But it might have peaked in the 2006 season... A 13 year vet the ORG is only experiencing the typical career arc of a MLB playerOriginally Posted by Red Buckeye
Or not
But it might have peaked in the 2006 season... A 13 year vet the ORG is only experiencing the typical career arc of a MLB player
Or not
Well at least the spewing "in my day..." sentiments are confined to a handful of threads now. Which is nice.
Agree 100%So the idea that the quality of the ORG has gone down is probably just an opinion shared largely by the people who had been on the ORG for a while.
But since more people are allowed to post it's actually gotten much better.
"Lemonade requires a significant amount of sugar. Otherwise, you've just made lemon juice."
Are there players that have taken steroids?
You know, I'm going to take another angle.
Let's talk about proof and having evidence to back it up and accusations, shall we?
Let's pick a random comment out of this thread:
Here Raisor implies that if you post a message saying goodbye, it appears as though you are trying to get others to beg you to stay.
So we get a goodbye post. And instead of taking the poster at face value, we now have the suggestion that the post is not sincere, that it is only an attempt at garnering sympathy.
Does Raisor have proof of this? Is there a link? Should he be admonished for violating the message board's mission statement of posting things he only has proof of? Is he degrading the conversation? Is he accusing, without proof, posters who type goodbye notes of not being sincere and then personally attacking their character by suggesting that they are liars and only trying to get others to feel sorry for them?
Or, could he be privately considering all the possibilities and then posting one that he might think it is?
Sure there are.
There are players committing adultery too. Does that mean we can openly speculate about the sanctity of Player X's marriage?
Last edited by jojo; 07-02-2013 at 06:16 PM.
"This isn’t 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
Raisor can see into the hearts of men some say even into their souls. Should he be admonished or should he be worshiped?
I don't think anyone has argued that speculating that a player is a cheat is prohibited by the board rules. At least haven't. I've argued that it is counter to the spirit in the board's mission statement and what's more, it's just bad behavior to call the character of others into question without cause.
"This isn’t 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
Well stated and I agree and disagree.
We can leave it there.
What is frustrating to many here is that despite the attempts of some to strictly define "cause," the threshold subjectively varies from person to person. Lest one man's definition should not be force-fed to all.
The standards of implication in discussion should not have to be held to that of the courts, which are justifiably higher to protect a person's rights and risk putting an innocent man behind bars. Opining on a board meant for discussion as to the mere possibility of one engaging in enhancers is no threat to anyone's livelihood and poses no threat to moving the needle of perception on a greater level.
"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
That is certainly one take on it.
One that I strongly disagree with.
RedEye (07-04-2013)
Yes
It is a far more reasonable leap of interpretation to say that MikeThierry's "goodbye" post could have had ulterior motives than it is to say that Yadier Molina's or Chris Davis' on-field performance (as represented by statistics) constitutes evidence of steroid use. It is also a far less objectionable one IMO.
If I have to convince you to see how the analogy fails, then I think we should probably take this to PM.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
PEDs aside for now, I think we may have culled another topic from the ORG. It has two main axes:
1) Posters complaining that others are using logically fallacious argumentation by not seeking (or refusing to acknowledge) statistical evidence in an aggressive manner.
2) Posters complaining that others are using alienating argumentation by aggressively seeking statistical evidence where it hasn't been used -- or hasn't been used effectively.
Both sides are, you probably note, aggressive -- and they continue to talk past each other a lot of the time. There is, however, a growing number of group #2 that I've noticed recently since the merger.
Discuss.
Last edited by RedEye; 07-05-2013 at 12:07 AM.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
What sort of ulterior motives could Mike have?
If it's all the same, I don't do PM.
Last edited by Dom Heffner; 07-05-2013 at 09:41 AM.
Ulterior motives in the sense that Mike's actual objective (staying at RZ) would be different than his explicit one (leaving). That's the high stakes gambit of Raisor's interpretation since it is 1) possible to interpret those intentions reasonably from what he wrote and 2) limited in its scope. Far different than using stats to accuse a player of steroids.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
Ahem
Posting Permissions
|
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. |
Reply With Quote