"The times they are a changin'."

Less Dylan, more Zappa. :)

I do love seeing the O's take advantage of sloppy play, instead of the other way around.

Personally I think Ozzie is losing his team.

He's been critical. His team has deserved some of that criticism, but you rarely see a manager publicly turn against his own players. Usually he's the one person who is supposed to protect and buffer them from media scrutiny. Here, he's been a major catalyst. And, for what it's worth, to me, the body language of his players seem to suggest that they resent that. They seem to be lackadaisical and disgruntled.

It's just hard for me to believe that the extraordinary degree of sloppy plays are just an extreme run of bad luck. It's got to be a pattern. I mean–I love the results for the Orioles, but come on–how many times in the last decade have we've seen so many good bounces fall the Orioles' way? It's just too weird.

Personally I think Ozzie is losing his team.

He's been critical. His team has deserved some of that criticism, but you rarely see a manager publicly turn against his own players. Usually he's the one person who is supposed to protect and buffer them from media scrutiny. Here, he's been a major catalyst. And, for what it's worth, to me, the body language of his players seem to suggest that they resent that. They seem to be lackadaisical and disgruntled.

It's just hard for me to believe that the extraordinary degree of sloppy plays are just an extreme run of bad luck. It's got to be a pattern. I mean–I love the results for the Orioles, but come on–how many times in the last decade have we've seen so many good bounces fall the Orioles' way to this degree? It's just too weird.

jc, Saw your post over on the Insider about Gonzo and the rest. Nice book there. Have you no shame though man? You are either on the Oriole payroll or you work for the Sun Paper. Is Cleveland one of those great teams you were talking about by the way? Face it jc, you are a blind Oriole apologist. Which of course, makes you an idiot

I think it stresses the importance of defense, makes me appreciate Wieters and Lee, Adam Dunn should have caught that ball. And speaking of catching balls, Fox should have caught the throw Adam Jones , Fox has not impressed me at all.

Jake Fox is trying...I don't know if he's succeeding. However, I will give him kudos for giving very effort!

My problem today is I have to suffer through steve stone and ken harrelson.
Stone isn't too bad, but Harrelson, aye carumba. I have never had to suffer through a bigger homer then Harrelson.
Oi!

PS- 2 things.
1.) Not sure why we sacrificed bunted Andino or maybe it was a bunt gone wrong. He's been one of our best hitters of late. Wouldn't have done it

2.) B Rob is making great contact. He really is driving that ball hard even if it's an out!

most peculiar Schmucky

walks

no excuse for walks

walks = doghouse

Yes, Berken has been a bit off as of late.
Another reason to consider Bergy as a set-up man.

How can we let Will Ohman get the best of us? Unbelievable!

PS- Would have liked to seen Britton go 7, oh well he's still a rookie/young..still..

Ahhhhhh,

My man Brit continues to stick it up AM's wazoo.

As long as he continues the way he is, AM will find it tough (even for him) to send him down the required amount (for business reasons).

Brit knows he can't slip up though... not for a second. I for one hope he gets sent down... just so baseball can see once and for all what a boob we have running the front office.

And how bout that Luke fella's?

I sure don't hear lots about his defense lately. Where ya at guys?

And golly...... Nick and Reynolds got hits today. Just one each, but hey....... they're still study.

I don't like how stressful that ninth inning was, but nice to see Gregg buckle down with those strikeouts. Was the called third strike on Rios a good call?

Wayne,
Wheres your LAST PLACE stuff? That was one of my top ten favorite Waynisms. Along with "We'll never saign Buck or "We'll never sign Vlad and on and on...

3rd place and climbing fast!

Strange how the better the O's do the cruder and more profane Wayne gets.

But at least Wayne goes to all the games....he he he

When is Pete quitting the blog again there Wayne....Your sources are pretty bad. I would quit listening to them...

Oh....they are all in your head?...Well tell em to shut up unless they can get something right once in a while.

Wayne says

"Face it people.

This is another LAST PLACE TEAM.

LAST PLACE
LAST PLACE"

You are sot on here dude...

I guess if 3rd place is considered last?

"just so baseball can see once and for all what a boob we have running the front office."

I didn't know boobs could win 2 World Series rings...

Two rings for the boobs... OK I have to stop now

we've seen them play just well enough to lose a bunch, nice to see them play just well enough to win a few of these games

Well at 13-13, I think we can look forward to 81 wins, That's how 13-13 plays out over a whole season. Right?
Hey, that's a nice improvement. I'm thinking a couple more wins, and 87 is not so out of reach.

Just to be sure, I checked with a colleague at MIT today to verify.He said yea, that works fine. But he was reading the blog one day and saw some dope try to fanagle things around and inject projections into his math argument, but he figured that some people just get confused when they tackle stuff like this.

Hey, Cleveland on the way to 112...nice

May 1st, the O's at .500 and in third place. Not a bad April at all considering the brutal schedule. Not bad at all...

I got to agree Pete, in past years the O's player would have been half way back to the dugout on those past balls. A.J. was really scuffling back there.

I quess somebody should have warned Wayne not to go outside in his tin foil hat before the recent thunderstorms, lately his posts read like he took a few thousand volts in the ole' noggin...

James -

Strike three to Rios was about nine feet outside. But, hey, you take what you can get. Maybe umps are still making up for that ridiculous call the ChiSox got a few years back in the playoffs. I can't remember exactly what happened, but I know it was beyond bizarre.

Anyway, let's keep this going with Guthrie going tomorrow!

I wonder if irony ever comes across to wayne in any meaningful way....

Couldn't it be argued that the rights to britton in 2017 were important because AM was convinced that Zach would be this good and therefore would love to keep him locked up for one extra year. If anything it shows what an astute talent evaluator AM is. That should be obvious to the unbiased eye.
Not quite as frequent a poster when the O's are going well ehh steve Eilerston?

14 days

Wayne's last post should prove to anyone who reads it that he'd rather obsessively hate Andy than see the O's win. Britton would have to get pretty crappy for him to get sent down.

"My man Brit"...sure, whine.

Hey Pete - I am back.

Let's see, 13-13 right around .500 - just as we expected.

by the way, I mean
Is that a Mexican Aloha or is that a Sears Aloha?

Poor Wayne - even in victory he can't let the AM digs go. Wayne when Zack wins whether you like it or not -- AM is rejoicing. In fact the only that is miserable is you - You want to make comments that in either victory or a loss - Wayne wins. Sorry Wayne is does not work that way for you -- why not just shut it up.

The pitching has been better lately.

The O's are also cathing some breaks - which never hurts.

Britton will retain his 5th year eligibility. He pitched 153 Innings at Norfolk last year, so he's not doing more than 175 this year.

IF he maintains his form, they'll probably shut him down during the All-Star break--maybe 1 start before and 2 after the break. They'll send him down for 20 games, and thus maintain the 5th year (but gain Super 2, I think...full market value, what ever that is in 2016).

By sending him down and resting him, he can pitch into the play-offs... 91 wins coming up, just like I said!

I posted on the other board and find myself called out on this one as a blind O's apologist? Which is supposed to make me an idiot. Or, apparently worse, accuses me of either being on the O's payroll or --- work for the Sun!

Ha!

What am I looking at? I'm looking at the world's most brutal schedule, our best pitcher on the DL, the bats not hitting, a rookie pitcher thrown into the bigs when he hasn't done much above AA, and a legacy of 13 miserable losing seasons. And what am I looking at? .500 on May 1st. Oh, did I mention weathering an 8 game losing streak?

I don't really give a crap if haters root for the O's or not. But calling me out because I recite the facts? And the facts are convincing me that things are good and getting better?

I have said from the beginning of ST that Buck is changing the culture. From a ping pong table in the ST clubhouse to making Andino his personal project to taking Matty under his wing when every analyst with a keyboard has been falling all over themselves to call him the biggest bust in history.

Lose 8 games? So what, says Buck. Start a winning streak. Against the Red Sox for crissakes. Gonzo sucking? Buck gives him the ball and says you got nothing to lose. Bats not producing, than you better run your ass off on a third strike. You better take off from third on a wild pitch if the pitcher doesn't break for the plate. You better gun down from center field anyone trying to score, and Matty'll have the plate blocked.

Young pitchers? Be aggressive. Throw strikes early in the count. Go after 'em. Don't be scared. Don't nibble.

You all think it's EASY to turn the Titanic away from the iceberg? Well, Buck's doing it. Killer instinct? Stepping on the ChiSox throats when they're down.

Are the O's at their best? You think they'll be better or worse when Matusz is back? You think their record will be better or worse when they start playing worse teams? You think their record will be better or worse when SOMEONE starts hitting closer to .300 than .250.

What I think this series and the Red Sox series shows me is that Orioles baseball is back with a vengeance. Fundamental, hard-nose, winning baseball is back. Because we have a manager who is changing the culture.

I may be a blind apologist, but I got nothing to apologize for!

Love ya smit my man. How you feeling these days by the way? A sometimes acquaintance of yours told me it hasn't been an easy go lately. Hope it's better soon.

Anyway my man.... don't write about me as much as you do. It's not healthy for you. Stay positive and keep your sense of humor.

By the way..... people noticed when you weren't around during the 8 game losing streak. I mean you vanished. It wasn't a good look. Stay around for the good and the bad ole buddy.

Me, I've been here the entire time.

As for 3rd place as compared to last. We'll see my friend. I hope I'm wrong smitarooo... I truly do.

I have a deal for you......

If the O's win 97 games like you say, I'll give you my seats for any 20 games you and a friend want for the 2012 season.

You pick the games my friend.

I won't be like ken and go back on a bet..... I stand by my word....

Now feel better, stay positive..... and as you say 'Go O's'...

Thanks Wayne but I don't think I could make the trip to New York or Boston for 20 games. It's a nice gesture though.
Since the only person in the world who would know I post as smitty and I'm pretty sure she would run the other way or call 911 when coming in contact with someone like you, I seriously doubt your story about knowing a "sometimes aquaintance"...
could this be the same reliable source that told you Pete was closing up shop?

You are correct. I didn't post much when the O's lost 8 straight. You see Wayne, I enjoy the winning and don't like the losing. Posting is more enjoyable when the O's win. For you, it seems the opposite....hmmm...I wonder why?
You just like the debate.

Hey Man - jc

No need to apologize for being an O's fan.

Better pitching will continue to lead to more wins.

20 games at the Yard smitty my man....

You name the games..... Get to 97 and I'll give them up proudly my friend.

So how do you "know me" from a "sometimes acquaintance"? And what's supposedly wrong with me?

C'mon...tell us...

Did you hear this from the same guy who told you this blog is shutting down? Or do you talk about this blog to everyone you run into on the street?

oh great now wayne is having conversations with himself playing both himself and me...

You should take a walk and get some fresh air

no smit, I'm not being you... That's the cool impostor who we like to laugh at from time to time. You know who it is, right?

Anyway, it's not important who I know. Trust me, some posters on here know who I am from knowing this or that person. Doesn't matter to me as it shouldn't to you.

Anyway, be well, stay positive..... and start thinking about the 20 games you'd like to go to when the O's win 97.

Peter-

A Quick side note. I'm sure everyone has heard the news by now. Baseball is America's past time. So...

Hoo Rah Spec Comm. Hope that MF'r is burning in hell right now. USA USA USA USA USA USA!!!!

Peter-

A Quick side note. I'm sure everyone has heard the news by now. Baseball is America's past time. So...

Hoo Rah Spec Comm. Hope that MF'r is burning in hell right now. USA USA USA USA USA USA!!!!

Peter-

A Quick side note. I'm sure everyone has heard the news by now. Baseball is America's past time. So...

Hoo Rah Spec Comm. Hope that MF'r is burning in hell right now. USA USA USA USA USA USA!!!!

I thought smitty was the impostor?

Mr. Schmuck,
FYI
It used to be Called "Oriole Magic"

Gregg for set-up man.

he is, and he isn't.... It's complicated.

So let me get this straight, Wayne is willing to sit through game after game of Orioles losses, but if they win 97 games this year he's willing to give 1/4 of his tickets away...

Now that answers a lot of questions about if Wayne is really an Oriole fan or not...

he is, and he isn't.... It's complicated.

Oh MountainFan.... Do you get outside the cabin much?

It's called a bet. A bet I would be happy to lose.

Because in losing this bet, it would mean the O's are winning (finally). I mean really winning.

And who better to lose a bet like this to than good ole smitty? The guy has been through allot. Year after year after year, he predicts winning. Year after year however, the Orioles let him down.

If they win 97 this season, they will have finally come through for smitty. And while it would be a sacrifice to me to give up 20 home games, I would gladly pay up.

A small price to pay for winning. Plus, I'd still get to go to the remaining 61 games if I choose.

Go smitty... Go O's!

He is and he isn't...sounds like double talk to me.

What am I missing here?

Do people really talk to themselves on this blog?

JJ,

Unfortunately, yes. But it's ok. To some, this is all they have.

To others, this is their gig (as a warehouser). The O's only employ a couple people who blog now, but they do nothing else, and they do it under multiple names.

You can see who they are...... let's just say the O's front office stopped fooling people a long time ago.

But during these times, it's a gig.... and everyone's allowed to make a buck.

There ya go.....

Wow...just...I mean they aren't...no one would...wow.

yes, the Orioles front office is terribly concerned with the 15 people that post on the blog...whew, shaking in their italian leather shoes, the poor players peeing on their kangaroo leather spikes

wayne,if you haven't noticed by now, they're overthrowing governments using my very own Facebook-FACT! ...ever think of taking your lame act over here?
You'll get a much bigger audience, and those people will get a much needed break. Think about it.

Or you can't bear to leave your sweet Petey?

I'm watching the game on MLB TV, and boy I tell ya. There is no worse announcers in MLB than the White Sox announcers. What's up with the idiot saying: "He Gawn!" after a strike out. Note to the Whitesox ownership: Not all baseball fans are rednecks. Get to know your audience!

The only nice thing they said about Guthrie was that he is well educated.

Wow! I will be upgrading to MLB TV premium so I can get the O's announcers back. Don't know what you've got 'til it's gone!

Meso,

The reasons many people don't say nice things about Guthrie is because he collects few W's.

Smart people realize however, that with his era and whip, he is again one of the better starters in the game. Not the best (as some people will say I'm saying).... but up there.

Home runs given up is a bs stats. W's is a bs stat (for starting pitchers)..... But era and whip? That's a different story.

Doesn't matter for the guy though. He'll win huge in arbitration next off season, and if he repeats next year what he's been doing 4 of the past 5 years (including this year), he'll be the #2 starter in the Yanks rotation, making at least 15m per year.

That'll be a good day for Jeremy.

Wayne,

Maybe; however in this case it just has to do with terrible broadcasters. The guy is such an effing homer that he couldn't even call Guthrie's last strikeout, as it never happened.

I'm not saying our announcers are not homers, but at least they call the effing game as it happens. Jim Palmer actually pisses me off some time going out of his way to kiss Derek Jeter's ass.

The Os are getting McNally'd tonite. Bunch of hits, few well placed walks, you think you should have 10 runs.

Meso,

Agreed.....

Pete,
Saw your column on McCourt. How about a local angle that exposes Jamie Luskin McCourt as partly to blame for the mess in L.A.? Her lifestyle needs makes McCourt seem like a hobo.

@jim66,

Agreed. You want to beat the O's? Throw a lefty who can walk and chew gum at the same time out there.

Wow.

I haven't listened to Hawk Harrelson since I got rid of cable, and I'm sure glad.

I tuned into the game on MLB.tv on my phone just in time for Lee's homer and...

Crickets.

Sure, I get that announcers are going to favor the team they announce for, but that non-call on Lee's homer was an absolute joke.

I've always likened Harrelson to a fan sitting on his couch watching the game with a six pack of cheap beer at his side, and boy, he was really in that kind of form tonight from what I heard.

Back to the O's...

Painful game tonight. 17 base runners and we scored two runs. Ouch. Not much else to say.

But I'll still take three out of four in this series and five out of the last seven. Keep winning series and you'll end up with a good record.

@Brooks

Look I don't like Hawk either. He drives be nuts. Like Meso said, Hawk says things like:
1.) He Gawn
2.) Stretch
3.) Get back in Here
4.) I hope he drops it. He said that back in 2009

I am not a big fan of Jim Palmer either. He knows what he's talking about, but he's not fun! When is Ben McDonald coming back? I liked him a lot!
Jim Palmer reminds me of Jack Nickalus. Successful in his career and a know it all about the sport where they were successful. In other words "BORING"! So Bring back Ben! Please!
Oh one thing, I like about Vlad when he's at bat. He steps right into the batter's box and he's ready to roll. No playing around with the batter's gloves, one good reason for that is that he doesn't wear any! No stretching, no extra swings, just blesses himself and steps right in and boom!

Nick M and Robert Andino could learn something there, although they aren't too bad. The worst offenders of batters that piddled around were Nomar Garciaparra and Joe McEwing. They always seemed liked they took 10 minutes between swings with their little rituals.

Buck Showalter really needs to look at his bullpen and see where improvement is needed! Guthrie gets frustrated in times when he really needs to hammer down not start pouting because he's not getting support. When he gets frustrated he starts feedding the gopher, just like he did tonight.

PS Luke Scott made a nice play, he's better then I thought in LF. You know it's funny, when he first came to the team. I didn't think he played poorly back then either. He can't play 1st base worth a lick, but he more then holds his own out there. He really does.

Squirrel -

You know, before '09 when Scott was a regular outfielder, he actually wasn't a bad defender if people would take the time to look at the numbers.

Sure, Scott isn't fast, but that isn't the point.

If UZR means anything to anybody, it will tell you that Scott was better than average in the field before he became the regular DH. He makes the plays, and sometimes it isn't pretty.

I just don't know where this "terrible" tag on his defense came from on Scott's defense. I've been saying this for a couple of years now...

Luke Scott isn't fast, and that is the point.

There is a reason the Orioles used Brady Anderson in LF even though he was a natural CF -- especially at places like Camden Yards where the lateral distance from CF to the LF-line is exaggerated. Even worse, unlike Anderson -- or Pie for that matter -- Scott is RH, meaning he has to shade a step or so more to the line or be subject to more back-handed plays.

And Scott isn't just not fast. He gets late starts on balls.

Yes, one would be hard-pressed to think of many balls that hit his leather and still find their way to the ground. And, yes, he has a strong and reasonable accurate throw. But as long as the AL insists on using the DH rule, most good rosters are not going to have players like Scott in the field. That makes him a liability by comparison and he needs a year like last year as a minimum to start negating that comparative shortcoming.

@not brooks,

Yeah, even a homer like Jim Hunter would have jumped off his seat if Adam Dunn had homered at Camden Yards. I thought the Yankee Broadcasters were bad, but this Harrelson guy is a douche.

We're not going to win them all; however what I am outraged about is how Guthrie keep getting no run support. 6 runs in the past 5 starts is not right. The whole team should be ashamed of themselves.

I love Jeremy, but he would be stupid to renegotiate any type of contract with the O's, even if they are the highest bidder.

What a wasted career this guy has had. I'm not saying he is Doc Halladay, but he's pitched good enough to win at least 5 games.

Announcers? Really?

Who cares what the announcers are saying. Use your eyes - what do you see? Or do you need to be told what you just saw?

Regarding player performance, you can check any stat you like - stats help you project future performance and that is all.

The only stat that matters and the only stat that ever matters is wins and losses.

Am I happy that Guthrie pitched well and kept the O's in the game? Not really, because the O's lost.

But, looking at his stats and looking towards his next start, we can expect a decent game from him. Will it lead to a win? I don't know...too many other factors in play.

@JJ,

What crawled up your ass?! I was just sharing the experience of watching the game on TV? Chill out dude!

JJ -

Do you watch games on mute?

I'd rather not. It seems weird.

I like hearing the pop of the mitt on a 95-mph fastball. And the crack of the bat on a line drive up the middle. And the cheers (and boos) from the crowd. And the beer and hot dog vendors. Makes me feel a little more connected.

But a bad announcer ruins that. And Harrelson is the worst.

We talk about Jim Hunter being a homer, but at least it doesn't come across that much in his play-by-play announcing.

Earlier, I likened Harrelson to a drunk fan sitting on his couch watching the game. Really, he's more like a 9-year-old who gets upset and stops talking when his team does anything bad. Since you don't seem to think that this is a big deal, I'm sure you didn't watch the White Sox broadcast of the game last night. When Lee hit his home run, Harrelson literally said: "That's deep (8 second pause). It's gone." And try to imagine a librarian who just downed an entire bottle of vinegar to get the tone and inflection of his voice in your head.

And this isn't just a one-game occurrence. It happens all the time. I was watching an O's game on WGN a few years back and after a White Sox player hit a ball into the right field corner with Paul Konerko on first, Harrelson was literally yelling "GO PAULIE, GO PAULIE!" as Konerko rounded the bases trying to score. And when Konerko was thrown out by 20 feet? Silence. Absolute dead silence for at least 45 seconds.

Hawk Harrelson is a joke. He ruins the experience of watching a baseball game on TV.

Meso -

why so sensitive? No harm intended. By the way, if you knew me, asking me to chill out is quite funny. If I was any more "chill", people might be worried I was dead.

Also, just to note, I am not the one calling people I have not met a "douche".

not brooks -

I do not watch on mute, I watch for entertainment and because I love the O's. The examples you gave of some of Hawks calls sound funny to me - in other words, I would be entertained. He does work for the Sox afterall.

I am not watching and listening for enlightenment or balance. Calling a ballgame is not journalism.

Can I ask a question? Why does Hawk and his blatant homer (yet funny to me) comments ruin the game for you?

JJ,

If you didn't like my response, you shouldn't have been dishing out what prompted it.

Here you say, you don't care about the announcers, but yet want to continue to have a conversation on the subject.

Both not brooks and me shared our experiences listening to Harrelson broadcast a game. We happen to agree. We are not lobbying for others to agree with us.

Not brooks described it very well as to why Harrelson is horrible. I feel the same way. You don't. That's OK. Let's move on. I don't think any of us can add anything else to conversation that would change anyone's opinion, and neither do I think that's what Not Brooks and me were trying to do anyway. We're just chatting among fans. If our opinions were that useless to you, don't bother responding. If you want to share or argue the opposit, at least make a case as to why you like the guy.

Also, the sounds you like hearing, that you yourself described, are best heard at the ballpark - a venue to watch the game without announcers.

Good announcers (if there is such a thing) will drown out your favorite sounds too.

almost indistinguishable from a corpse

just won't let it go

I report, you decide

Thanks for the insight, JJ.

As a lifetime baseball fan, I didn't realize that it's better to attend a game than to watch a game on television.

You've changed my world, and I am eternally grateful.

(end sarcasm)

Please don't attempt to tell me how I should or shouldn't enjoy a baseball game.

Hawk Harrelson is a caricature. I cannot stand listening to him, and when he's the only option, he puts a damper on the experience of watching my favorite team play baseball. That is my opinion and it will not change. Please do not attempt to convince me otherwise, especially since you've never listened to the guy.

Guthrie has a 3.00 ERA this year and a 3.83 ERA last year. Yes he doesn't get run support...but there's a reason for that. He's the #1 pitcher for the O's, so he goes up against other #1's. I don't think anyone here believes that Jeremy is a #1 starter. A #2, sure. (maybe more like a # 1.6)

Anyway, I guess the point is that his match-ups are always going to "challenging" at least.

Larry Bowa was mentioning in his pre-year AL MVP pick... "There aren't that many guys that make a living tearing up #1 pitchers. And those that can, are paid well for it." (his pick was Billy Butler...but that's not the point).

There aren't a lot of Orioles hitters that take other #1 starters to the shed.

When compared against other #1 starters in the AL, I don't think Guts is in the top 20. Maybe not the top 25. (How many guys that are #2's on other teams would be our #1??)

Is Guthrie good? Absolutely. Is it a shame he can't get more wins despite pitching well? Oh hell yeah. Is that trend going to continue? Yes sir.

Guthrie needs a little better run support, and maybe being a little better himself.

Really?? Meso, you confuse me. Dishing what prompted it?

My comment was not directed at anyone. As you say, I was just chatting among fans.

Then I get this, posted by you -
@JJ,

What crawled up your ass?! I was just sharing the experience of watching the game on TV? Chill out dude!

So who started down this path?

Did you even read my response? The first thing I wrote was there was no harm intended. You are quite sensitive.

You are right, I do not care about the announcers, I care about being entertained.

You call Hawk names, I say your stories make him sound funny.

I am not out to change anyone’s opinion on such a subjective matter of little importance. Just looking for context.

No fellow O's fan opinion is useless to me. In your case it's probably wrong, but not useless.

Alright JJ,

I'm gonna take the high road here. No point in arguing. If you feel like I offended you, you have my sincerest apologies.

No fellow O's fan opinion is useless to me. In your case it's probably wrong, but not useless.

Posted by: JJ | May 3, 2011 1:32 PM

o·pin·ion

–noun

1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

If you want some context, JJ, and our Hawk stories aren't enough, then watch a White Sox broadcast.

If Hawk doesn't bother you, then that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But don't tell somebody that he's wrong just because he disagrees with you.

paulie,

To say he's not top 20 or 25 is absolutely due to a lack of understanding. In other words, you don't get it.

Look around all of baseball.... And when you look at the national league, account for stats without having to face a DH. Trust me, they're different.

No, he's not King Felix, CeCe or the other elite SP's. But look at all the #1's paulie (it's quite revealing).

Then consider how Guthrie has routinely pitched for one of the worst teams in all of baseball year after year....not only receiving little run support, but with a horrific overall defense behind him.

This season so far, only one #1 has a better whip than Guthrie has in the AL. ONE. And what is whip? It's how many men you put on base on average each inning.

Bill James has said that whip is one of the most important stats for any pitcher... and year after year after year, Jeremy is one of the best at keeping runners off base in all of baseball (look it up).

Home runs allowed and K's are bs stats..... as are Wins.

That's why a huge payday is coming for Jeremy. Not with the O's mind you...... but a huge pay day nonetheless. It'll be a great day for the guy... if anything, just to get away from some of the least knowledgeable fans in the country.

And as for #1's...... It doesn't work out the way most people think. It's a very common mistake however....

Unless it's opening day or the post season, #1's don't always face #1's. Look at last night's games.... Verlander vs Colon - Weaver vs Buchholz. Those are very common matchup types.

No, Jeremy's problems aren't that he always faces #1's. His problem is that he still pitches for the Baltimore Orioles.

Meso -

I read your words but they do not FEEL sincere.

I cannot accept your apology.

Paulie,

I'm going to overlook the numbers and I'm gonna talks straight up fan instinct and gut feeling. Guthrie, up until last night had been pitching like a number 1 (ACE), with absolutely ridiculous run support. If that is not difficult to do, I don't know what is. Logically if he had run support, he would be an even better pitcher, which is scary. Do I think he is a number 1 on the Yankees and the Redsox? No. I need a full season of him pitching like he is now to say that. But up to right now, has he pitched like a number one? Hell yes.

Frankly, I felt terribly when Peter F. Angelos let Mussina go, but one side of me was happy that he was finally going to play for a real team. I'm there with Guthrie right now.

"Meso -

I read your words but they do not FEEL sincere.

I cannot accept your apology."

Not sure what else I could say. I'm a man of my word. I meant it. I don't know that you can actually FEEL anything over the internet.

not brooks -

Bustin out Webster’s...for real??

Why are you guys so serious? I thought we were supposed to play in the sandbox. Read what you wrote about Hawk - he may be terrible, but what you wrote was funny.

Peter - are there rules that I am not aware of?

First, I learn that there are people posting here that talk to themselves (thanks for filling me in wayne).

Now, it seems we also have a no fun rule.

Sorry everyone, I would have used bigger words, but I lost my thesaurus.

Meso -

Now, that FELT sincere, apology accepted.

Friends?

My disagreement with wayne on Guthrie's status as an ace is well-documented.

But the fact that he is pitching like an ace this year cannot be denied.

He's still giving up too many home runs, but his walk rate is absolutely fantastic, and he's certainly pitched will enough to be 5-1 right now (start #3 against Cleveland was a disaster).

The one thing I'm going to have to disagree on is that home runs allowed and strikeouts are BS stats.

Think about it, wayne:

1. A home run is at least one run without any work by the offense. Normally, an offense has to string together a couple of hits and walks to score a run, but a home run equals at least one run on one swing.

The name of the game when you're a pitcher is to stop the other team from scoring runs. When you're giving up at least one home run per nine, which Guthrie has done like clockwork throughout his career, you're making it easier for the other team to score runs.

2. Now to strikeouts. I'm actually quite surprised at your assertion that strikeouts are a BS stat for starting pitchers. How many times have you railed on Andy for acquired Mark Reynolds and his rally-killing strikeout abilities?

If a double play is a pitcher's best friend, a strikeout is at least a close acquaintance. Think about it: A strikeout doesn't go into play, which makes it impossible for a fielder to make an error. A strikeout with men on base and less than two outs makes it impossible for a runner to advance.

Not to mention the aura that a strikeout pitcher carries with him every time he goes out to the mound. When guys are going up to face Jeremy Guthrie, they know they're probably going be putting the ball in play all night (and hitting a number of fly balls, in Guthrie's case). When guys are going up to face, say, Tim Lincecum, the fact that he racks up at least 230 strikeouts per year, and could put up double-digit K's on any night, has to be in the back of their minds.

Please don't take this the wrong way, wayne. I'm not just trying to say "black" because you said "white". It's just that we tend to disagree on quite a few things.

Wins are the only stat that matters. Wins are not a bs stat. Throw all other stats out the window. Stats are only useful for predicting future performance.

2010 Stats (all made up):

Pitcher 1 -
16 wins
11 losses
4.75 ERA
1.45 Whip

Pitcher 2 -
11 wins
16 losses
3.30 ERA
1.25 Whip

Now 2 separate questions -

Which pitcher do you want on your team in 2010?

Which pitcher do you want on your team in 2011?

I know my answer, what is yours?

Sure, wins are all that matters for a team, but you just tossed up a perfect example of why wins are a BS stat for starting pitchers, JJ.

You can't answer that question in a vacuum.

If those were real stats, I would guess that Pitcher 1 pitched for a high-scoring team like the Yankees (859 runs in 2010) and Pitcher 2 pitched for a low-scoring team like the Mariners (513 runs in 2010). Flip those pitchers, and the guy with the 3.30 ERA probably would have won 20 games on the 4.75 ERA guy's team.

Think about it this way:

Pitcher 1
4.40 ERA
1.42 WHIP

Pitcher 2
3.78 ERA
1.25 WHIP

Stats (from 2010) are real. Who are you picking?

JJ,

Wins are the LEAST important stat for a SP. The fact that you said as much destroys any cred you have discussing any subject concerning baseball.

Even the ignorant sportwriters are now getting it now when voting for Cy Young winners.

How many WIns would Guthrie have on a contender this year or 3 of the last 4 years genius? Wow..... do you define allot of Oriole fans. Wow!

nb,

Not my words, but Bill James.

Many great SP's in the game have given up the long ball. It usually means a pitcher is around the plate.

The reason K's are over rated for a SP, is the fact that a bunch of K's usually means a higher pitch count.... A higher pitch count usually means quicker exits... Quicker exits are one of the reasons why we have the ridiculous 'quality start' stat.

Again, he's not elite like the King....... but he'll be a very rich young man soon (as long as he stays healthy).

not brooks -

I don't care who pitched better. I only care who won more. Big difference.

So, with the information provided, I can't answer your question.

But I can answer who I would rather have pitching tomorrow.

Waspman -

No, Scott's lack of speed is not the point. The point is he is fundamentally sound out there, moreso than Felix Pie.

Granted, Pie can get to more balls out there, which is great. Although, how many times have we seen him miss the cut-off man? How many times have we seen him cut off Adam Jones en route to a fly ball?

Pie has some nice raw ability, but his fundamentals in the field -among other areas- suck. Until a coach can finally get through to him, or until it finally "clicks", he's not an everyday outfielder.

And don't give me that crap about "well he needs to play more to get better" - that's why they train and that's why they have coaches.....to teach. If Pie can't get through his skull what was ingrained into me by the time I started high school baseball, he needs more work before the game rather than during the game. He's a bigger liability than Scott, not just in the field, but also on the basepaths as well.

Until he displays an aptitude for fundamentally sound baseball, he's nothing more than a 4th outfielder. That's that point, that's the difference, and that's why Scott is out there instead.

"Rawness" and "grittiness" and all that other BS about intangables mean nothing and it doesn't win games. If this year is really supposed to be THIS YEAR, there's no room for either, especially for a team like this.

wayne -

If wins don't matter, then answer my 2 questions and try to have your answer make sense.

Are you telling me that winning the game does not matter.

I will repeat myself - I do not care who pitched better. I care who won.

How many wins would Guthrie have on another team? I don't know and neither do you.

Wins are the only stat that matters.

Point taken on home runs. They're just a fact of life, though they are a bit more prevalent in Guthrie's life.

But on quicker exits...

Guthrie has averaged 6.3 innings per start since 2008

Lincecum: 6.7
Halladay: 7.4
Jimenez: 6.3
Felix: 6.9
Verlander: 6.6
Lester: 6.4
Sabathia: 7.0
Weaver: 6.4
Haren: 6.7

Quicker exits? I'm not seeing it...

Isn't the Cy Young award for the league's best pitcher? It is not for the guy who won the most games - never was.

You would have rather had King Felix on your team last year. I would have rather had the guy with the most wins.

Guess which team would be in first place - mine or yours?

I guess you had better pitching though - cool

JJ,

You're truly mixed up and you sorely lack an understanding of stats and the game of baseball.

Yes... Wins are the only thing that matters to the team....

But Wins as a starting pitchers stat are meaningless. It's not even close....not even debatable... unless of course it's when talking to someone who completely lacks understanding.

That's why the winner of the Cy Young award isn't going to the most wins anymore..... Do you understand why JJ?

Seriously... do you understand why?

Have you figured it out yet?

Need more time?

With your scenario, you would trade a Yank who has 15 wins, with an era of 4.5 for an Oriole who has an era of 3.5 with 8 wins.

You don't see or understand the difference.....

But hey, you're a breath of fresh air to the blog. Haven't seen this kind of ignorance in quite some time.

Figured out why Cy Young winners aren't going to the most wins anymore JJ?

Let me know when you've figured it out.

not brooks, wayne, JJ, ect.

I think above all, the most deceptive stat for most pitchers other than Wins is the Save.

A reliever can blow a 6-2 lead and still get a win. A reliever can give up 3 runs and still be credited with a save. A reliever can pitch the final 3 innings in a 30-3 loss and still get a save.....

If anything, a Hold probably indicates how good a reliever really is. That is, if you one to use just ONE stat.

I know you guys were talking about starters and wins, just wanted to join the conversation. But on that note, a win doesn't justify how good a pitcher is. Example? Daniel Cabrera had more wins than Jeremy Guthrie in '07.

Who would you rather have?

I know you guys were comparing wins to starters

sorry for repeating that last sentence. Typo

JJ -

It's not that winning the game doesn't matter. It's that wins don't tell the whole story of how good a pitcher is.

Wins are a ridiculous way to judge a starting pitcher because a starting pitcher could throw nine no-hit innings and still not get a win. Heck, a pitcher could throw 30 no-hit innings and still not get a win.

Look at the past four Cy Young Award winners:

Roy Halladay, 21 wins
Felix Hernandez, 13 wins
Tim Lincecum, 15 wins
Zack Greinke, 16 wins

Hallady is the exception there. Felix beat a 21 game winner, two 19 game winners and two 18 game winners. You know why? Because he pitched better than they did. His ERA was 50 points better than the next contender's. He was second in the league in strikeouts. He threw the most innings. He was, by far, the best pitcher. He just didn't rack up wins because his team scored just 513 runs.

Obviously wins are all that matters for a team. But a pitcher can get a win without pitching well and a pitcher can get a loss or a no decision even if he pitched a great game.

Wins for pitchers just aren't as clear cut as say, home runs for hitters. There's just more to the story, JJ.

JJ,

Your last post says everything I need to know. You are stubborn and locked into your thinking...... You actually don't even understand the argument or what you're saying.... So you can have the last word my man. But welcome to the blog...... We need more like you...

nb,

You know what I mean about innings. Add more K's to Guthries tally and his avg become 5.3 instead of 6.3.

The numbers you put up are revealing though. All of those pitchers could/should be going deeper. I really believe in what Nolan Ryan's doing in Texas. To hell with pitch counts.

wayne,

Talk about missing the point.

I have said, very simply, that stats are only good for predicting future performance.

Like you, I would prefer the player with better stats to be on my team TOMORROW.

But that is not my question - which pitcher do you want in 2010 and which one do you want in 2011.

Remember, wins don't matter, right?

Another thought -

Bert Blyleven gave up 50 HR's in 1986 while with the Twins, but had a 1.17 WHIP and issued only 58 walks. That's the most HR's given up (as wayne would say) IN HISTORY.

There's one example of a HOF pitcher giving up the long ball a bunch of times

He doesn't understand what you're saying wayne. He's lost. Funniest thing I've seen around here.

JJ,

Your last post says everything I need to know. You are stubborn and locked into your thinking...... You actually don't even understand the argument or what you're saying.... So you can have the last word my man. But welcome to the blog...... We need more like you...
Posted by: wayne | May 3, 2011 3:35 PM

Good points dave......

JJ -

You're the one who brought up the phrase "wins don't matter".

All wayne said is that wins are a BS stat. In other words, wins aren't useful in evaluating pitchers.

And they're not.

wayne -

I don't think I am being stubborn. I don't even think I have disagreed with you.

I just want to see if you will actually say that you would rather have the guy with less wins in 2010.

Your lack of an answer tells me everything I need to know. Who is the stubborn one?

I never asked who the better pitcher was.

Oh, it's not about the better pitcher? Because I thought that's what we were talking about.

But if it's not about the better pitcher, I get it now, JJ!

Essentially, the question posed in your 2:37 post was "Which pitcher pitches for the better team?"

Easy! It's Pitcher 1! If a guy with those numbers can win 16 games, that's a damn good team!

If wins aren't useful in evaluating pitchers, how come no one will answer the question?

"anon" was me - forgot to put my name in

JJ, Because I said you had the last word....... Speaking for myself only, I won't answer.... because I already have. And because you don't understand the subject...

BUT

You sir, should believe anything you want to believe. I just like seeing someone new on the blog.

Ok.... you really have the last word this time, thus you need not ask for a response, because...

well,

you have the last word

not brooks -

You are correct. The question was not about who was the better pitcher.

But you are incorrect in saying the question was "Which pitcher pitches for the better team?"

The question was - which pitcher would you rather have on YOUR team in 2010 and 2011.

The guy who pitched well or the guy who won?

Can you see the difference?

JJ -

Wins aren't useful in evaluating pitchers because it "shows who was in the lead during the last half of an inning". That's the definition of a win, according to MLB. It doesn't say how; the pitcher just has to be there on the mound while his team is in the lead. That's the most basic way I can put it.

Let's make a couple scenarios:

1)Pitcher A goes into the 7th inning with a 3-1 lead. He's pulled after 2 outs into the 7th inning for giving up a single. The Reliever comes in, gives up HR, to tie the game, Pitcher A gets credited for nothing other than an apperance. In the 8th inning, the offense comes back and scores a run, making the score 3-4. They hold onto the lead, The Reliever gets the win, Pitcher A's record remains the same.

2) Pitcher B struggles through 5 innings and gives up 7 runs, but exits the game with the team ahead 10-7. The relief staff holds on to the lead, Pitcher B gets the win.

Now, going by your idea, you'd rather have Pitcher B on your team because he got the win. I disagree. I'd rather have every player/pitcher BESIDES Pitcher B just for the fact they outplayed him. That doesn't say much for Pitcher B......Pitcher A had the better game.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, this statistic fails because it takes into account more factors than it should. A pitching-centered statistic should look only at pitcher's performance, nothing more. Wins and losses are largely determined by outside factors such as the defense behind the pitcher and his team's offensive lineup, neither of which he has any influence over.

These are just a couple examples of how wins and losses fail to provide us with the whole picture, and in some cases provide us with a completely false picture.

Does that answer the question???

Wayne -

I do understand the subject. Probably better than you.

You can pitch poorly and win, you can pitch great and lose. Groundbreaking wayno.

What matters more - pitching well or winning? I say winning. What do you say?

Now there is my last word.

Ok, so winning has nothing to do with the pitcher then. GREAT!

2012's rotation:

Kevin Millwood
Daniel Cabrera
Sidney Ponson
Rocky Coppinger
Oswaldo Perez

Thanks for throwing logic out the door. You just made my life easier!! Tell Angelos that, he might appoint you as Executive Assistant COO to the Orioles.

dave,

GREAT post.... Now that's good stuff.

And JJ,

Now that we know who you are, I'm bummed. Hear I thought you were a new poster (which was fun to see).

Now though, we see who you are. Oh well..... was fun while it lasted.

And you were doing well for a minute.

nb, Meso and dave.... you see who JJ is, right?

What a bummer.

How in the hell did this thing even get started?

Oh, right. JJ took "wins are a bs stat" to mean "wins don't matter".

And there it is. We're having two separate arguments.

JJ is arguing for "wins matter". Essentially, "After the fact, I'll take any 16 game winner over any 12 game winner, regardless peripheral statistics. For the future, I'll take the 12 game winner if he put up better peripheral stats."

Fair point.

Everyone else is arguing for "wins are a bs stat". Essentially, "This 12 game winner was a better pitcher than this 16 game winner because of the peripheral statistics."

Also a fair point.

And that is why no one wants to answer JJ's question. Because it's a question for a totally different argument.

Ok, enough with the semantics...on to bigger questions, no?

Can the Orioles keep the Kila Monster(205/308/333)(2 HR/6 RBI) in check?

The postings are getting crossed up - not my last word I guess....

dave in gb - I agree with everything you said, except where you state that I would rather have pitcher B than pitcher A. Where did I ever say that I want a guy who can't pitch.

A pitcher's wins and losses do not tell the whole picture, I never said they did. But when looking at the PAST, wins are the only stat that matter. Projecting for the FUTURE, wins do not mean a thing.

Lets try it this way, cause this has been my argument from the beginning.

In a head to head matchup -
Pitcher A lost, Pitcher B won. Who do you want on your team? Or do you need more stats to evaluate the question?

JJ -

Can I pitch for the Orioles?

Since performance doesn't matter and only wins matter, all I need is players from the '01 Mariners lineup, '98 Yankees lineup, Murderer's Row, and the the Top 5 Homerun Leaders backing me up, along with Mariano Rivera, Goose Gossage, Hoyt Wilhelm, and Don Stanhouse (for color) backing me up in the bullpen.

Not Brooks -

I already answered JJ's question an hour ago.

He just doesn't want read it.

wayne -

who am I? why are you bummed? what has changed? Please don't take your ball and go home. This is fun.

If you are hinting that I am someone else, you could not be further from the truth.

I am the one and only (stubborn) JJ. New to the blog.

not brooks -

you summed it up nicely, but the reason no one wants to answer my question is beacuse it proves when you are "evaluating" pitchers (for example, during the 2010 season) wins are not a "bs" stat.

But yes, wins for a starter are a bs stat for projections.

JJ -

Pitcher A because he's gonna give my team a better chance to win.

I wouldn't chose Pitcher B because more than likely my team would lose. He's making the offense and defense work harder. Plus, he's overworking the bullpen as well.

7 runs allowed is 7 runs allowed and I don't think any offense in ML history ever averaged 7 runs.

I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around actually prefering a bad pitcher or performance.

I do see what you're saying on the surface - a win is a win no matter how ugly. I guess if I had I choice I would take Pitcher B for one day soley based on the fact that he won.... not including the fact that he didn't deserve the win.

But that is just my arguement - individually, wins and losses as a stat can't be justified on many occasions.

Look at the Yankees for the past decade; Championship caliber offense, struggling pitching.

I don't know. Believe what you want to believe, but sometimes a win isn't always just a win. In my opinion, that's the problem with relying on it as a stat.

dave in gb -

Please don't put words in my mouth.

if you can put that team together, yes, you can pitch for my team.

If not, you need to lower you whip and then we can talk.

JJ -

After agreeing with me you still don't get it?

Your "who do you want in 2010" question barely makes any sense because you literally cannot answer that question without factoring the team into the equation.

And this is the whole issue. Wins are too simple. Your question is, at it's core, "Who won more games?" Duh. Pitcher 1 won more games. Great. You proved that a mediocre pitcher on a good team can win more games than a good pitcher on a mediocre team. What's next on your agenda?

But "Who is a better pitcher?" is an actual evaluation of two players. It's a discussion.

Finally, no, your question doesn't prove that wins aren't a BS stat. Actually, by choosing Pitcher 2 going forward, which you did, you're saying that he's the better pitcher, therefor proving that wins are a BS stat.

Hey! You proved something else! Cool!

In a head to head matchup -
Pitcher A lost, Pitcher B won. Who do you want on your team? Or do you need more stats to evaluate the question?

dave in gb says - Pitcher A because he's gonna give my team a better chance to win.

Huh????? Pitcher A lost the game - you want to lose?

I know you did not mean that.

not brooks, dave in gb,

you are right - i think we are splitting hairs at this point. We could go back and forth all day.

Stats help you project, speculate, set the odds, etc... and wins are pretty useless when projecting a pitchers future peformance.

Personally, I thought CC deserved the Cy Young last year. Why?.....wait for it.....

because he won more :)

Just kidding - I am done - and please don't forget, I was granted the last word by wayne himself.

...who, by the way, thinks I am someone else.

(do people really do that??)

JJ -

wayne is a pathological conspiracy theorist.

wayne,

"To say he's not top 20 or 25 is absolutely due to a lack of understanding. In other words, you don't get it."

Enlighten me.

Make a list of 20 SP's and put Guthrie in that list. Show me how much you "get it"....

We can make this even simpler...name me the team who's fans would want Guthrie as their #1. We can go to that MLB teams board, and I'm sure the wayne and paulie of that board will rip you to shreds.

Show me ANY list ever created by any professional baseball annalist that puts Guthrie in the top 20 pitchers...hell, make that the top 30 just give you the benefit of doubt.

Look, I get it, you have a man crush on the guy...but please, try and use some professional evaluations to support your man crush (like I did for the Great Cakes!!). {sorry, you know that was coming and I owed that too you...game on my man. Game on.}

and wayne, no disagreement that Guthrie is going to get a pay-day (by any team other than the O's).

Gil Meche got 55 Million from the Royals...so strange things do happen. Guthrie is a horse, and that'll get him paid.

But a #1 Ace he is not. A soild #2 he most certainly is.

I always considered Guthrie a #3 at best - but he will get paid, no doubt about that.

He is a legit major league starter who takes the ball every 5th day.

He has value.

not brooks -

can you ask him to be nice to me? I am new here and he has already called me names, questioned my baseball knowledge, and accused me of talking to myself.

All you did was go Webster's

Hey Peter - no moderation? are we on our own here? what kind of blog is this?

Go O's

JJ,

A # 3? Go look at every team you idiot. Look at the #1's and #2's. Do you know where to find them?

Look at their era and whip you loser. Look at each team.

You looking?

Put their #'s up loser.....

You working on it?

I'm sorry, but Baltimore fans just infuriate me with how incredibly stupid they are when it comes to sports.

I visit NY and other large cities frequently, and Baltimore fans are considered an absolute joke..... and they are.

#3 my azz... Look at the stats you mutant. Don't just spout your ignorance, and don't just list Ce Ce and King Felix. List the stats from '10 and this year for every 1 and 2 in the game..... then say he's a #3.

paulie,

See JJ.

Listen you jokers..... I don't have a man crush on Jeremy. I do hate when fans continue to give Baltimore a bad name like you ignorant bastards continue to do.

Now wake up.... or give your home addresses or phn numbers,... just so people can harass you're stupidity at the next level.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: I see we've raised the level of discourse again. Try to maintain your poise, guys. It's just a game.

And nb,

If you can't see who this moron is, you're just dumber than you pretend to be.

You, and you walk the fence, bill james wannabe nature, have become one of the biggest a-holes on the blog

Whyt don't you give us a play by play for tonight?

We miss it

Hey Pete,

How bout just commenting when someone ask you a question.... Not me, because I never ask you a question. Plenty do though, and it would be NICE if you acknowledged them once in a while.........

Or..... you can just answer questions on the Insider.

Your blog, your choice.

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Wayne, how about you do your job -- which is anonymously ripping everybody with no accountability -- and I'll do mine.

wayne -

Haha, your post was hysterical (still laughing...hard to type). If I didn't think you were joking, I would agree with Peter and suggest that you "maintain your poise".

Anyway.....

Please tell me what the educated "NY and other large city" fans think of Guthrie.

I think he is a solid #3.

..............................................................................................
Pete's reply: I was referring to both of you, JJ. And, while I'm on the subject, I've heard enough of this childish namecalling. If you're going to be a total lout and use a bunch of nasty, highly offensive slurs, you might want to spell them right so you don't look like a complete bleeping idiot as well as a mean-spirited bigot.

Why erase my post Pete? I'm only telling the truth about wayne. And what about free speech Pete? I can't speak my mind without getting censored by you?

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Sorry, the First Amendment doesn't apply to blogs, especially when you -- or somebody using your initials -- is posting gay slurs and various other offensive terms.

JJ,

Pete erased your posts. And good for him for doing so. There's no room for anyone like you around here. I may not be a fan of wayne's, but there's no room for anyone like you around here.

I see now...not brooks you warned me.

Peter and the blog -

The post at 10:24 PM is not me. I am not sure what else was posted under my name by an imposter, but, based upon Peter's previous comment, it must have been pretty low.

Believe what you want, but I speak the truth.

Meanwhile, back at the game....

This is a big game for the O's. Win tonight, and guarantee a winning road trip, plus give you a solid chance of taking the series before TB comes to town. Tied after 8...need to wrap this one up right here.

Peter -

I am here to have fun and discuss the O's.

If you honestly think I wrote whatever made you reply with such a strong response - Say the word and this will be my last post.

I think what everyone was trying to say before it devolved into name calling is that pitcher wins are a meaningless stat. Team wins are the only thing that matters.

Peter -

I will take your silence as a sign of approval, but I am a man of my word.

Since I was so stunned by your comment last night, I asked my advisor to review the thread.

Here is what my advisor said to me (I probably should not be revealing this as this info is confidential and privileged) - but anyway, here is what my advisor said "JJ, you are right, you did not call anyone names, but you sure sounded like a d**k"

So there.

I have taken the words from my advisor to heart. I will try to change.