Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[anabiono]

i don't think he said anything about them being popular, most of them weren't

 

?

 

Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them?

 

thanks thread nazi

[anabiono]

 

kosuke will have a bounce back campaign

 

I agree with this, but it's far from a fact.

 

our bullpen is better than last year

 

Why? Unless Gooz breaks out, I don't see it.

our lineup is more balanced

 

No, it definitely is not.

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

[Schwarber Fan]

200 pages + amounts to nothing

 

well done everyone! :good:

[SouthSideRyan]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

[anabiono]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

 

your mom??

[17 Seconds]

i don't think he said anything about them being popular, most of them weren't

 

?

 

Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them?

 

thanks thread nazi

 

Umm okay

[17 Seconds]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

 

your mom??

 

I'm convinced

[The Other 15]

Good to know the real Jim Hendry is back. Not the one that made good move after good move last year. We're going to win 80 this year.

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote?

 

Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed.

 

So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made?

Yeah, that's exactly how what I wrote should be understood. In fact, if my statement was read correctly, it means the exact opposite.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I don't want to hurt your feelings by replying to one of your posts. That's just so creepy. At the risk of starting another three pages of you crying how you're so smart and everyone else is so stupid, it's posts like the one above that label you the [expletive] that most think you to be.

[17 Seconds]

Good to know the real Jim Hendry is back. Not the one that made good move after good move last year. We're going to win 80 this year.

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote?

 

Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed.

 

So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made?

Yeah, that's exactly how what I wrote should be understood. In fact, if my statement was read correctly, it means the exact opposite.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I don't want to hurt your feelings by replying to one of your posts. At the risk of starting another three pages of you crying how you're so smart and everyone else is so stupid, it's posts like the one above that label you the [expletive] that most think you to be.

 

Good lord, what is your deal? I knew as soon as I tried to discuss something with you you'd flip out, go crazy, and sart calling me names. My mistake.

 

And yeah, my post made perfect sense. He said Hendry made a lot of good moves last year. You implied he shouldn't receive credit for those because they weren't percieved as good moves at the time they happened. I think it's pretty obvious what you meant and pretty obvious what my post ws saying. Just like it's obvious that you're trying to start stuff. Whatever.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

*whistle*

*throws flag*

[17 Seconds]

*whistle*

*throws flag*

 

But seriously, did I do anything wrong here? I ggt attacked for no reason. Dude is insane.

 

Hopefully the modslook this over.

[The Other 15]

Good to know the real Jim Hendry is back. Not the one that made good move after good move last year. We're going to win 80 this year.

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote?

 

Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed.

 

So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made?

Yeah, that's exactly how what I wrote should be understood. In fact, if my statement was read correctly, it means the exact opposite.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I don't want to hurt your feelings by replying to one of your posts. At the risk of starting another three pages of you crying how you're so smart and everyone else is so stupid, it's posts like the one above that label you the [expletive] that most think you to be.

 

Good lord, what is your deal? I knew as soon as I tried to discuss something with you you'd flip out, go crazy, and sart calling me names. My mistake.

 

And yeah, my post made perfect sense. He said Hendry made a lot of good moves last year. You implied he shouldn't receive credit for those because they weren't percieved as good moves at the time they happened. I think it's pretty obvious what you meant and pretty obvious what my post ws saying. Just like it's obvious that you're trying to start stuff. Whatever.

Of course yours is the only post that made perfect sense. I wouldn't expect anything otherwise.

[17 Seconds]

Oh well. I think any reasonable person who looks over the last page of this thread will know who is being crazy and know exactly what posts make sense.

[The Other 15]

As long as you deem them to be reasonable, right?

[17 Seconds]

As I said, any reasonable person will understand what is going on here. Have a nice day.

[tfarks]

dont lock this thread plz

[cubbyvirus00]

Please lock this god forsaken thread. Peavy is not coming to Chicago.

 

Jim Hendry is an absolute failure.

[The Other 15]

Oh well. I think any reasonable person who looks over the last page of this thread will know who is being crazy and know exactly what posts make sense.

You wonder why I respond to your posts? Come on, you're easily the best comic relief here as unintentional as it may be.

 

Offended by [expletive]? Why, it's about the only way to describe your posting persona without getting profane. By any small chance, could any "reasonable" person understand that my post was meant to be exactly the opposite of Hendry bashing but rather a look back at how his moves looked good after the season was used as a measuring stick? And by any chance, could you put that together and understand that, without saying it directly, I was showing how past moves needed time to be proven good and that these moves deserve the same measure?

 

I know you worked long and hard to be the Commissioner of Taking Every Post Literally Division. It hasn't gone unnoticed by some of us.

[UMFan83]

Please lock this god forsaken thread. Peavy is not coming to Chicago.

 

Jim Hendry is an absolute failure.

 

Why does this mean Hendry is a failure? He didn't have to have Peavy, and when it came down to it, he likely didn't have the money to spend on him.

[erik316wttn]

I think we need cat pictures again.

[Bull]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

 

well since that's what he probably meant by "balanced", I'd say its pretty relevant.

 

Well...that's my contribution to this pathetic, threadless excuse for a thread.

[cubbyvirus00]

Please lock this god forsaken thread. Peavy is not coming to Chicago.

 

Jim Hendry is an absolute failure.

 

Why does this mean Hendry is a failure? He didn't have to have Peavy, and when it came down to it, he likely didn't have the money to spend on him.

 

Cmon, the entire offseason has been a failure. This ballclub did NOT improve in the offseason. We coulden't scratch out any runs in the playoffs for two years in a row. Jim Hendry is a giant failure.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

 

well since that's what he probably meant by "balanced", I'd say its pretty relevant.

 

Well...that's my contribution to this pathetic, threadless excuse for a thread.

 

Then I stand by my who cares. Who cares if the lineup has more leftie if it's a worse lineup?

[tfarks]

 

actually, from a left/right standpoint, it is

 

WHO CARES??

 

well since that's what he probably meant by "balanced", I'd say its pretty relevant.

 

Well...that's my contribution to this pathetic, threadless excuse for a thread.

 

Then I stand by my who cares. Who cares if the lineup has more leftie if it's a worse lineup?

 

Cubs management. And that's all that matters.

[The Other 15]

I don't get the worse lienup talk.

 

DeRos production replaced by Bradley and Fukudonems 2008 production replaced by Fontenot isn't enough to call the lineup worse. Different, balanced, younger yes. Worse? Not until proven so.