tennischmp

It's the hair

1 hour ago, Bronson said:

Rendon is a 6-7 WAR player. Cole is a 6-7 WAR player. Your 10x statement is ludicrous.

Your WAR goes out the window once the playoffs come around

18 minutes ago, Duren, Duren said:

Eppler is trying to win the most realistic way possible right now while building for a more balanced future.

Prioritizing Rendon over starting pitching tells you that Eppler thinks that great hitting and defense will win more games over the long haul than adding an elite starter.

Very pragmatic and realistic, given the makeup of the current roster. With a lineup that should be in the top third of the league in run production or better, why not accept reality as it is for the near future and try and win by outscoring the opposition? 

It also puts a lot of faith in the new manager and pitching coach to get more out of the current staff. 

There is decent potential for growth amongst some of the returning starters. Ohtani can potentially become a part time ace. And Bundy and Teheran add stability. They can even just pitch a little above average, eat up innings and make the staff better than it was. Not an unrealistic expectation. The strength is in the bullpen. Starters just keeping games close through six innings allows the pen more rest, and the hitters opportunity to break things open. 

  A 'good enough' rotation can work if the bullpen is solid and the offense produces consistently. Last season was about as bad as it can get for a starting rotation. For a number of reasons. Logic tells you they will be improved with the new additions, coaching and management. The string of injuries and bad luck also has to reverse itself at some point.

Embrace the realities of this roster and think positively. There won't be many low scoring pitchers duels or scoreless innings streaks. Just hope for the best when on defense and get excited when the team is at bat. 

Winning is about scoring at least one run more than the opposition. It doesn't matter how it is accomplished.

I don't think Eppler prioritized Rendon over Cole. If he did he should be fired on the spot. Pitching wins championships and considering the state of the Angel's pitching, Cole would have had a 10x greater impact on the team than Rendon will. 

The last overturned call was such bullshit. If they slow every swat block down like that they will see the ball touch the shooters hand last most of the time. If it wasn't in the last 2 minutes, no coach would think to challenge it, but hey lets overturn this one. 

45 minutes ago, Lou said:

I dream of the day I can pinch pennies while still offering almost $300 million for something.

The Nationals didn't offer $300 million for something, instead focused on pitching, look where that got them. 

Too many turnovers, poor perimeter defense, and bad free throw shooting outside of AD. All need to be fixed for them to be a serious contender for the title.

There's a good chance they add Iggy too

But we were told by @Blarg that when Hillary testified in the Benghazi hearings she had no choice. Looks like she had a choice huh just like Pompeo and all of Trump's cronies who have ignored Congressional subpoenas for testimony and/or documents. 

24 minutes ago, LAAMike said:

If it is going to be simply a political issue, then abuse of power may form the basis of articles of impeachment.  But if you are to get the public to understand and support, then this seems like the wrong way to go.  Holding back aid happens all the time and seems to be part of the horse-trading that is part of the diplomatic relations between nations/governments.  There has to be an egregious and understandable lapse of conduct to get the public's support.   

Holding back aid to get an announcement on an investigation from a foreign power into a political rival doesn't happen all the time, at least it shouldn't, and he should be impeached for the sole reason as to deter it from happening again, by Trump or any future Democratic or Republican president. If you are going to no impeach you are basically telling Trump, go ahead do it again, do it to the actual Democratic nominee if it happens not to be Biden, and also setting a precedent for future presidents.

2 hours ago, LAAMike said:

Assuming for a minute that the QPQ was a White House Meeting in exchange for Zelensky making a public statement about investigating either Corruption and/or Burisma and that there was no military aid as part of the QPQ as stated by Trump, then the Democrats have a problem as a "meeting or call doesn't qualify as an Official Act for the purposes of bribery prosecution"  (per the Supreme Court in McDonnel vs US).   Abuse of power and the obstruction of Congress are pretty weak arguments for something as big as impeaching a President.  

You mean we should believe his text he sent saying there was no QPQ the same day he learned he was being investigated by Congress and the same day the WH got news of the whistleblower's report claiming there was a QPQ? If we would believe every criminal's denial after they got busted we would have empty jails. 

1 hour ago, Adam said:

Ultimately the funds were released and the request wasn't complied with. 

This is all just typical shady authoritarian political shit. 

Man I hate to agree with Scott Adams but... 

 

No not every president withholds funds and in return for another president going on American TV announcing their investigation into a political rival. Sorry that just doesn't happen.

2 hours ago, Blarg said:

So it's cool that the vice president can hold up foreign aide until a country submits to removing people from their justice system.

This is ok to you guys. Meddling in another countries justice system. Not even CIA spook level, blatantly out in the open extortion.

But President Trump can't hold up foreign aide to request clarification on those actions while not demanding anyone lose their job. 

No wonder the Democrats lost the last election, you are their constituents. 

 

Yea one was for fighting corruption in Ukraine and the other is getting dirt on a political opponent. But no one here would expect you to see the difference

1 hour ago, Adam said:

I think a sitting Vice President blackmailing a foreign leader for personal gain or something like that is important regardless of when it happened. I think a concerted effort by political opponents to create a Russian collusion hoax is important too.

We all know what the intent was but it doesn’t really matter because the evidence isn’t there. 

And Let’s be real all foreign aid is quid pro quo. 

Trump is a dick. He sucks. Dems should run someone who can beat him 

There is nothing wrong with what Joe Biden did. He got the persecutor fired who wasn't investigating corruption, a prosecutor that wasn't investigating companies such as the one Hunter Biden was on. And all that was the consensus of Obama, the Senate and House, and all the members of the EU and the Ukrainian parliament. Sure Hunter Biden taking a job as a board member of a company based on his name is slimy. Kids of famous and powerful people shouldn't do that but they do, see Trump's kids. It isn't illegal. But Joe Biden did nothing to help Hunter. He replaced a prosecutor that wasn't doing investigations.

7 minutes ago, st1ckboy said:

The thing is, because it is an impeachment inquiry, they can actually move it through the courts fairly quickly.

It’s still not quick enough. It just happened with another staffer of the White House. The judge fast tracked the hearing but still a month from now, December 10th. By that time the impeachment vote will already be held. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-fast-tracks-hearing-over-house-impeachment-subpoena-to-ex-trump-deputy-national-security-adviser-charles-kupperman/2019/11/04/5606e5bc-ff3e-11e9-8bab-0fc209e065a8_story.html

8 hours ago, st1ckboy said:

The Washington Post: Bolton willing to defy White House and testify if court clears the way, according to people familiar with his views
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bolton-willing-to-defy-white-house-and-testify-if-court-clears-the-way-according-to-people-familiar-with-his-views/2019/11/07/dd72d73c-00aa-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

He won't be defying the White House if he won't appear voluntary and not even with a subpoena. The White House wants everyone to go to the courts because they know it will drag on for so long that the Democrats won't wait. So if Bolton really wanted to defy the White House he would appear. There is nothing unconstitutional about an impeachment inquiry so there is no need to go to the courts with it unless he really doesn't want to testify and just wants to drag it out long enough so he doesn't have to.  

1 hour ago, Lhalo said:

He may have been using his powers to investigate the wrong doings of Biden and his son. You're glossing over the fact that Biden was using his power to do the same thing as Vice President. I still don't think withholding aid to a foreign country is impeachable. 

I don't hate you btw. I actually feel sorry for you. Getting all worked up and cussing people out on a baseball message board is pretty sad. Maybe go outside and get some sun. The "Live Free or Die" State has a lot to offer in terms of enjoyment.

No Biden did what he did on behalf of the president and all the members of the EU and the Ukrainian parliament via the official channels and in public to get a corrupt prosecutor fired who was NOT investigating the company Biden's son was on. Trump did it on behalf of himself to get dirt on his political rival, not via the official channels, in secrecy, and tried to cover it up.  

But I'm sure you know the difference, and if you don't you should read something else aside from Breitbart and Fox News

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

Hillary had no choice. If she had she wouldn't have volunteered.

Hillary had no choice? News to me, 4 people from the Trump administration didn't show up to testify, and that's was just today. 

2 hours ago, Blarg said:

I think the president would be remiss in his duties to not see if there was illegal activity by his predecessors, especially if it altered foreign diplomacy, by going straight to the source. But y'all can disagree. 

You can't be that ignorant to believe that Trump is just some honest corruption seeker trying to investigate illegal activity, but only of those that happen to be his past and future political rivals.  

1 hour ago, Adam said:

My point, my only point, was that everyone uses the office for personal gain. 

Using the power of office to help stay in power(ie asking a foreign government to get dirt on your opponent to help win an election) is different than just making money off the government position. 

What is Trump's health care plan? Can someone send me a link? I can't find it

43 minutes ago, Lou said:

I'm looking forward to the "Don't Bring the Troops Home" rally.

The “bring troops home argument” falls flat when the troops from Syria are going to Iraq and another 1800 were deployed to Saudi Arabia days before. 

2 hours ago, Rico said:

1. Steal underpants

2. ???

3. Profit 

Jokes aside, you mean the same Kurds that we left to slaughter?

7 hours ago, LAAMike said:

I do not believe that that is true.  On TV John Ratcliff, who supposedly asked questions of Bill Taylor that considerably weakened his statement, said he could not disclose these questions/answers due to Committee rules.  I then read in the NY Times article that Bill Taylor could not cite any direct conversations or emails that supported his statement that quid pro quo occurred.  Second hand or hearsay should not decide this question.  The people that Bill Taylor said were supposedly his sources will have to testify to clear this up

Mulvaney went on TV and admitted that quid pro quo occurred and every second hand account so far has confirmed it. You want to see all the first hand sources and evidence? Well Trump has been blocking them. Pence, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Pompeo, the transcript from the May call with Zelensky. 

7 minutes ago, LAAMike said:

I prefer to think of it as our Committee (as a voting citizen) which just happens to have a Democratic Chairman and a Democratic majority.  Again my point is that polling on whether an impeachment should proceed will just yield misleading results until both sides get their respective chances to present the facts.  

The Republicans have a chance to present their facts, they are in the hearings too. They can present their "side" of the story to the press and media, they just chose not to. 

Chances this pullout was conditioned on Turkey finding dirt on Biden?