KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 oops, sorry, I was having cyber sex, and lost track of time. Yeah, you're right, you said theyd contend the year after next, and be 500 this year. I bet they won't do eitehr of those things. wanna wager?So you are basically admitting that you are wrong and that you have misunderstood my posts. Cool. Looks like I am the one, after all, who has been saying the rational things things all along, while you are the one who has simply been reciting generic babble and changing up your arguments. W-H-A-M-M-Y....so, you do or don't want either of those wagers, I don't understand...You not understanding something!?!?!??! Wow, that's hard to believe SW ZING!!!!!!!!So wait, I'm confused again, your money is or is not where your mouth is?www.gamblersanonymous.com Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,355 Posted October 11, 2005 Author Share Posted October 11, 2005 oops, sorry, I was having cyber sex, and lost track of time. Yeah, you're right, you said theyd contend the year after next, and be 500 this year. I bet they won't do eitehr of those things. wanna wager?So you are basically admitting that you are wrong and that you have misunderstood my posts. Cool. Looks like I am the one, after all, who has been saying the rational things things all along, while you are the one who has simply been reciting generic babble and changing up your arguments. W-H-A-M-M-Y....so, you do or don't want either of those wagers, I don't understand...You not understanding something!?!?!??! Wow, that's hard to believe SW ZING!!!!!!!!So wait, I'm confused again, your money is or is not where your mouth is?www.gamblersanonymous.comSo wait, you do or don't thinkg that the royals are going to finish 500 next year, and contend for the playoffs the next? I thought you did... but you don't want to make a wager based on your superior knowledge and anaylis? What was that? Mangina flapping? Link to post Share on other sites
teneight 1 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 royals suck, plain and simplethe reason kowboykoop dosen't wager is because he knows he will lose. I wouldn't even bet on the royals even if I was getting 10-1 on my money because it's -ev if you ever root and bet for the royals. hehenow kowboykoop is going to make a comment about me which has nothing to do about the royals because he can't think of a good arguement to defend those poor crappy royals from kc, which isn't a very good city to live in.Los Angeles = best city in the world! Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,355 Posted October 11, 2005 Author Share Posted October 11, 2005 royals suck, plain and simplethe reason kowboykoop dosen't wager is because he knows he will lose. I wouldn't even bet on the royals even if I was getting 10-1 on my money because it's -ev if you ever root and bet for the royals. hehenow kowboykoop is going to make a comment about me which has nothing to do about the royals because he can't think of a good arguement to defend those poor crappy royals from kc, which isn't a very good city to live in.Los Angeles = best city in the world!LA is the third best city in California. But about a hundred times better than KC. What a shitty dump that town is. It's got a bunch of hicks, a bunch of gangsters, a couple shity sports teams, very little culture, overrated barb-b-Q, and a name that doesn't make sense to it's location. Missouri= -ev. Link to post Share on other sites
teneight 1 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 they also have a guy with a little 12 year old girl body frame aka kowboykoop heheeheheheheheheheehehehezing! Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 they also have a guy with a little 12 year old girl body frame aka kowboykoop heheeheheheheheheheehehehezing!It is a good thing you made sure everyone knew you were referring to me in that insult....Wanker. Man, you can't even insult people well....Oh, and by the way...ROYALS RULE!!! Link to post Share on other sites
kers2 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 they also have a guy with a little 12 year old girl body frame aka kowboykoop heheeheheheheheheheehehehezing!It is a good thing you made sure everyone knew you were referring to me in that insult....Wanker. Man, you can't even insult people well....Oh, and by the way...ROYALS RULE!!!Stop trying to bring "wanker" back. You sound like a 60 year old British Nanny... its so gay Link to post Share on other sites
RhinestoneCowboy 2 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Kansas City Royals = 66-91 in interleague play.... Link to post Share on other sites
Orion071 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 I'm a Royals fan, so I have to speak up in this thread. Yes, the Royals suck. That's hardly news at this point, but there's a lot of teams in baseball that will continue to suck. They're my team and I can't change that now. But let's not deviate from the true purpose of this thread, which is to flame KowboyKoop for being a complete moron. Stop focusing on the Royals and keep focusing on Kowboy. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Kansas City Royals = 66-91 in interleague play....ohhhh....noooo....the Royals have a bad record in INTERLEAGUE PLAY!?!?!?! Man, I am so shocked. I figured with the Royals .400 winning percentage over the past few years, that we would FOR SURE be a .575 team in interleague play. Silly me.... Link to post Share on other sites
RhinestoneCowboy 2 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 'Eh, the only reason those teams all finished so close to each other is because they were all just mediocre. Not one of those teams make the playoffs in any division in the AL. Same with the NL West for that matter. Only NL team that could be a playoff team in the AL is the Cardinals. Every other team in that league is "decent" at best. Yes, even the Astros. The Pirates play in the National League..which is the Minor Leagues of baseball. If the Pirates played in the AL, where there is more than just two good teams (Cardinals and Astros), they probably would have had a worst record than the Royals. HAHAHAH Seriously though, the NL is a disgrace. Ha. Padres. What a joke. Kansas City Royals = 66-91 in interleague play....ohhhh....noooo....the Royals have a bad record in INTERLEAGUE PLAY!?!?!?! Man, I am so shocked. I figured with the Royals .400 winning percentage over the past few years, that we would FOR SURE be a .575 team in interleague play. Silly me....Based on your description of the National League, that is exactly what I am lead to believe... Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Here's why the Royals suck: (from SoSH)"Here's a crazy stat: The KC Royals didn't have ONE game started by a pitcher with an ERA+ of 100 or better. The closets was Mike Wood, 10 games started and a 97 ERA+.Greinke, 33 GS, 74 ERA+Lima, 32 GS, 62 ERA+Hernandez, 29 GS, 78 ERA+Carrasco, 20 GS, 90 ERA+Howell, 15 GS, 70 ERA+Wood, 10 GS, 97 ERA+Bautista, 7 GS, 74 ERA+Anderson, 6 GS, 64 ERA+Gobble, 4 GS, 76 ERA+Snyder, 3 GS, 64 ERA+Jensen, 3 GS, 61 ERA+" Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Here's why the Royals suck: (from SoSH)"Here's a crazy stat: The KC Royals didn't have ONE game started by a pitcher with an ERA+ of 100 or better. The closets was Mike Wood, 10 games started and a 97 ERA+.Greinke, 33 GS, 74 ERA+Lima, 32 GS, 62 ERA+Hernandez, 29 GS, 78 ERA+Carrasco, 20 GS, 90 ERA+Howell, 15 GS, 70 ERA+Wood, 10 GS, 97 ERA+Bautista, 7 GS, 74 ERA+Anderson, 6 GS, 64 ERA+Gobble, 4 GS, 76 ERA+Snyder, 3 GS, 64 ERA+Jensen, 3 GS, 61 ERA+"Well, I never said the Royals were a good team this year....so...I don't see the relevance of your post. I said they will be a better team next year. That is all. Yes, their starting pitching wasn't good, but most of our good arms are very young, and our bullpen was actually way better than our starting pitching. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 'Eh, the only reason those teams all finished so close to each other is because they were all just mediocre. Not one of those teams make the playoffs in any division in the AL. Same with the NL West for that matter. Only NL team that could be a playoff team in the AL is the Cardinals. Every other team in that league is "decent" at best. Yes, even the Astros. The Pirates play in the National League..which is the Minor Leagues of baseball. If the Pirates played in the AL, where there is more than just two good teams (Cardinals and Astros), they probably would have had a worst record than the Royals. HAHAHAH Seriously though, the NL is a disgrace. Ha. Padres. What a joke. Kansas City Royals = 66-91 in interleague play....ohhhh....noooo....the Royals have a bad record in INTERLEAGUE PLAY!?!?!?! Man, I am so shocked. I figured with the Royals .400 winning percentage over the past few years, that we would FOR SURE be a .575 team in interleague play. Silly me....Based on your description of the National League, that is exactly what I am lead to believe...Again, you have not comprehended my post. I did not say that the Royals were better than most NL teams. That is not true. I was saying that there was only one NL team that could make the playoffs in the AL, and therefore, the NL was by far a worse league. You honestly think the Braves are getting in ahead of the Yankees, and BoSox. NO. You think the Astros get in the Wild Card ahead of the BoSox. No. You think the Padres get in ahead of the Angels. HAHAHAHAHHAH. No. Thus, I am right, the AL is vastly superior to the NL, however, this does not mean I think EVERY AL team is better than EVERY NL team, like you are saying. I am just saying that if the Pirates played in the Al (or the Rockies for that matter), they would have had much worse records as they would, on average, fact better teams. As you can see, this is plain logic. Link to post Share on other sites
teneight 1 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 royals= kowboykoop= 12 year old girl body frameplain and simple, they suck! Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 royals= kowboykoop= 12 year old girl body frameplain and simple, they suck!oooohhhh, man, that joke is really getting under my skin, look, I am crying right now.....( :cry: seriously though, not very funny. Runners tend to be skinny. Got it. Bad joke. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 royals= kowboykoop= 12 year old girl body frameplain and simple, they suck!wow, i just noticed your signature. Anyone who goes to that much effort to try and make fun of someone, really needs to reassess their priorities in life. That is just sad......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, man, You suck at the internet. Link to post Share on other sites
teneight 1 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 YSALPKNenjoy!my sig is the best ever, you little 12 year old girl! heheeh Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 First of all, the NL and AL have completely different rules. Having a DH changes the shape of the game a lot, so saying this team or that team would do well in whichever other league is silly. If the Pirates were in the AL, they would have a different team with better hitters (DH).Second of all, the Royals totally blow. I MIGHT take 50 to 1 that they finish .500 next year. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 First of all, the NL and AL have completely different rules. Â Having a DH changes the shape of the game a lot, so saying this team or that team would do well in whichever other league is silly. Â If the Pirates were in the AL, they would have a different team with better hitters (DH).Second of all, the Royals totally blow. Â I MIGHT take 50 to 1 that they finish .500 next year.DDEERRRRR, THE TWO LEAGUES HAVE DIFFERENET RULES!?!??!?!?! WHAT IS A DH!?!??!?!?!? BOY, I GUESS I NEED TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH ABOUT BASE-BALL SOME MORE, DERRR...Seriously though, I took this into consideration, yet I still feel that only one NL team, STL, could compete with the top 5-6 AL teams consistently. Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 Here's why the Royals suck: (from SoSH)"Here's a crazy stat: The KC Royals didn't have ONE game started by a pitcher with an ERA+ of 100 or better. The closets was Mike Wood, 10 games started and a 97 ERA+.Greinke, 33 GS, 74 ERA+Lima, 32 GS, 62 ERA+Hernandez, 29 GS, 78 ERA+Carrasco, 20 GS, 90 ERA+Howell, 15 GS, 70 ERA+Wood, 10 GS, 97 ERA+Bautista, 7 GS, 74 ERA+Anderson, 6 GS, 64 ERA+Gobble, 4 GS, 76 ERA+Snyder, 3 GS, 64 ERA+Jensen, 3 GS, 61 ERA+"Well, I never said the Royals were a good team this year....so...I don't see the relevance of your post. I said they will be a better team next year. That is all. Yes, their starting pitching wasn't good, but most of our good arms are very young, and our bullpen was actually way better than our starting pitching.The relevance of my post is that I'm showing a big reason why the Royals suck in a thread called "why the Royals suck."If you're talking about next year, well this is still relevant unless:a.) the Royals are planning on getting a whole new pitching staff. (Though you've already mentioned how the team is unable to bring in free agents due to a limited payroll...and I'd like to add, a cheap owner. Do you have 11 major league ready young arms on the way up? Doubt it.)or b.) The pitchers will all of a sudden get way better. There's no reason to think that. Some of them are talented, but not enough. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 Here's why the Royals suck: (from SoSH)"Here's a crazy stat: The KC Royals didn't have ONE game started by a pitcher with an ERA+ of 100 or better. The closets was Mike Wood, 10 games started and a 97 ERA+.Greinke, 33 GS, 74 ERA+Lima, 32 GS, 62 ERA+Hernandez, 29 GS, 78 ERA+Carrasco, 20 GS, 90 ERA+Howell, 15 GS, 70 ERA+Wood, 10 GS, 97 ERA+Bautista, 7 GS, 74 ERA+Anderson, 6 GS, 64 ERA+Gobble, 4 GS, 76 ERA+Snyder, 3 GS, 64 ERA+Jensen, 3 GS, 61 ERA+"Well, I never said the Royals were a good team this year....so...I don't see the relevance of your post. I said they will be a better team next year. That is all. Yes, their starting pitching wasn't good, but most of our good arms are very young, and our bullpen was actually way better than our starting pitching.The relevance of my post is that I'm showing a big reason why the Royals suck in a thread called "why the Royals suck."If you're talking about next year, well this is still relevant unless:a.) the Royals are planning on getting a whole new pitching staff. (Though you've already mentioned how the team is unable to bring in free agents due to a limited payroll...and I'd like to add, a cheap owner. Do you have 11 major league ready young arms on the way up? Doubt it.)or b.) The pitchers will all of a sudden get way better. There's no reason to think that. Some of them are talented, but not enough.Actually, in my posts, I have already stated that the Royals SHOULD have 15-20 million dollars in payroll to add, which is more than enough to add a solid arm or two. Also, yes, there is reason to think that a lot of our young pitchers will get better, because (as a person who actually keeps up with the team), it is obvious that every single young pitcher we had CLEARLY got better as the year went on, except for D. Bautista, who was injured. Grienke got better, Gobble got better, J.P. Howell looked lights out at times (see the no-hitter in five he threw in his second to last start), Carrasco looked very good until he got a minor injury, and Wood was very solid. So, yeah, a lot of their pitchers showed a lot of promise. It is too easy to simply look at numbers and say "Oh, this person sucks," but it is much different when you actually watch their progress throughout the entire year, which is why this year was a lot different than last year, as in '04, it was obvious that the Royals lacked a clear direction, while in '05, the Royals had a ton of young, promising players who were clearly getting better. This does not mean every single one will be a great MLB player, but at least some of them will be very solid players within the next year or so. (i.e. David DeJesus, who was very solid this year.) Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,355 Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 Wow, the royals signed good free agents. I may have to re name this thread. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 Wow, the royals signed good free agents. Â I may have to re name this thread.I TOLD EVERYONE THAT WE WERE GONNA HAVE MONEY TO SPEND...yet NNNOOOOOONNNEEEE thought anything would come of it. I am not saying we are going to the playoffs next year, but we are going to be significantly better. I told you it was coming, and it is.....once again, it appears that KowboyKoop actually knows what he is talking about... Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 also, there is about a 98 percent chance we will be signing Jacque Jones OR Jeremy Burnitz in the next week or so...so that will be a fairly solid addition. Nothing great, but better than what we had. Also, I REALLY like the Mientkeviwtcz (yeah...that isn't even close...lol) and Grudzileanek (WTF is with these names!?!?!) signings, our defense should be great on the infield, and Grudz is a pretty solid average hitter. AND Earlton is a fairly solid pitcher who is still getting better....and a few other of our signings/trades seem pretty good so far....I like it, hopefully it yields some wins. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now