Outshined_One

Remember m4d's friend in high places who said Furcal to the Cubs was a done deal, then came back two days afterward with a Zito to the Cubs as a done deal to top himself? Oh trolls, how we love them around here.

Says you, drunky. Fool, Don't make me open up a can of Chef Boyardee Ravioli on your ass. You won't like the taste of it, AND it'll likely give you montezuma's revenge. So backup!! Blah, blah, I'm up reading Crim Law, what's your excuse for being up this late?

What caused 20000 hits on 12/7 last year? December 7, 2005: Traded by the Florida Marlins to the Chicago Cubs for Sergio Mitre, Ricky Nolasco, and Renyel Pinto. ...a day that will live in infamy Bonus points for the WW2 reference.

It easily has the "meaningless content" award locked up. You weren't around for the old "chit-chat" threads in social. Ahhhhhhhhhh, memories. And oh God...the Juan Pierre trade.

What caused 20000 hits on 12/7 last year?

Says you, drunky.

Weenie! QFT Last Poster Posting Competition I'm an insomniac so you are all in trouble What, is this now a post where the last person to post wins? It's guaranteed the mods are going to cheat. :(

Dan Plesac has funny eyebrows. So does Rex Grossman. My friend noticed that when he has his helmet on, his eyebrows disappear into it, like they go all the way up his head.

http://sixtymins.ytmnd.com/ Love it.

There were only two good parts to that episode. But overall, it sucked. I refuse to believe you are serious. It was one of the best of the season IMO. Nah, this season had much, MUCH better episodes than that one.

Two of my favorite YTMNDs of all time.

There were only two good parts to that episode. But overall, it sucked.

Plus I got this tat... http://www.insidestl.com/webpics/stlsports/hoosiertatoo.jpg http://www.insidestl.com/webpics/stlsports/hoosiertatoocloseup.jpg THIS IS OUUUUR COUNTRY HOOSIER!!!!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/Outshined_One/Batmanbomb2.gif

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/5351/failed4gz9ssyh8.jpg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/4889/pretentiouspandagi2.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c77/Mr_G77/urf.jpg http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r114/tcbm7/img/funny/80.gif http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/3948/energizerthread3qkjd6.jpg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/3708/39fatgirlmosh4lvco4.jpg

Poor Rich Hill. :(

So what's the dividing line between young and old? I'm 29, am I an old young guy, or an young old guy? Modestly aged.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c77/Mr_G77/urf.jpg

Your opinion has my curiosity piqued. I would truly be grateful if you expounded upon it so as to further enlighten me. Only when an observation has been repeatedly validated can it be considered a fact. Even then I'd stick an asterisk by it. You also need compitent data takers, which is not a given in a "stat" for it to become a "fact." A stat is very close to becoming a fact, but I don't think you can make that leap in confidence. It's a minor point, but since this thread has run amok, I thought I'd throw that in there. I don't have a problem with stats. They're wonderful things, but you have to be careful about the conclusions you draw from your data. I understand where you are coming from in this split hair, but I would strongly disagree with you on the following basis: The question is not whether Soriano hit a home run on any given day. The question is whether or not the governing body in question gave him credit for hitting a home run. The first question may be challenged on your basis above. The second cannot be reasonably questioned as it is documented and reported through many, many independent sources. The accumulation of baseball events is all done on this basis and therefore baseball statistics are actual facts. You are saying that in one case, the data is true and therefore the stat must be a fact. You are reasoning from the specific to the general, but that is not a valid argument. The confidence level in HR data taking has nothing to do with defensive data confidence or any other baseball data confidence. I believe Tantotiger even said (in your chat forums) that defensive stats are arguably not better than the scout's judgement b/c they are both involve human subjectivity. Obviously that data and the resulting stats are not facts as they can differ depending on who is taking them. It's also another thing to say that a certain stat is a "fact" and then to draw conclusions from it. Those conclusions may or may not be true depending on how you use facts to justify an argument. ^^^ Yes, I know it's PHIL 101 junk. :lol: Don't make me bring out causation analysis and David Hume...those days are long behind me and you're both tempting me. :cry:

...but can he walk and chew gum at the same time?

http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/1157/1137228575093lh1.jpg

:evil: I was just about to post that!!!!!