2014 Offseason Thread

Post #181 » by **Da Schwab** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 3:53 am

The Rays have had more winning seasons in the last six years than the A's.

I rest my case.

TheKingofSting · Post #182 » by **TheKingofSting** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 3:57 am

Ouch!

and the Blue Jays are not very good!

Post #183 » by **Stanford** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:25 am

Da Schwab wrote:Are you Quake's brother or something?

ethered

Neddy · Post #184 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:25 am

Da Schwab wrote:The Rays have had more winning seasons in the last six years than the A's.

I rest my case.

haha if you shrink the sample size to 3 seasons, billy's A's crush the Rays, and if you increase the sample size to 14 seasons the A's blow the rays off the water by more than 200 more wins. so what is exactly your point other than manipulating the stats within an extremely narrow band to fit your argument?

Neddy · Post #185 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:26 am

Stanford wrote:
Da Schwab wrote:Are you Quake's brother or something?

ethered

quakes dad went to the same dental school as i, so what?

Post #186 » by **Stanford** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:28 am

Neddy wrote:
Stanford wrote:
Da Schwab wrote:Are you Quake's brother or something?

ethered

quakes dad went to the same dental school as i, so what?

Schwab's dad studied anesthesiology and passed on everything he learned.

Neddy · Post #187 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:29 am

Stanford wrote:
Neddy wrote:
Stanford wrote:
ethered

quakes dad went to the same dental school as i, so what?

Schwab's dad studied anesthesiology and passed on everything he learned.

so he isn't an anesthesiologist but my brother in law is, lol

PS- they make some serious bucks, those bastards.

Post #188 » by **Stanford** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:31 am

Don't matter. You done been ethered, bruh.

Neddy · Post #189 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:32 am

Stanford wrote:Don't matter. You done been ethered, bruh.

you still haven't proven anything statistically to support your position, bruh.

Neddy · Post #190 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:32 am

BTW Im pretty sure Im closer to your dad's age than yours, Stan.

Post #191 » by **Stanford** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:43 am

Neddy wrote:BTW Im pretty sure Im closer to your dad's age than yours, Stan.

I'm sure that's right. You type like the old man.

Neddy · Post #192 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:47 am

Stanford wrote:
Neddy wrote:BTW Im pretty sure Im closer to your dad's age than yours, Stan.

I'm sure that's right. You type like the old man.

lol well done, young lad. but you still fail to actually post statistical evidence to support your claim, son.

Neddy · Post #193 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:56 am

and before you use your power to ban me, I will stop debating you, I thought you were better than to get personal but I guess I am not as wise as my age says, therefore I will seize to reply simply because i love this site and don't plan to be banned anytime soon.

but if you actually post statistical rebuttal, I am all yours, stan.

otherwise consider this the last post from me since i can't afford to get too personal as you are a mod and i am not.

RIPskaterdude · Post #194 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:07 am

Here's some statistical evidence for you

Giants have 3 rings in 5 years

BAM!

Neddy · Post #195 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:09 am

RIPskaterdude wrote:Here's some statistical evidence for you

Giants have 3 rings in 5 years

BAM!

... and what does that got to do with hanley's defense at 3rd base? maybe you should read before you post?

please don't tell me that logic and reasoning is beyond a regular giants fan because i refuse to believe your fan base is that dumb.

Quake Griffin · Post #196 » by **Quake Griffin** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:23 am

Har har at Quake's brother.

hard time finding me being wrong about much on this forum.

brb pablo can't defend.
brb rollins can't defend.
all in the same thread.

Quake Griffin · Post #197 » by **Quake Griffin** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:25 am

RIPskaterdude wrote:Here's some statistical evidence for you

Giants have 3 rings in 5 years

BAM!

still fighting for respect and relevance.

so much you have to tell people you're a dynasty.
good for you.

we've got you in the long run in Dodger Country.

RIPskaterdude · Post #198 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:39 am

Neddy wrote:
RIPskaterdude wrote:Here's some statistical evidence for you

Giants have 3 rings in 5 years

BAM!

... and what does that got to do with hanley's defense at 3rd base? maybe you should read before you post?

please don't tell me that logic and reasoning is beyond a regular giants fan because i refuse to believe your fan base is that dumb.

I didn't say it was related to what you were talking about, it's just statistical evidence

Neddy · Post #199 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:48 am

RIPskaterdude wrote:
Neddy wrote:
RIPskaterdude wrote:Here's some statistical evidence for you

Giants have 3 rings in 5 years

BAM!

... and what does that got to do with hanley's defense at 3rd base? maybe you should read before you post?

please don't tell me that logic and reasoning is beyond a regular giants fan because i refuse to believe your fan base is that dumb.

I didn't say it was related to what you were talking about, it's just statistical evidence

statistical evidence to what? exactly? i am curious now... what do you do for a living?

i sure hope you are not in a field that is vital to my survival when i am ready to retire.

El Turco · Post #200 » by **El Turco** » Sat Nov 29, 2014 9:46 am

Statistical evidence of a badass baseball franchise.