2025 Trade Deadline Thread

Enscheff said:
People don’t pound out multiple off topic essays unless they are triggered. Stop trying to backpedal.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you could trigger me if you tried. However, I would enjoy reading your writing a lot more if you moderated your rhetorical style to be a bit less authoritarian.

And that’s why we’re all here, right? A strange mix of enjoyment and longstanding compulsion.
 
jpx7 said:
I don’t think you could trigger me if you tried. However, I would enjoy reading your writing a lot more if you moderated your rhetorical style to be a bit less authoritarian.

And that’s why we’re all here, right? A strange mix of enjoyment and longstanding compulsion.
Click to expand...
and Cy's Mom
 
so not only AA isn't going to be a seller at the deadline like I said, He is going to continue to let Twitner to bench ROY to tank that pick as well...

like I have been saying the org has some sort of stupid virus that they can't get rid of.
 
I am convinced Snit is purposely sabotaging this team out of spite because he's being forced to retire. There is no other reason for the decisions he makes.
 
Catching is the most nuanced position on the field, and the most demanding by far.

That said, if you can't play the guy in the lead for the ROY voting that will get you a pick with an open DH spot...then I can't help you. Move the backup Murphy, and grab a decent all glove backup for half the price of Murphy, save the $, get assets for 26...PROFIT.
 
Carp said:
It's not semantics. You just have zero reading comprehension and butted your nose into a conversation for no reason than to make a snide remark.

The post I was replying to said "The guy the Pads gave up is not the # 3 guy. Top 20, sure, but he's no Acuna and at 18 still a ways off."

I was just pointing out that FG has a guy the same age and a playing at a level lower. That is the point. I'm sorry you are having trouble comprehending that.
Click to expand...
I can promise you with 100% certainty you're not capable of conveying a thought I can't comprehend.

But by all means, keep pounding the semantics table despite nobody actually disagreeing with your actual point of "De Vries was an overpay". We all know he was an overpay no matter where he ranks exactly.

Unless you've switched to defending mlb.com...which is just silly.
 
Enscheff said:
I can promise you with 100% certainty you're not capable of conveying a thought I can't comprehend.

But by all means, keep pounding the semantics table despite nobody actually disagreeing with your actual point of "De Vries was an overpay".
Click to expand...
You can believe what you want.

I'm sorry you butted your nose into a conversation without understanding the context just to say something snide. Congrats I guess?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top