Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the
Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.
Monday, August 27, 2007 |
Meta: Buh-bye, Seitz
One of my less-proud moments, true, but, hey, Seitz, you've been nothing but a provocateur all season. I'm not allowed, apparently, to suggest the Angels are anything less than a playoff team. Also, please show exactly where I've "misappl[ied] another SABR stat or use[d] your typical multiple endpoints to prove it", because if you're talking about this, I still maintain that we don't know whether Kotchman can hit lefties (and the recent evidence was encouraging). But since you don't feel compelled to provide anything besides personal attacks (one of the defining hallmarks of so many of the posters over at Halos Heaven, what a surprise), I imagine I'll be waiting a long time for that response. Insist on reading things into my posts if you like. (I was "interesting to read", apparently, until I started disagreeing with the groupthink.) It's just amazing how quickly the Angels blogosphere has declined into the kind of name-calling schoolyard that chased me off the fan forums three years ago.
Comments:
I'm not allowed, apparently, to suggest the Angels are anything less than a playoff team.
That is a ridiculous mischaracterization of Seitz' critique, and to the extent it & other complaints are meant to tar those of us who disagree with some of your conclusions & arguing style, it's also wildly off-base.
That is a ridiculous mischaracterization of Seitz' critique, and to the extent it & other complaints are meant to tar those of us who disagree with some of your conclusions & arguing style, it's also wildly off-base.
What am I supposed to answer to "STFU", Matt? The merest hint of a suggestion of an Angels team not taking the division lead to that. I just don't get it.
Who said STFU?
And I, for one, praised you repeatedly for having the stones to predict a 2nd place finish.
And I, for one, praised you repeatedly for having the stones to predict a 2nd place finish.
I think what may make you even "less proud" is the fact that it was LosAngel that told you to STFU in that thread, not LA Seitz. But you responded to Seitz as if he did.
Am I missing something? I don't really hang at HH, so maybe certain posters have multiple usernames.
Am I missing something? I don't really hang at HH, so maybe certain posters have multiple usernames.
First things first, Matt and Andrew: I agreed with Los Angel's sentiment (in fact, I believe I "panthered" it), which is why Rob went after me. Regardless:
Wow, I'm flattered to know I've warranted a special post. I'll break character and actually post this response on my blog, since you'll probably delete it. Not exactly why you can't let what I wrote speak for itself, but so be it.
It's funny that I'm accused of personal attacks when it was you that called me an asshole for simply agreeing with another poster that the constant negativity coming from you was getting tired. And this is coming from someone who has been pretty negative in the past. Just ask Matt. But even I couldn't keep up with you on that front.
And accusing me of reading things into your posts, well, it's pretty pathetic. Sorry, but when you say "I won't say [Weaver] failed to do his job" common sentence construction suggests that the writer is implying that there's a case to be made for exactly that.
I'm not allowed, apparently, to suggest the Angels are anything less than a playoff team.
I'd be careful around matches, because you're likely to set fire to all of these strawmen that you've taken such care in building. Has anyone made such a suggestion? Hell, I'm not sure if the Angels are a playoff team. Hell, I've got tickets for five or six concerts in October, and it would make my life a lot easier if the Angels were left out. But I'm not sure how whining about it and worrying about it post, after post, after post adds anything constructive to the discourse. Most Angels fans can read the standings. Most people on Halos Heaven watch every game, and they can tell when the Angels are playing well and when they aren't. And it's not particularly fun to beaten over the head with posts about their poor performances, let alone be reminded of those poor performances EVER AFTER GOOD PERFORMANCES! Christ, I get the impression that when you buy a bottle of water, you immediately dump most of it out just so you can claim it's half empty.
I don't know what it is about this season, but it's certainly been worse than the last few. It's just been near constant negativity about every aspect of the team, all the way down the minors. And I still like some of the things you do here. Certainly the minor league updates (aside from the commentary) is more informative than BA's prospect report when it comes to Angels prospects. But your unique ability to not only see the negative in virtually everything, but find it inspiring enough to write about is particularly grating. And believe me, I'm not the only one who thinks so.
But it's your site. You can wallow in your own misery to your heart's (dis)content. Lord knows I tried to point out how it was bringing everyone down earlier in the season. When Matt did the same for me, I laughed it off and had fun with it. But you seem get more and more defensive. Just don't let all of that misery eat you up inside, because being right isn't worth being miserable, and being wrong makes winning a lot less fun.
Wow, I'm flattered to know I've warranted a special post. I'll break character and actually post this response on my blog, since you'll probably delete it. Not exactly why you can't let what I wrote speak for itself, but so be it.
It's funny that I'm accused of personal attacks when it was you that called me an asshole for simply agreeing with another poster that the constant negativity coming from you was getting tired. And this is coming from someone who has been pretty negative in the past. Just ask Matt. But even I couldn't keep up with you on that front.
And accusing me of reading things into your posts, well, it's pretty pathetic. Sorry, but when you say "I won't say [Weaver] failed to do his job" common sentence construction suggests that the writer is implying that there's a case to be made for exactly that.
I'm not allowed, apparently, to suggest the Angels are anything less than a playoff team.
I'd be careful around matches, because you're likely to set fire to all of these strawmen that you've taken such care in building. Has anyone made such a suggestion? Hell, I'm not sure if the Angels are a playoff team. Hell, I've got tickets for five or six concerts in October, and it would make my life a lot easier if the Angels were left out. But I'm not sure how whining about it and worrying about it post, after post, after post adds anything constructive to the discourse. Most Angels fans can read the standings. Most people on Halos Heaven watch every game, and they can tell when the Angels are playing well and when they aren't. And it's not particularly fun to beaten over the head with posts about their poor performances, let alone be reminded of those poor performances EVER AFTER GOOD PERFORMANCES! Christ, I get the impression that when you buy a bottle of water, you immediately dump most of it out just so you can claim it's half empty.
I don't know what it is about this season, but it's certainly been worse than the last few. It's just been near constant negativity about every aspect of the team, all the way down the minors. And I still like some of the things you do here. Certainly the minor league updates (aside from the commentary) is more informative than BA's prospect report when it comes to Angels prospects. But your unique ability to not only see the negative in virtually everything, but find it inspiring enough to write about is particularly grating. And believe me, I'm not the only one who thinks so.
But it's your site. You can wallow in your own misery to your heart's (dis)content. Lord knows I tried to point out how it was bringing everyone down earlier in the season. When Matt did the same for me, I laughed it off and had fun with it. But you seem get more and more defensive. Just don't let all of that misery eat you up inside, because being right isn't worth being miserable, and being wrong makes winning a lot less fun.
I think what may make you even "less proud" is the fact that it was LosAngel that told you to STFU in that thread, not LA Seitz. But you responded to Seitz as if he did.
He certainly endorsed it heartily enough...
I'd be careful around matches, because you're likely to set fire to all of these strawmen that you've taken such care in building. Has anyone made such a suggestion?
Yes, you. Over. And. Over. And. Over. Again. The HH thread I linked to being but the latest example. Weaver throws too many pitches, and not enough strikes? Too negative. My comment that the Angels might not reach the postseason got a big fat STFU from one poster, and your enthusiastic endorsement. No strawmen here, buddy.
He certainly endorsed it heartily enough...
I'd be careful around matches, because you're likely to set fire to all of these strawmen that you've taken such care in building. Has anyone made such a suggestion?
Yes, you. Over. And. Over. And. Over. Again. The HH thread I linked to being but the latest example. Weaver throws too many pitches, and not enough strikes? Too negative. My comment that the Angels might not reach the postseason got a big fat STFU from one poster, and your enthusiastic endorsement. No strawmen here, buddy.
Wow, if you think he's negative when it comes to the Angels, let's hope you're not a Dodgers fan. I am mildly surprised however, that Rob doesn't have at least a little more confidence in his prognosis for the Angels.
Arguing over the internet lol.
Just keep up the blog Rob. I enjoy all your opinions, wether I agree with them or not.
Just keep up the blog Rob. I enjoy all your opinions, wether I agree with them or not.
Rob, I don't know how many times you need to be told, but it's your constant focus on the negative. It's the fact that you go out of your way to run Weaver down after a game in which he'd gone six scoreless innings, as if the ball/strike ratio was more important than, ya know, the six big zeroes up on the scoreboard. It's a constant with you. That's why people tell you to shut the fuck up. Go take a look at that paragraph. A guy who hasn't even pitched a full season start to finish in the majors just threw six scoreless innings, and won a game that the team really needed, and what was the most positive thing you could say? He only walked one and struck out five. Every other sentence in that paragraph was critical of his performance. Every single one.
And if a Mariners fan had posted that same sentiment on HH, it would have been considered trolling. You might not realize this, but people don't like being kicked when they're down, especially right after a loss, even by someone who is allegedly pulling for the same team. There's a time and place, and you apparently have no clue where either one exists.
And if a Mariners fan had posted that same sentiment on HH, it would have been considered trolling. You might not realize this, but people don't like being kicked when they're down, especially right after a loss, even by someone who is allegedly pulling for the same team. There's a time and place, and you apparently have no clue where either one exists.
THIS REMINDS ME OF THE SCENE IN LIFE OF BRIAN WHEN THE COMPETING ACTIVIST FACTIONS HAD TO BE REMINDED THAT THE ENEMY WAS THE ROMANS...
-RevHF
-RevHF
Fiend -- I think I've chased away most of the Dodgers fans already.
Seitz -- There's a time and place, and you apparently have no clue where either one exists.
Waiting to hear when that might be, aside from "never".
Mat -- so, are you a member of the Judean People's Front or the People's Front of Judea?
Seitz -- There's a time and place, and you apparently have no clue where either one exists.
Waiting to hear when that might be, aside from "never".
Mat -- so, are you a member of the Judean People's Front or the People's Front of Judea?
Rob, I sympathize with you, because I do think there's a bit of unfair piling on happening to you over on HH. On the other hand, you really should have thicker skin than this.
I understand that you care deeply about the Angels, and you're just calling things the way you see them. You're not the kind of person who likes to stake out unpopular positions just to seem like the smartest guy in the room.
But as a prophet of doom, you have to expect a lot of negative responses. It's human nature to be annoyed with someone pointing out the dark cloud inside the silver lining right when you're smarting from a humiliating loss. As Matt suggests, it takes courage to predict an unsuccessful end to the season. It takes even more courage to handle disagreement without losing your cool.
Mat brings a lot of passion to his Angels fanship, too, and he can get negative too now and again, but he strives to make HH a friendly place for all people of good will, which is why he accentuates the positive. I know I appreciate that. I think your apparent inference that HH is degenerating into a "name-calling schoolyard" (it is the center of the Angels blogosphere, after all) is unfair to Mat, although I doubt you intended that.
I respect your analytical ability, and I visit this site every day. But this whole thing is just painful to watch.
Rob? Seitz? Shake hands and agree to disagree, please.
I understand that you care deeply about the Angels, and you're just calling things the way you see them. You're not the kind of person who likes to stake out unpopular positions just to seem like the smartest guy in the room.
But as a prophet of doom, you have to expect a lot of negative responses. It's human nature to be annoyed with someone pointing out the dark cloud inside the silver lining right when you're smarting from a humiliating loss. As Matt suggests, it takes courage to predict an unsuccessful end to the season. It takes even more courage to handle disagreement without losing your cool.
Mat brings a lot of passion to his Angels fanship, too, and he can get negative too now and again, but he strives to make HH a friendly place for all people of good will, which is why he accentuates the positive. I know I appreciate that. I think your apparent inference that HH is degenerating into a "name-calling schoolyard" (it is the center of the Angels blogosphere, after all) is unfair to Mat, although I doubt you intended that.
I respect your analytical ability, and I visit this site every day. But this whole thing is just painful to watch.
Rob? Seitz? Shake hands and agree to disagree, please.
Rob, people accuse you of being negative because you are negative.
Fuck you, Lackey. Fuck you, Vlad.
Raise the white flag.
by scareduck on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 02:44:23 PM EST
UK Halo
Fuck you, Lackey. Fuck you, Vlad.
Raise the white flag.
by scareduck on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 02:44:23 PM EST
UK Halo
He certainly endorsed it heartily enough...
Okay, just know that you're publishing, well, publicly, and a few of us among your loyal audience don't get the whole "panther" shibboleth. If I could put this whole process on background, I would, but alas. Cross-community piefights are for the crows, duck.
Okay, just know that you're publishing, well, publicly, and a few of us among your loyal audience don't get the whole "panther" shibboleth. If I could put this whole process on background, I would, but alas. Cross-community piefights are for the crows, duck.
Newer› ‹Older