Escobar?

On Thu, 1 May 2008 15:58:01 -0500, Dale Hicks
<dgh1138.TakeThisOut@southernbell.com> wrote:

>In article <67m9p8F2pp6q5U1.TakeThisOut@mid.individual.net>,
>colintwilliam@hotmail.com says...
>> Sam Hutcheson wrote:
>> > Come on, Terry. You and Colin both should have smelled this out as
>> > the troll that it was long, long ago.
>>
>> As I've pointed out before, sometimes I respond not to feed the trolls,
>> but because I think the discussion is worthwhile for others in the
>> group. whosthat is clearly a closed-minded nonthinker; however, Dale,
>> Terry and TCol are also in this thread.
>>
>> The troll is saying things that echo (up to a point) sentiments of many
>> older fans and baseball pundits. So yeah, the points come from a troll,
>> but the discussion is still an interesting one to visit among those who
>> are not trolls.
>
>Right, I was curious enought to look up the numbers to see how much
>of a truism this was. Colin was curious enough to do a term paper on
>it.

As was pointed out the older fans acknowledge the fact.
I put those that disagree up there with those who thought Lover Boy
was the best band of all time in a poll. Those with more experience
have more data to draw from.
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

<tcol.DeleteThis@toast.net> wrote
> But I feel that "Trolls, Hampton and their Influence on Athletic Perpetual
> Injuries" might be an appropriate and interesting theme for a doctoral
> thesis.

Alas, though, you have to follow the data, and in this case I fear that the
data on Hampton would lead to a conclusion of "justifiable trolling".

Colin
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

In article <l1hk14lc4gfmtgekhh0k20i2i0bj9oin45.DeleteThis@4ax.com>, tcol.DeleteThis@toast.net
wrote:

> On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:14:31 -0400, "Colin William"
> <colintwilliam.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Dale Hicks" <dgh1138.DeleteThis@southernbell.com> wrote
> >> Right, I was curious enought to look up the numbers to see how much
> >> of a truism this was. Colin was curious enough to do a term paper on
> >> it.
> >
> >If it ain't worth bein' long-winded, it ain't worth postin'.
> >
> >Colin
>
>
> But I feel that "Trolls, Hampton and their Influence on Athletic Perpetual
> Injuries" might be an appropriate and interesting theme for a doctoral
> thesis.
>
Probably an orthopedic doctoral thesis.
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

On Fri, 02 May 2008 11:48:34 -0500, Lance Freezeland
<freezelandlaw.nospam.RemoveThis@consolidated.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 01 May 2008 17:58:30 -0500, who'sthat <whosthat> gave us:
>
>>On Thu, 1 May 2008 15:58:01 -0500, Dale Hicks
>><dgh1138.RemoveThis@southernbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <67m9p8F2pp6q5U1.RemoveThis@mid.individual.net>,
>>>colintwilliam@hotmail.com says...
>>>> Sam Hutcheson wrote:
>>>> > Come on, Terry. You and Colin both should have smelled this out as
>>>> > the troll that it was long, long ago.
>>>>
>>>> As I've pointed out before, sometimes I respond not to feed the trolls,
>>>> but because I think the discussion is worthwhile for others in the
>>>> group. whosthat is clearly a closed-minded nonthinker; however, Dale,
>>>> Terry and TCol are also in this thread.
>>>>
>>>> The troll is saying things that echo (up to a point) sentiments of many
>>>> older fans and baseball pundits. So yeah, the points come from a troll,
>>>> but the discussion is still an interesting one to visit among those who
>>>> are not trolls.
>>>
>>>Right, I was curious enought to look up the numbers to see how much
>>>of a truism this was. Colin was curious enough to do a term paper on
>>>it.
>>
>>As was pointed out the older fans acknowledge the fact.
>>I put those that disagree up there with those who thought Lover Boy
>>was the best band of all time in a poll. Those with more experience
>>have more data to draw from.
>
>But yet, when confronted with actual data, you ignore it and choose to
>trust what your eyes tell you.

Actual data provided by someone else proved me right.
Common sense tells you that they didn't have middle relievers back in
the 60s so the starters went longer. If that math bothers you I can't
help you.
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

In article <umjm14h5tc9nd7r8b92l78bbp8sk730kuh DeleteThis @4ax.com>, who'sthat
<whosthat> says...
> On Fri, 02 May 2008 11:48:34 -0500, Lance Freezeland
> <freezelandlaw.nospam DeleteThis @consolidated.net> wrote:
>
> >But yet, when confronted with actual data, you ignore it and choose to
> >trust what your eyes tell you.
>
> Actual data provided by someone else proved me right.
> Common sense tells you that they didn't have middle relievers back in
> the 60s so the starters went longer.

I know you're trolling, but to set the record straight, the innings
pitched went down 10% while the games started went down 20% when they
moved to a five-man rotation.

Of course the reality is that they probably used some five-man
rotations back in the day to explain this disparity.

--
Cranial Crusader dgh 1138 at bell south point net
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar? 

"Dick Sidbury" <DrJamesSidbury DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DrJamesSidbury-5F67F4.11591528042008@individual.net...
: In article <6reb14ppt9sjok3t2bad6kc39puees19jq DeleteThis @4ax.com>,
: who'sthat <whosthat> wrote:
:
: > On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:59:42 -0700, Tarkus
: > <karnevil9 DeleteThis @atlantabraves.net> wrote:
: >
: > >who'sthat wrote:
: > >> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:53:02 -0700, Tarkus
: > >> <karnevil9 DeleteThis @atlantabraves.net> wrote:
: > >>
: > >>> tcol DeleteThis @toast.net wrote:
: > >>>> 1. This whole thread in my mind raises the question not only of
: > >>>> pitchers
: > >>>> but all players with respect to limitations and injuries. Now, I
go
: > >>>> back a
: > >>>> few decades and in my youthful heyday I followed baseball, at least
the
: > >>>> 3
: > >>>> NY teams, rather religiously and intensely especially from the
period
: > >>>> 1945
: > >>>> - 1956 when I left on a military career.
: > >>>>
: > >>>> Back then I cannot recall reading of debilitating injuries such as
torn
: > >>>> rotator cups, ham strings, groin injuries etc. Further, pitchers
: > >>>> routinely
: > >>>> went 9 innings unless "knocked out of the box". heck, recall
Dodger's
: > >>>> Don
: > >>>> Newcomb pitched a double header in the Polo grounds, although he
lasted
: > >>>> only about mid-way of game #2. Such known hurlers back then like
Vic
: > >>>> Rashii, Larry Jansen, Sal Maglie, Allie Reynolds, Eddie Lopat and
many
: > >>>> more
: > >>>> never seemed to make the DL or its equivalent in those days.
: > >>>>
: > >>>> What makes it perplexing to me is now-a-days body conditioning,
diet,
: > >>>> sports medicine, etc. is so far advanced over the era I recall,
that one
: > >>>> would think there would be less DL injuries.
: > >>> I believe that's already been addressed more than once, by more than
one
: > >>> person.
: > >>>
: > >>> Let me ask you this: Do you think Cy Young would have as many
victories
: > >>> today, even if he was allowed to pitch on the same exact schedule,
with
: > >>> the same number of innings?
: > >>>
: > >>> If so, I'd love to have some of what you're smoking.
: > >>
: > >> HAHAHHA he did it WHILE he was smoking. And most were also drinking!!
: > >> And traveling by train and not being babied in private jets as many
: > >> are today.
: > >>> It's a different game today. That's the main reason why pitchers
pitch
: > >>> fewer innings, not because they're somehow less manly or weak or
: > >>> something.
: > >>
: > >> Nope..you're still wrong.
: > >
: > >There is no right and wrong, because neither of us has proven anything
: > >beyond out own person opinions.
: > >
: > >Are YOU suggesting Cy Young would have the same stats today under
: > >similar circumstances to what he pitched under during his era?
: >
: > I'm saying Williams would have AVERAGED over 400 today.
:
: He's dead, Jim.
:
: dick
: -- But who dat won't find that out because he's got me killfiled.


and to think, I almost missed it. I must've accidentally copied
someone's killfile.

--
Scott
 >> Stay informed about: Escobar?