Lifetime

I know what your comments were regarding. It's still a fallacious argument.

I have played sports and no, 1 game and 10 games are not the same thing. Your argument is a strawman because you're arguing against something that isn't being stated by anyone. Of course you want to win every game, but that's ridiculous. Losing 1 game or being 1 game back early is not a slow start. 10 games back early, slow start. No one has said anything about being 10 games back after 2 months is not a slow start or "it's still early"

Here we go with the strawman again

So I take it the irony is lost on you stormin

GM should be held accountable for an unexpected and unpredictable early fail? Is there any precedent for saying most other GM 's would have been fired?

Big FA signings fail to live up to expectations or contract value all the time. When has a GM been fired for these kind of acquisitions 2 years in?

You can't answer those questions with specificity because we don't have that information including from the vague inferences given by the writers that supposedly have inside information. The point of those "stupid" questions is that those are exactly what things are being assumed or implied as facts while many use those assumptions as a basis for ridicule and abhorrence toward Arte et al. Those questions are the accusations being leveled about the organization yet all we truly have to support them are vague inferences and, wait for it..... speculation. Apparently that's good enough for you. It's not for me and that dissention of your opinion really seems to bother you.

Wow

Yes nate, cut the bullshit

The fact is, I haven't argued that Arte had nothing to do with it, in fact, I have argued my opinion on just what he did and why it makes sense from a business standpoint. It's pretty clear it's my opinion and I make no attempt to claim it as anything else. I haven't turned any speculation to fsct. Nice try though.

Go pound sand tdawg. There's no reason for this bullshit exchange from you.

Because I'd like to know what's behind that comment. This is a discussion right? Why do you feel the need to post a snide comment about it?

Curious scout, what does that tell you? So, aside from Arte being behind signing Pujols, which by the way as an owner making that large of an investment he'd have to be in a significant way, what is the a lot more behind it your sources revealed?

OK, let's look at that evidence TG. Do you know exactly what influence and involvement Arte had in the acquisitions of Pujols, Hamilton or even Wells. Do you know the level of involvement and agreement with those acquisitions Dipoto and even Scioscia had? Do you know for a fact that those acquisitions were Arte's from conception and that he forced them on Dipoto and Scioscia despite their preference to move a different direction?

Of course I speculate all the time. I have no problem with speculation, we all do it especially here. We express our opinions based in large part on speculation born out of a mixture facts, experience, acumen, etc. My issue with this is that it's gone beyond speculation to be presented as fact and not only that, harsh critcism is wielded against the FO, the manager, the coaches and even the owner based on that speculation. I'm not the only one that thinks that but that's irrelevant. More people, even a majority of people, believing one way doesn't mean they're position is right.

I don't accept speculation as fact. Pardon me for expressing my opinion on that True Grich.

that's not "basically" what I said

Nice strawman, speaking of flawed logic

Logical fail

So apparently you don't. Thanks for clarifying.

The rotation was decent not great, but the overall pitching staff was very well put together. The hasn't been the case for a few years now.

The difference has been the quality of the overall pitching staff not the make-up/style of the rest of the roster. I don't care who the manager/coaches are, this team will not make the playoffs again unless the pitching situation is addressed. I don't buy the passionate argument either. Winning teams appear more passionate. Losing teams appear less passionate. It's perception not reality. We saw a different team demeanor when they went on a roll in August. More fire and enthusiasm, building on their success. It's the nature of the beast.

I don't disagree that 2012 and 2013 were slow starts.

Actually upstream he did concede that point. But thanks for your contribution.

Under. 500 in 2010 and barely over. 500 in 2011