8/19 GDT BlowSox @ ExChamps

[tzill]

1. Towers (S) CF
2. Moped (R) 2B
3. BB9 (L) 1B
4. MVP (R) C
5. Gangle (R) RF
6. Panda (S) 3B
7. Frenchy (R) LF
8. Stamos (L) SS
9. Freak (L) P

Screw dem wicked bahstahds 4-2 good guys

 

[calsnowskier]

tz...

We are NOT the EXChamps...

stop with the pantshatting...

 

[calsnowskier]

Betting thread...

http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/[email protected]

7.5 O/U? Um, yes, please...

Giants costing 115, Sox getting 125. Meh...

 

[GiantsPackersChamps2011]

Go Giants!!!!!!

 

[Brahmsian]

Since I have been known to come up with uncomplimentary nicknames for
teams I don't like (New York Sinstripes, for example) I can't really object to your calling
my team the "Blow Sox". But I can ask you in future to refer to them by the
abbreviation "BoSox". It's long established, used by Bostonians, and not insulting.

Not asking you to root for them, BTW.

 

[calsnowskier]

Since I have been known to come up with uncomplimentary nicknames for
teams I don't like (New York Sinstripes, for example) I can't really object to your calling
my team the "Blow Sox". But I can ask you in future to refer to them by the
abbreviation "BoSox". It's long established, used by Bostonians, and not insulting.

Not asking you to root for them, BTW.

You are in a Giants board GDT, Brahm. We always make "funny" names for the opposing teams in the thread title, and sometimes bad ones for ourselves as well. If this GDT were posted on the Red Sox board, than you would be right in your request. However, as it is, the target audience for this thread is Giants fans.

You are welcome to hang out here. From what I have seen you mean no ill will, and bring some good knowledge that at least I would like to hear. But keep in mind, this is NOT neutral territory. You are most certainly behind enemy lines here.

 

[Brahmsian]

You can be amusing without being vulgar.

"Sinstripes" is not vulgar in my own, possibly biased eyes. "Blow Sox" is, and I am not amused by vulgarity.

BTW, the Yankees forum would be "behind enemy lines" for a fan of Boston teams. San Francisco is not,at least IMO.

 

[calsnowskier]

You can be amusing without being vulgar.

"Sinstripes" is not vulgar in my own, possibly biased eyes. "Blow Sox" is, and I am not amused by vulgarity.

BTW, the Yankees forum would be "behind enemy lines" for a fan of Boston teams. San Francisco is not,at least IMO.

Personally, I call them the "Spankees". Everyone has their own line.

As for enemy lines, I trust you knew what I meant when I said it. I don't feel I need to clarify it. It was not meant in a hostile or accusatory manor. You are welcome to take it as you see fit.

 

[GiantsPackersChamps2011]

Not sure we even have room to come up with names for our opponent's when they are clearly the superior team. Oh well just a difference of opinion on this one. Not my thread

 

[Brahmsian]

With me it doesn't matter that much whether a team is better or worse than the Boston team
it's competing against.

I'm going to be rooting against any NYC team because I've lived in Boston most
of my adult life. Texas teams also because I spent the 1st 25 years of my life in
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

On the other hand I tend to root FOR Minnesota teams because my maternal grandmother grew up in that state.

More later, the game is about to start.

Your Giants are this weekend's opposition, but otherwise I have nothing against them.

 

[Brahmsian]

There's a long way to go yet but your team is in BIG trouble now!

Lester's our ace and is the best bet on our staff to win a Cy Young Award someday.

The currently DL'd Clay Buchholz would be #2 on that list.

 

[Brahmsian]

During the commercial break I'd like to ask who here shares my desire tosee both leagues playing the same rules, whether with the DH or without?

 

[calsnowskier]

No DH.

Ever.

If half the teams want to bastardize the game, that is their prerogative.

 

[Brahmsian]

My position is that the pitcher in baseball is like the goalie in hockey. He's so crucial to the defense
that he HAS to be a defensive specialist.

One offensive specialist, the DH, balances that out. More than 1 DH per team would be wrong,
but 1 isn't.

 

[Mays-Fan]

During the commercial break I'd like to ask who here shares my desire tosee both leagues playing the same rules, whether with the DH or without?

I'm honestly torn. The DH would help us, as outside of Bum, we have the most God-awful hitting pitchers. Painful to watch. And it does extend the career of some exciting players.

But the purist in me would like to ban the DH. The DH is like putting in a rule in football that you can't hit the quarterback, like, at all. Or having a designated free-throw shooter for your worst free-throw shooter on the floor. Just not right.

What they ought to have is a rule that would create minimum dimensions for ML ballparks, instead of some of the statistic-skewing kiddie parks in certain large eastern metropolitan areas.

 

[Brahmsian]

You have to remember that most MLB parks, like Boston's Fenway Park,
were built back when team owners couldn't even THINK about asking for government
help in building stadia. They had to buy the land and pay for construction strictly
out of their own pockets. So the stadiums had to fit whatever real estate was available.

That made for greater distinctiveness for the stadia in different cities. I like that, personally.

 

[Mays-Fan]

You have to remember that most MLB parks, like Boston's Fenway Park,
were built back when team owners couldn't even THINK about asking for government
help in building stadia. They had to buy the land and pay for construction strictly
out of their own pockets. So the stadiums had to fit whatever real estate was available.

That made for greater distinctiveness for the stadia in different cities. I like that, personally.

Understood. The frustration on my part is that if Willie Mays had played in Fenway or its equivalent, he would have had like 800 home runs, and a like amount of doubles.

 

[calsnowskier]

I like uniformity, but I do NOT want to go back to the 70s or 80s where all the stadiums were cookie-cutters. As long as that can be avoided, I am all for stadium standards.

As for the DH, I hate to see a catcher on the base paths. I think each team should be able to have a designated runner to run for him. I also get irritated when an outfielder makes an error that really affects the game. Why not just mark up the OF and if a ball is hit into certain areas, the outcome is set (out, double, single, etc)

 

[Mays-Fan]

I like uniformity, but I do NOT want to go back to the 70s or 80s where all the stadiums were cookie-cutters. As long as that can be avoided, I am all for stadium standards.

As for the DH, I hate to see a catcher on the base paths. I think each team should be able to have a designated runner to run for him. I also get irritated when an outfielder makes an error that really affects the game. Why not just mark up the OF and if a ball is hit into certain areas, the outcome is set (out, double, single, etc)

Sounds like whiffle ball in my backyard as a kid. That was fun. I wouldn't have a problem with that.

 

[Stokes1931]

First, Timmeh balks in a run. (And then exhibits his best 2012-2013 sukkitude by allowing 9 hits and 4 walks in 5 miserable innings)

Then Moscoso (what do the Giants see in this guy?) wild pitches a run home.

In the meantime, the Giants' flailers, er, hitters, have one measly hit, and (drum roll please), no walks.

Timmeh pitching? Loss. Check.

Moscoso pitching? Loss. Check.

First game of a homestand? Loss. Check.

Unable to hit the ball safely or score runs? Loss. Check.

Opponent scores first (and second, and third, and fourth, and fifth). Loss. Check.

Giants commit an error. Loss. Check.

They are however, a perfect 0-0 with RISP. So that's something!

2013 Giants baseball. Bleh!