Off Season Thread

[GreenWeenie]

If you don't enjoy a thread, no one holds a baseball bat forcing you to read it. Blaming others for your own At Bats is bush league.



I can't care less about Selling The Future, so I rarely visit certain threads that focus on it.



Gee, I wonder why you don't see me bitching about them.



Shed is not the problem. I'm only being fair. If I thought that you were right on this, you know that I'd say so.

[BellevueBuc]

162334343F0634343F3834510 wrote: I'm done with it. I'll tell you what.  Huntington didn't, either, and guys still bark about him to this day.  And, he was better.



Then, as I've correctly pointed out, it's OK to criticize guys Cheringtin hires, but not him.  I wrote that 'it didn't have to be this way.  Ppl complained about Shelton, not Cherington. That's mind boggling.



Announcers have 0 to do with a game's outcome.  We're allowed to come down on them.  How many times a game?



What gives about this Cherington cat?  Are ppl afraid that he'll bolt or something?  I don't get it. 


Huntington did put them in the playoffs 3 years. That is better than 2 GMs before him and the current one so far.

[GreenWeenie]

I try to be fair.



Yes, those are inarguable facts.  I wrote the same before.



Unless the previous guy dies, retires, resigns, or gets promoted, the job becomes available only when he/she stinks to high heaven.



So, I don't want to hear how bad any team was before.  Except for the above, they ALL were bad.  Huntington had a bad team, too.



And, being fair to Cherington, it took Huntington six years to form a winning- and, simultaneously Wild Card- team.



But, it should be noted that NH was an OJT.  That's hardly the case with this Cherington guy.



I expect improvement, and I know that the task's daunting.  The clubs in our division aren't going to step aside and just let us walk through.  We need to roll up our sleeves and man up.



By no means should we fans accept less.  My .02.

[rucker59@gmail.com]

7D485F5F546D5F5F54535F3A0 wrote: If you don't enjoy a thread, no one holds a baseball bat forcing you to read it.  Blaming others for your own At Bats is bush league.



I can't care less about Selling The Future, so I rarely visit certain threads that focus on it.



Gee, I wonder why you don't see me bitching about them.



Shed is not the problem.  I'm only being fair.  If I thought that you were right on this, you know that I'd say so.


You’re not being fair. Despite your claims otherwise.

Threads. Get. Hijacked.

Over and over.

We all get that THIS season is more important to you than building for the future. I’ve got no problem with your vision for running the team, even if I disagree with you. But in the end, that’s NOT WHAT THE PIRATES ARE DOING. So to complain about results that are not part of the plan does NOTHING to contribute to discussion on here.



Start a threat that explains why you think your plan is better than BC’s plan. I’d love to hear how you would build a playoff team following your plan cause I don’t get it. But I’d listen to you and think about it. Instead, you have judged BC because he does not follow you’re plan. You’ve judged BC because other GMs have failed. Those do not contribute anything. And they get threads off point.



Every single tread here could bash nutting for being cheap. We all know he is, so there are times to bash him but any real discussion can only happen if we deal with whatever options we do have.



Finally, this is not complicated, what the mods are asking. To make it sound like some sort of censorship or some sort of confusing standard is simply disingenuous. Your writing ability gives you away: you’re smart enough to easily understand what the mods are talking about.

[GreenWeenie]

If we don't want to read what a member writes, the ability to block them exists.



If we don't like a thread in general, we have the ability to not go into it.



Seems easy enough to understand.  I'm not the smartest guy here, and I get it.

[rucker59@gmail.com]

665344444F7644444F4844210 wrote: If we don't want to read what a member writes, the ability to block them exists.



If we don't like a thread in general, we have the ability to not go into it.



Seems easy enough to understand.  I'm not the smartest guy here, and I get it.


Then maybe you’re not as smart as I gave you credit for above.



See - this borderline smart-zzz reply is proof that you don’t want to engage, you simply want your way. I don’t need to respond to this post because my point, which you once again totally veer around, is all in my above post.



You are an antagonist. You enjoy it. Too bad, you could be a great contributor.

[GreenWeenie]

It's not a smart ass reply. They are facts that I find easy to follow. It's direct.



There are members whom I don't agree with. We all do. Discussions go in tangents. So what? This isn't Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. It's an internet message board. There are folks who've been a nuisance, and even i dont block them. I can glance over things in the blink of my eye. I don't understand why others don't.....and, even when don't, they'd rather cry about it than to Block or not go to a thread that they know full well that they won't enjoy.

[rucker59@gmail.com]

093C2B2B20192B2B20272B4E0 wrote: It's not a smart ass reply.  They are facts that I find easy to follow.  It's direct.



There are members whom I don't agree with.  We all do.  Discussions go in tangents.  So what?  This isn't Harvard, Yale, or Princeton.  It's an internet message board.  There are folks who've been a nuisance, and even i dont block them.  I can glance over things in the blink of my eye.  I don't understand why others don't.....and, even when don't, they'd rather cry about it than to Block or not go to a thread that they know full well that they won't enjoy.




You don’t understand? Try reading my freaking reply and tell me where I’m wrong. Again, this reply demonstrates that this is all about what YOU want. I’ve tried to engage you. I’ve given you credit. I’ve invited you to start threads. No point whatsoever.



You’re an antagonist. You enjoy it.



I’m done.

[WildwoodDave2]

113C31202736216162530 wrote: Those are all moot.



The point is, Cherington should be as fair game for criticism as he is fair game for compliments.



He's as fair game as his inferior hires and subordinates.



He's as fair game as his players and coaches.



He's as fair game as anyone associated with the club.



Let's call this exactly as it is:  Cherington has nothing to do with this.  No one will admit it.  These inconsistencies are nothing other than personality conflicts among certain members.



The solution SHOULD be:  Dont read the thread if you don't enjoy it.  I don't read The Minors.thread.


You are pushing a false narrative that Cherington cannot be criticized here. It's certainly fair game to criticize him for trades, the 2021 roster and even the hiring of Shelton. But it's also fair to recognize that while he clearly punted on the MLB roster, he focused on building up the minors, for which all evaluations seems to be very favorable. So when we get the constant comments that BC is a total failure because he failed in his only task to make the 2021 MLB roster competitive while totally ignoring what he's been working on, it gets old because it pushes a poster's agenda rather than a fair discussion of BC's overall successes and failures. Shedman was asked more times than I can count to stop pushing his agenda while ignoring the overall situation. He was suspended several times, was reinstated today and immediately resumed his agenda and then immediately complained about how OBN was run when he was again asked to modify his behavior.



OBN is not PMB 2.0. Thankfully! A lot of us on OBN were once members of the PMB and left because of how the board was made unpleasant due to the accepted behavior of some posters. Such behavior is not accepted here. Shedman was made aware of that numerous times and didn't seem to care. So he's gone. Fair criticism of BC or anyone else is totally acceptable. But ignoring reality to push an agenda is not. And falsely accusing OBN of not permitting criticism of BC in order to defend unacceptable behavior is not acceptable. Learn from Shedman's mistake. Or join him. 
It's too bad that it has come to this. I just want to discuss baseball

[fjk090852-7]

7144535358615353585F53360 wrote: Those are all moot.



The point is, Cherington should be as fair game for criticism as he is fair game for compliments.



He's as fair game as his inferior hires and subordinates.



He's as fair game as his players and coaches.



He's as fair game as anyone associated with the club.



Let's call this exactly as it is:  Cherington has nothing to do with this.  No one will admit it.  These inconsistencies are nothing other than personality conflicts among certain members.



The solution SHOULD be:  Dont read the thread if you don't enjoy it.  I don't read The Minors.thread.






Your last sentence sums it up. “ I don’t read the Minors thread” . To tell you the truth that is the Pirates future. Guys like Newman, Gamel etc will be replaced by Gonzales, Swaggerty , and Davis. Maybe every so often read the Minors thread. The Bucs have 7 prospects going to the AFL starting next week, some of them are going to be a big part of the Pirates future. As a long time fan I have always tried to follow the Bucs minor league players, and I really believe the current group of prospects are a special group.