Braves sign Dickey

Hawk said:
It means that if he's right you would have to put "Enscheff has a 10" donkey Dickey, ****ed my wife, kicked my ass at catch, and makes 10X as much as me" in your signature. If he's wrong, he would have to put "I desperately seek validation, have a micropenis, live in my Mother's basement, and love realtors" in his.

Make the deal Guv. Make the deal.
Click to expand...

Correct. Except I'll make his signature be, "This poster has a Baseball Knowledge Index of X/10", and I get to decide what X is.

State what mine will be, and let's seal this deal.
 
Enscheff said:
Again, you aren't paying attention. A team interested in acquiring Archer doesn't sign Dickey and Colon on back to back days in November. A team going for Archer signs guys like that as fall back plans in January.

The Braves added 400 reliable innings of average-ish pitching to their rotation at minimal cost and commitment. It is exactly what they said they wanted to do from day 1.

They also said from day 1 they will not be trading prospect assets for a quick fix. Why do folks still insist on trying to come up with clever scenarios that completely contradict everything that has been said and done?
Click to expand...

Why indeed?
 
Enscheff said:
I'm struggling to see where I was wrong here. A team that just paid for mediocre innings would not trade for Archer, and they didn't.

Let's see what you have to say when I dig up all your dumb comments. I already have a few in mind haha.
Click to expand...

There was the time I couldn't read the service time chart on baseball reference. That was a good one.
 
Enscheff said:
Yeah I'll start there.

And you still didn't explain how I was wrong.
Click to expand...

You were right about the service time.

If you mean this thread, I still don't think you were wrong when you said:

"they also said from day 1 they will not be trading prospect assets for a quick fix. Why do folks still insist on trying to come up with clever scenarios that completely contradict everything that has been said and done?"

I still agree with you.
 
Southcack77 said:
You were right about the service time.

If you mean this thread, I still don't think you were wrong when you said:

"they also said from day 1 they will not be trading prospect assets for a quick fix. Why do folks still insist on trying to come up with clever scenarios that completely contradict everything that has been said and done?"

I still agree with you.
Click to expand...

Then why did you necro this thread in an attempt to show all the times I was wrong.

You better go back and start editing your old posts. I hope you do so I can call you out on that too haha.
 
Enscheff said:
Then why did you necro this thread in an attempt to show all the times I was wrong.

You better go back and start editing your old posts. I hope you do so I can call you out on that too haha.
Click to expand...

I was admiring your eloquent prose.

"I think the Braves are showing the optimal blueprint for building a roster during that awkward transition season between rebuilding and true contention. Mismanaging that transitional season has scuttled many rebuilds, and I think the Braves are handling it nearly perfectly."
 
Southcack77 said:
I was admiring your eloquent prose.

"I think the Braves are showing the optimal blueprint for building a roster during that awkward transition season between rebuilding and true contention. Mismanaging that transitional season has scuttled many rebuilds, and I think the Braves are handling it nearly perfectly."
Click to expand...

And they were handling it perfectly by signing short term pitchers. Nothing worked out for them on the pitching staff, from rookies to veterans.

How exactly are those contradictory statements?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top