Schilling: Sign Beckett -- Now

[Dojji]

I wish they'd let me buy my Gameday Audio package already. I'm half afraid they're holding it back until they add enough features to jack up the price on me.

[a700hitter]

Don't you think you should have "wasted your time" by checking his injury history yourself before you claimed that he never had a shoulder issue with the Red Sox after '85

No, because missing a few starts in a 20 + year career is inconsequential and irrelevant when the issue being discussed is whether Clemen's early career shoulder surgery affected his durability. It clearly didn't. You seized on the word never and proved an entirely irrelevant point. Hence, the Pyrrhic victory. I also stated that he had 350 wins and that he pitched to age 46. I'm not sure that either of those statements are correct. They are not worth researching, because precision with regard to those facts is irrelevant to the argument. Must I teach you everything.

[Imperial59]

No' date=' because missing a few starts in a 20 + year career is inconsequential and irrelevant when the issue being discussed is whether Clemen's early career shoulder surgery affected his durability. It clearly didn't. You seized on the word never and proved an entirely irrelevant point. Hence, the Pyrrhic victory. I also stated that he had 350 wins and that he pitched to age 46. I'm not sure that either of those statements are correct. They are not worth researching, because precision with regard to those facts is irrelevant to the argument. [b']Must I teach you everything.[/b]

 

 

Yes sensei. Forgive me for pointing out your factual innacuracies oh great one. You claimed:

 

had no shoulder issues during his Boston tenure after 1985.

 

And I pointed out that he went on the DL with a shoulder injury in 1990. It's really not a big deal, everyone makes mistakes. Some people admit that they made a mistake and move on, others get upset and take it out on other people over the internet.

[a700hitter]

 

Yes, you're clearly the sensei of PSD. Forgive me for pointing out your factual innacuracies oh great one. You claimed:

 

 

 

And I pointed out that he went on the DL with a shoulder injury in 1990. It's really not a big deal, everyone makes mistakes. Some people admit that they made a mistake and move on, others get upset and take it out on other people over the internet.

Continue arguing irrelevant facts and you'll continue losing arguments. Just sayin.

 

BTW Have you fact checked the # of Clemens wins and his age? just as irrelevant.

[Imperial59]

Continue arguing irrelevant facts and you'll continue losing arguments. Just sayin.

 

BTW Have you fact checked the # of Clemens wins and his age? just as irrelevant.

 

You simply aren't the type to admit when you make a mistake, are you? You get bitter, claim the other person's post in which they proved you wrong is irrelevant and when they challenge you on it, you claim they lost the argument. Why so serious?

[Dojji]

http://montaraventures.com/pix/no-tilting-at-windmills.jpg

[a700hitter]

You simply aren't the type to admit when you make a mistake' date=' are you? You get bitter, claim the other person's post in which they proved you wrong is irrelevant and when they challenge you on it, you claim they lost the argument. Why so serious?[/quote']I admitted the mistake several posts back. It was, as I put it a Pyrrhic victory, because you pointed out a mistake regarding an irrelevant fact. I'm not bitter. I'm just trying to point out that you're argument is technical and misses the forest for the trees, but I guess that is your style. Carry on.

[Imperial59]

I admitted the mistake several posts back. It was' date=' as I put it a Pyrrhic victory, because you pointed out a mistake regarding an irrelevant fact. [b']I'm not bitter. I'm just trying to point out that you're argument is technical and misses the forest for the trees, but I guess that is your style[/b]. Carry on.

 

Yes, that didn't sound bitter at all

 

Your argument which consists of the fact that Beckett's shoulder may not be an issue because one of the major steroids users of all-time pitched into his 40's after shoulder injury is much more logical and comprehensive.

[a700hitter]

Yes' date=' that didn't sound bitter at all [/quote']

Yes, yes ! You were right all along. I was wrong. Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all of his health and injury problems. Imagine what he would have been if he had been healthy. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds. I think I am right in maintaining that Clemens was a horse, both before roids and while taking them.

[Imperial59]

Yes' date=' yes ! You were right all along. I was wrong. Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all of his health and injury problems. Imagine what he would have been if he had been healthy. [/b'] Do you see how ridiculous that sounds. I think I am right in maintaining that Clemens was a horse, both before roids and while taking them.

 

It is ridiculous. And it's also an obvious straw man.

 

I challenge you to show a single post where I said that Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all his health and injury problems.

[a700hitter]

 

Yes sensei. Forgive me for pointing out your factual innacuracies oh great one. You claimed:

 

 

 

And I pointed out that he went on the DL with a shoulder injury in 1990. It's really not a big deal, everyone makes mistakes. Some people admit that they made a mistake and move on, others get upset and take it out on other people over the internet.

In 1990, he pitched 228 innings, won 21 games, led the league with a 1.93 ERA (the 2nd lowest of his 24 year career), and he finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting. Yes, I guess you were right that he fell victim to a bum shoulder that season.

[a700hitter]

It is ridiculous. And it's also an obvious straw man.

 

I challenge you to show a single post where I said that Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all his health and injury problems.

The point of my post that started all of this was that an early shoulder injury did not prevent Clemens from being a reliable starter -- a horse. In order to prove me wrong, you'd have to prove to me that he wasn't a horse.

[arbitrary]

http://montaraventures.com/pix/no-tilting-at-windmills.jpg

 

don't fight the windmill, man!

[Dojji]

What's worse is that Imperial seems to be moving the windmill.

[a700hitter]

It is ridiculous. And it's also an obvious straw man.

 

I challenge you to show a single post where I said that Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all his health and injury problems.

I'd have used this post which you have edited to eliminate your statement that he was injured in 3 of his last 4 years with the Red Sox and that is why they let him go.

[Imperial59]

What's worse is that Imperial seems to be moving the windmill.

 

If you have nothing more to add to the discussion other than pictures and personal insults, feel free to step aside at any time now. This isn't FOX news.

[a700hitter]

If you have nothing more to add to the discussion other than pictures and personal insults' date=' feel free to step aside at any time now. This isn't FOX news.[/quote']Why so serious... it's the internet?

[Imperial59]

The point of my post that started all of this was that an early shoulder injury did not prevent Clemens from being a reliable starter -- a horse. In order to prove me wrong' date=' you'd have to prove to me that he wasn't a horse.[/quote']

 

It's a lot easier to rewrite history when you're not on a web site with a quote function. Your exact words were:

 

he had no shoulder issues during his Boston tenure after 1985.

 

Nothing at all about the shoulder injury not preventing Clemens from being a reliable starter -- a horse.

 

And I simply pointed out that your statement was untrue. No big deal, everyone makes mistakes.

[a700hitter]

It's a lot easier to rewrite history when you're not on a web site with a quote function. Your exact words were:

 

 

 

Nothing at all about the shoulder injury not preventing Clemens from being a reliable starter -- a horse.

 

And I simply pointed out that your statement was untrue. No big deal, everyone makes mistakes.

It's called context.

[Imperial59]

Why so serious... it's the internet?

 

Yes, comparing Doj to FOX news was clearly serious business

 

You're a trip.

[YAZMAN]

Anything Goes & Fights and Crap were sooooo boooooring.

 

 

Maybe one of the mods will archive you two until you can get your act together.

[a700hitter]

It's a lot easier to rewrite history when you're not on a web site with a quote function. Your exact words were:

 

 

 

Nothing at all about the shoulder injury not preventing Clemens from being a reliable starter -- a horse.

 

And I simply pointed out that your statement was untrue. No big deal, everyone makes mistakes.

...and I conceded the factual point, but it had nothing to do with the the point I was trying to convey. It was not pertinent. Cut your losses.

[Dojji]

There is no discussion. There's just you and a700 talking past each other.

 

Let's recap shall we?

 

Your point: That a shoulder injury early in Beckett's career puts him at greater risk for shoulder-related injury and resulting useless late in his career.

 

A700's rebuttal: There's a number of examples of power righthanders with similar injuries early in their career who did not have significant shoulder troubles later in their career. Example, Roger Clemens, who had a shoulder injury in 1985 but didn't miss significant time because of his shoulder later in his career, and indeed went on to pitch well into his 40's.

 

Your response: He missed a couple starts in 1993. You are therefore wrong. As this undeniably proves my complete intellectual superiority over you I will now act like a total douche and disrupt further debate with pointless snark.

 

a700: How does a couple injuries in 1993 which didn't cost him any real time or imperil his future career have any bearing on my argument? Or on the discussion to this point at all?

 

Your response: Nyah. Nyah I say. I have already demonstrated my intellectual superiority. You continue to attempt to make points. Thus you are clearly a sore loser, so again I say, Nyah.

 

Dude, you really aren't covering yourself with glory here.

[italstallianion]

...and I conceded the factual point' date=' but it had nothing to do with the the point I was trying to convey. It was not pertinent. [b']Cut your losses[/b].

 

 

That would imply that he had something to lose in the first place.

[Imperial59]

I'd have used this post which you have edited to eliminate your statement that he was injured in 3 of his last 4 years with the Red Sox and that is why they let him go.

 

So basically, you've got nothing?

 

You claimed I said that "Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all of his health and injury problems." I asked you to show a single post where I said that. So either put up or shut up.

[a700hitter]

That would imply that he had something to lose in the first place.

Baiting?

[Imperial59]

There is no discussion. There's just you and a700 talking past each other.

 

Let's recap shall we?

 

Your point: That a shoulder injury early in Beckett's career puts him at greater risk for shoulder-related injury and resulting useless late in his career.

 

A700's rebuttal: There's a number of examples of power righthanders with similar injuries early in their career who did not have significant shoulder troubles later in their career. Example, Roger Clemens, who had a shoulder injury in 1985 but didn't miss significant time because of his shoulder later in his career, and indeed went on to pitch well into his 40's.

 

Your response: He missed a couple starts in 1993. You are therefore wrong. As this undeniably proves my complete intellectual superiority over you I will now act like a total douche and disrupt further debate with pointless snark.

 

a700: How does a couple injuries in 1993 which didn't cost him any real time or imperil his future career have any bearing on my argument? Or on the discussion to this point at all?

 

Your response: Nyah. Nyah I say. I have already demonstrated my intellectual superiority. You continue to attempt to make points. Thus you are clearly a sore loser, so again I say, Nyah.

 

Dude, you really aren't covering yourself with glory here.

 

 

Show a single post where I mentioned 1993/claimed I was intellectually superior to anyone/claimed that Clemens missed significant time or basically said anything else that you claimed that I said.

[a700hitter]

So basically, you've got nothing?

 

You claimed I said that "Clemens was an unreliable starter due to all of his health and injury problems." I asked you to show a single post where I said that. So either put up or shut up.

I can't quote something that you edit out of a post.

[Dojji]

Why would I have to show you a single post when you've expressed this for the benefit of the entire forum over multiple posts?

 

Do you seriously think you're winning anything here? I want to know.

[Imperial59]

That would imply that he had something to lose in the first place.

 

He had to make it look like he was "winning" somehow :dunno: