Maybe they should. I mean they are suggesting that someone broke the laws of this country. This isn't like suggesting they are stealing signs. It is suggesting they are breaking the law. Huge difference.
    Actually, that's not even necessarily true. Fact is, many substances banned by Major League Baseball are legal to purchase by any ordinary American citizen at their local pharmacy or health/nutrition outlet. If I remember correctly, there are literally hundred(s) of such items banned by baseball that are not illegal.

    Regardless, we're not talking about breaking the laws outside of the game of baseball. We're talking about something directly relevant to the sport and in an era where clearly the established bar of preponderance has been set very low empirically by the players themselves.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  17. #208
    Custodial Engineer Bob Sheed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    348

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    Would the quoted post be one of those bellwether posts in a person's past 5 or 10 posts? BTW, this is a feedback thread. The topic is the recent quality of the ORG.
    Link please. Also, some stats to backup your point would be helpful. And if you come up with the stats yourself, I'll need a hyperlink to your calculator.
    "And why do false truths persist, getting passed down the decades as if they were fact? It comes back to the same point: People believe things that are wrong because, individually, people rarely investigate their own beliefs, particularly when what they believe makes sense intuitively. Even more so when those around them agree with them." -K.F.

  18. Likes:

    jimbo (06-28-2013)

  19. #209
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,925

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    Actually, that's not even necessarily true. Fact is, many substances banned by Major League Baseball are legal to purchase by any ordinary American citizen at their local pharmacy or health/nutrition outlet. If I remember correctly, there are literally hundred(s) of such items banned by baseball that are not illegal.

    Regardless, we're not talking about breaking the laws outside of the game of baseball. We're talking about something directly relevant to the sport and in an era where clearly the established bar of preponderance has been set very low empirically by the players themselves.
    While you are technically correct, we both know that they aren't talking about buying stuff at GNC. They are talking about HGH and Steroids.

    As for the era we are in, we don't have a clue how many guys were using. But since they started testing less than 1% of guys have failed tests or even been linked in the media to some type of PED, so let's not just start throwing everyone under the train because of assumptions.

  20. #210
    Daffy Duck RedTeamGo!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    3,930

    Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

    I thought HGH was legal?


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25