Michael wrote:I never think these thread bumps are the "gottchas" the bumpers think they are. There's nothing wrong or unreasonable being "for" a signing then later criticizing the front office if the signing doesn't pan out. Ultimately we're just folks talking on the internet. On the other hand, it's the front office's job and they need to execute.
Exactly. For the vast majority of fans, baseball/sports is a hobby. I really don't care that I was right or wrong about this or that guy, because I casually lookup stats in the little spare time that I have.
Who cares? Its entertainment. I've probably been "right" on, rough guess, 10-20% ish of the signings/trades/draft picks I thought we should have/should have not made. (probably the most obvious good ones) Wrong on the rest. Who cares? If I was the GM, then sure, that would be a problem, but I'm not. So who cares?
Michael wrote:I never think these thread bumps are the "gottchas" the bumpers think they are. There's nothing wrong or unreasonable being "for" a signing then later criticizing the front office if the signing doesn't pan out. Ultimately we're just folks talking on the internet. On the other hand, it's the front office's job and they need to execute.
Exactly. For the vast majority of fans, baseball/sports is a hobby. I really don't care that I was right or wrong about this or that guy, because I casually lookup stats in the little spare time that I have.
Who cares? Its entertainment. I've probably been "right" on, rough guess, 10-20% ish of the signings/trades/draft picks I thought we should have/should have not made. (probably the most obvious good ones) Wrong on the rest. Who cares? If I was the GM, then sure, that would be a problem, but I'm not. So who cares?
well these "gotchas" are dmarx's hobby it seems
sometimes they are funny, I admit...this bump just doesn't make any sense
dmarx114 wrote:
But I am sorry, you can't be in favor of a signing 3 years ago and then use that same signing as a reason the GM should be fired today.
1. That's not what is happening.
2. Why? Fat's not getting millions of dollars to make these decisions. Only the people that actually make the decisions and get paid to do so are accountable. I can say the pham trade was the best thing that's ever happened day 1 and then day 365 reverse course and call for peoples' heads on a spike.
That's my prerogative as a fan. In the end, all I care about is winning, and we're looking at a team that's not even in the 10-team playoffs if the season ended today despite having the 6th highest payroll in the league. That's pretty bad front-officing by any non-biased metric.
To maintain credibility. I think most of us post with the idea of having a credible opinion on a given subject. And if someone is inconsistent, I think that hurts their credibility.
I realize we are in a hot take era, but I still think people should own all of their comments. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to applauding Mo for the Grichuk-Leone trade.
Sounds made up. You can maintain credibility by changing an opinion when it's proven wrong. Continuing to support an obviously incorrect statement leads to a severe lack of credibility.
Can you imagine if the scientific process followed your line of thinking?
Step 1: Form a hypothesis.
Steps 2 - infinity: Ignore everything and argue the hypothesis is right to maintain credibility.
dmarx114 wrote:
But I am sorry, you can't be in favor of a signing 3 years ago and then use that same signing as a reason the GM should be fired today.
1. That's not what is happening.
2. Why? Fat's not getting millions of dollars to make these decisions. Only the people that actually make the decisions and get paid to do so are accountable. I can say the pham trade was the best thing that's ever happened day 1 and then day 365 reverse course and call for peoples' heads on a spike.
That's my prerogative as a fan. In the end, all I care about is winning, and we're looking at a team that's not even in the 10-team playoffs if the season ended today despite having the 6th highest payroll in the league. That's pretty bad front-officing by any non-biased metric.
To maintain credibility. I think most of us post with the idea of having a credible opinion on a given subject. And if someone is inconsistent, I think that hurts their credibility.
I realize we are in a hot take era, but I still think people should own all of their comments. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to applauding Mo for the Grichuk-Leone trade.
Michael wrote:I never think these thread bumps are the "gottchas" the bumpers think they are. There's nothing wrong or unreasonable being "for" a signing then later criticizing the front office if the signing doesn't pan out. Ultimately we're just folks talking on the internet. On the other hand, it's the front office's job and they need to execute.
Exactly. For the vast majority of fans, baseball/sports is a hobby. I really don't care that I was right or wrong about this or that guy, because I casually lookup stats in the little spare time that I have.
Who cares? Its entertainment. I've probably been "right" on, rough guess, 10-20% ish of the signings/trades/draft picks I thought we should have/should have not made. (probably the most obvious good ones) Wrong on the rest. Who cares? If I was the GM, then sure, that would be a problem, but I'm not. So who cares?
well these "gotchas" are dmarx's hobby it seems
sometimes they are funny, I admit...this bump just doesn't make any sense
I think he writes down the thread title and anyone who disagreed with him so that in the future if it turns out they're wrong (not necessarily that he was right, just that they were wrong), he'll necro a thread and quote every. single. post. with a snarky remark. The first 50 or so times he did it it was only a minor annoyance... Now it's getting really annoying.
First, I don't read these threads for the wisdom of a single poster, but for the wisdom of crowds--that is, reasoned assessments why a team acquisition or trade was made, and the pros and cons moving forward. You can find that cumulatively in this thread, which is all you can ask for--not individual accuracy per se, but thoughtfulness based on limited information. So I don't expect perfection from any one poster, but I do appreciate attention to detail, explaining of one's thought process, and presenting one's homework. That is certainly here.
Second, why can't someone reassess a transaction three years later? If anything, I think that someone who went out on a limb to analyze and approve a transaction would be in a BETTER position to critique it later when the expected performance hasn't materialized. Taken together, such posts are continued reflection, and not the disingenuous goalpost shifting that is being imputed.
We need to distinguish between two very different kinds of posters: those who weigh in with reasoned discussion and go out on a limb, and then follow up with further discussion, and those who present themselves as Nostradamuses when the team is playing the worst teams in the league or getting crushed by the best. "Game over in the first inning!" "I told all you Kool-Aid guzzlers that this would happen."
