flpmagikat

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless: Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too. Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers. The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season. All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh. How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year. He never mentioned Strasburg. He mentioned Gio and Zimmerman from the Nats, both guys who made 32 starts. Neither completed 200 innings, but both were over 190. Cueto led the league in starts this year and threw nearly 220 innings, but he was injured in the postseason. Lincecum also never left the rotation, tying Cueto for the lead league in games started, though he only tossed 186 innings in the same amount of starts. Just some facts for your argument, some you stated correctly, some not. Right he didn't mention him, but when discussing the cumulative stats of those three teams, the top guys figure pretty heavily. Washington "lost" Strasburg, Cincinnati lost Cueto, SF didn't lose Cain. I guess my point was that I agree that luck is a big factor, and SF is lucky that their starters remained healthy and active(and that Zito has continued to pitch well in the postseason)

Stras was shut down and Cueto had an untimely injury.....your point? The point I was annoyed by was the suggestion that team stats don't matter because only your top guys pitch in the postseason and SF has clearly the best top guys. 1) Their top guys are comparable with two teams that were eliminated earlier than them. If not teams eliminated earlier were better and 2) Not just your top guys pitch as Barry Zito has demonstrated this postseason. So it's a ridiculous argument that none of your points do anything to support. Well I guess my point is that while they all have great rotations, both of the Reds and Nats best starters didn't pitch in the playoffs. When you take those guys out of the picture, I'd say SF probably does have the best rotation in the playoffs. So of course team stats matter, and the effect a guy like Cueto or Strasburg has on those stats is substantial and worth noting. Are you saying that because guys like Zimmerman, Gio, Latos, are all good pitchers as well that losing their top starters doesn't matter?

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless: Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too. Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers. The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season. All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh. How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

I agree with this, but it has to do with life, not the campaign. Romney has been a leader and a success throughout his life, whereas Obama has virtually never been involved in business his entire life. Also, Romney has been able to show that he can work across the aisle as a Republican Governor in the Heavy Democrat leaning state of Massachusetts. I'll will admit that Romney was not my preferred choice for the Republican nomination (more like my 4th or 5th), but he has my support over Obama. I find it difficult to blame Obama for not "reaching across the aisle". The Republican-controlled Congress has gone out of its way to make everything exceedingly difficult. The Tea Party has been a blight on the entirety of American politics and their refusal to budge on anything has been the cause of this gridlock, not Obama. They've shot down some pretty reasonable bills just because they were supported by Obama & Co. That's not how this game is supposed to work. Obama and the Democrats are not without blame but the vast majority of the blame for recent gridlock has to be placed on the more radical elements of the GOP, which infuriatingly seem to grow more radical and powerful by the day. I don't understand what the hell is going on with this country anymore. We continue to elect bat****-crazy people to office (Pelosi and Reid need inclusion here as well) and then become disgusted when nothing is accomplished. It's absurd. This is something that always bothers me. People in all forms of media always spout the CW that people are put off or disgusted by the gridlock in Washington. While I know there are folks that feel that way, a majority of people are voting all of these people into office! Now granted it's a flawed system where people aren't necessarily represented by someone of their liking, or someone sane, but nonetheless it's who at the very least our neighbors are electing every other year. It's like the joke that Americans aren't malicious, stubborn, greedy *******s, those are just the people they elect to run their government.

Maybe, if the team wasnt so awful already.

You're right, its pretty much the same when republicans, for instance, imply that being gay is a crime punishable by stoning to death, and when democrats imply that rich people paying more in taxes will just magically make a company more willing to hire folks. Pretty much the same thing.

No one said anything about changing ones mind based on a commercial being any less shallow. Both just give more constant exposure to those who dont need it, and shut out those who do(every other parties candidates) But there is a big difference between exagerating or omitting, and completely reversing ones stance. Are both dishonest? Yeah. But the later tends to fall into the outright lie category usually. Its like when you hear the mouthpieces say obama lied, they point to something he promised In 2007-8 that hasnt materialed. When people call romney out, they just point to almost anything he's said, cause he's probably claimed the exact opposite.

It looked like both players were bored with the game and on the defensive. Neither won, mitt played even which is winning, but its a weak opponinent. Ill still take the guy who isnt a bigot.

Man MN sports fans are a miserable bunch(not unlike most) Your team(presumably) wins and the best that can be said is that they wont go winless on the year. Not a vikes fan so its fairly hilarious listening to even the "diehards" and their perpetual torment by teams they dont have to cheet for.

Alot of democrats are awful people, most of the time they dont try and legislate it.

Lol at people thinking a republican president Will cut spending. When was the last time that happened? And game changer? Yeah mitt really flipped the script choosing the epitome of sterotypical republicans as his running mate.

I dont know that I agree with you pseudo; I dont believe that either our president or VP have considered the idea of same sex marriage over their careers. However I dont doubt their sincerity on the matter now, isnt that the idea of progrossesivism? I am sure they are counting votes at the same time. Every politician does. And the more national you are the more you concede.

Our current president repealed dont ask dont tell. Like I said, being a centrist doesnt mean one side isnt wrong.

Last weekend, I went to one of my best friends weddings. That day, I witnessed a smile ive never seen before on not only his, but his wife and all their families faces. I went with a male date who I have no intentions of marrying. I cant really consider the option, as it isnt legal in this state and some politicians are working to make sure that it never happens based on their religous views. There's a fair chance Joe Biden and Barack Obama dont particularly like what I do, but ill take their Fairweather support over the hate that I recieve from those on the other side. I know you're more libertarian than anything, but being a centrist doesnt mean both sides are equal.

I honestly think most people dont give a damn if gay people call themselves married. Some folks on the right and less on the left get all up in arms about what constitutes a marriage. I prefer the democrats support of the matter, even if it just comes in the form of apathy. Marriage isnt a right, but to entitle some citizens to certain right because they happened to have been born a certain way is discrimination.

What, pandering to the people who believe in equal rights? Pandering to the people who think being a bigot makes you kinda a bad person? I really dont care why obama or any democrat supports gay marriage, they arent wasting their breath demonizing it.

Do you really believe this? Any of it?

As far as I know they are still in business, so, what?

Right, I don't necessarily disagree with your initial article, its more the discussion which came about, and I agree with klobs snark. Ha so at least I'm registered now and not just lurking. Anyway I agree that given what they received, it would've made more sense to just keep him and offer him the $12whatever mil if he held up. The players they got back might fill a role, but they seem like guys who can be acquired without giving anything up but money, let alone the best pitcher on your staff(and yes, thats just sad for many reasons, and being the most valuable SP for the Twins doesn't mean other teams value you the same) It is beginning to feel to me like, well what many more cynical than myself have been worrying/whining about. That the Twins ownership/FO just isn't going to spend the money they are shedding. Which kinda makes sense given that they need to rebuild and Im not a believer in the "just sign a rotation" strangeness. But yeah, whatever. Seems like another poorly handled situation by the same guys that people have had similar gripes with in the past. Instead of valuing their own guy, and saying, "make me an offer i can't refuse, and we'll see", it seems like they just said, "make me an offer, we don't want this guy either, and so we'll take it".

Sorry for the formatting there, first post.

+1. Maybe that was the best available package, maybe Ryan isn't lying when he said, Originally Posted by Nick Nelson Right. I don't know who Stark was quoting in that ESPN article because it's not attributed, but Ryan was quoted directly (and extensively) as saying that focusing on guys who could help next year would be a "terrible mistake." Here's the money quote: "You can go get a marginal Triple-A guy who might be here next year," he said. "Are you going to be satisfied passing up a high-ceiling guy? I wouldn't be, but everybody has their own philosophy on that." But that's kinda exactly what he traded for, and while no realistic person expected getting a top prospect back, getting two guys who are "Major league ready", in the same way Butera and Manship are Major league ready, seems like a poor way to play that hand. And for anyone to say there isn't any art or tact involved in business, ha, well that is just foolish. It's annoying seeing people that unrealistically expected a great return for a questionable good, but for all the folks to be defending the Twins FO as either seemingly being forced to trade Liriano for garbage or that was the only way to handle the situation, or that it somehow doesn't reflect poorly on them is inane. These guys put together the teams that have made baseball unwatchable(and getting worse) over the last few years. They aren't doing their jobs well. Hold them accountable.