I'm afraid applenut's typical whining attitude has derailed the thread. How unfortunate.
Next time you try to pull a thread-shit, applenut, at least make sure the subject you try to migrate everyone towards is similar to the one that started the thread.
The Red Sox fans know what it's like to have a terrible GM. Plus, it looks like something bad happens when our two GMs get together. Carl Everett stays in Major League baseball. The horror. This guy should have been gone a long time ago. He can't hit, he damages the team's atmosphere, and he won't listen to authority figures. Even when he does listen, it makes him angry and he feels the need to hit something/someone.
Sorry you guys ended up with him. I hope you can get rid of him ASAP. The Red Sox are now better because of the 'addition by subtraction' factor that Everett had.
The Red Sox fans know what it's like to have a terrible GM. Plus, it looks like something bad happens when our two GMs get together. Carl Everett stays in Major League baseball. The horror. This guy should have been gone a long time ago. He can't hit, he damages the team's atmosphere, and he won't listen to authority figures. Even when he does listen, it makes him angry and he feels the need to hit something/someone.
Sorry you guys ended up with him. I hope you can get rid of him ASAP. The Red Sox are now better because of the 'addition by subtraction' factor that Everett had.</strong><hr></blockquote>
he was good when he was with the astros...
was he really that bad production-wise for u guys??
<strong>he was good when he was with the astros...
was he really that bad production-wise for u guys??</strong><hr></blockquote>
He was good for us the first year he was here. You guys got someone who could be very, very good for practically nothing. There's a reason for that. But if he ever pulls his head out this could be a great deal for the Rangers.
i wasnt talkin about that, and yet he cant help but bitch...
anyway, nut, shutup if yer not gonna talk about the topic on hand, ok? if u wanna bitch about my dislike of the yanks, start a thread about it, ok?
thx</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was just commenting on the double standard you set. there was no need for you to get all winded about it like you always do.
[quote]'m afraid applenut's typical whining attitude has derailed the thread. How unfortunate.<hr></blockquote>
yep, this thread is full of whining
[quote]
Next time you try to pull a thread-shit, applenut, at least make sure the subject you try to migrate everyone towards is similar to the one that started the thread. <hr></blockquote>
a thread-shit? did you just coin that or something. I tell you, you used to have some wit but you're getting played now.
You should know that applenut doesn't shup up until the other person does. He's gotta get the last word it seems like. (No offense applenut)</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm supposed to let him finish off with insulting me?
I agree. I have taken the thread offtopic. I'll end it Sorry
"Thread-shit" is Arsian for making an off-topic statement that derails the thread. (eg - Figuratively defecating on the subject.)
The Yankee subject, if I remember correctly, was an assertion by _alliance_ that the Yankees were bad for baseball since, he asserted, they bought championship rings.
That isn't applicable to this since the Rangers have no championship rings, so unless the Rangers are ruining the proud tradition of expensive failure there is no carry-over.
Comments
<strong>Is there ever a thread about baseball that you don't argue in?</strong><hr></blockquote>
he brought the damn yankees into this...
i wasnt talkin about that, and yet he cant help but bitch...
anyway, nut, shutup if yer not gonna talk about the topic on hand, ok? if u wanna bitch about my dislike of the yanks, start a thread about it, ok?
thx
Next time you try to pull a thread-shit, applenut, at least make sure the subject you try to migrate everyone towards is similar to the one that started the thread.
The Red Sox fans know what it's like to have a terrible GM. Plus, it looks like something bad happens when our two GMs get together. Carl Everett stays in Major League baseball. The horror. This guy should have been gone a long time ago. He can't hit, he damages the team's atmosphere, and he won't listen to authority figures. Even when he does listen, it makes him angry and he feels the need to hit something/someone.
Sorry you guys ended up with him. I hope you can get rid of him ASAP. The Red Sox are now better because of the 'addition by subtraction' factor that Everett had.
<strong>Okay, if we have to get back on topic....
The Red Sox fans know what it's like to have a terrible GM. Plus, it looks like something bad happens when our two GMs get together. Carl Everett stays in Major League baseball. The horror. This guy should have been gone a long time ago. He can't hit, he damages the team's atmosphere, and he won't listen to authority figures. Even when he does listen, it makes him angry and he feels the need to hit something/someone.
Sorry you guys ended up with him. I hope you can get rid of him ASAP. The Red Sox are now better because of the 'addition by subtraction' factor that Everett had.</strong><hr></blockquote>
he was good when he was with the astros...
was he really that bad production-wise for u guys??
Not very good production value, especially considering the problems that he causes.
<strong>I believe that he hit in the .250s last season with less than 20 home runs.
Not very good production value, especially considering the problems that he causes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
but he was also hurt, was he not?
<strong>he was good when he was with the astros...
was he really that bad production-wise for u guys??</strong><hr></blockquote>
He was good for us the first year he was here. You guys got someone who could be very, very good for practically nothing. There's a reason for that. But if he ever pulls his head out this could be a great deal for the Rangers.
<strong>
he brought the damn yankees into this...
i wasnt talkin about that, and yet he cant help but bitch...
anyway, nut, shutup if yer not gonna talk about the topic on hand, ok? if u wanna bitch about my dislike of the yanks, start a thread about it, ok?
thx</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was just commenting on the double standard you set. there was no need for you to get all winded about it like you always do.
[quote]'m afraid applenut's typical whining attitude has derailed the thread. How unfortunate.<hr></blockquote>
yep, this thread is full of whining
[quote]
Next time you try to pull a thread-shit, applenut, at least make sure the subject you try to migrate everyone towards is similar to the one that started the thread. <hr></blockquote>
a thread-shit? did you just coin that or something. I tell you, you used to have some wit but you're getting played now.
<hr></blockquote>
yep, and yet u keep going...
unbelievable...
<strong>
yep, and yet u keep going...
unbelievable...
You should know that applenut doesn't shup up until the other person does. He's gotta get the last word it seems like. (No offense applenut)
<strong>
You should know that applenut doesn't shup up until the other person does. He's gotta get the last word it seems like. (No offense applenut)</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm supposed to let him finish off with insulting me?
I agree. I have taken the thread offtopic. I'll end it
<strong>
I agree. I have taken the thread offtopic. I'll end it
ty...
and the rest of the forum thanks you...
<strong>
ty...
and the rest of the forum thanks you...</strong><hr></blockquote>
you....... ahh nevermind
I have wit when we agree.
I don't have wit when we disagree.
Nice.
"Thread-shit" is Arsian for making an off-topic statement that derails the thread. (eg - Figuratively defecating on the subject.)
The Yankee subject, if I remember correctly, was an assertion by _alliance_ that the Yankees were bad for baseball since, he asserted, they bought championship rings.
That isn't applicable to this since the Rangers have no championship rings, so unless the Rangers are ruining the proud tradition of expensive failure there is no carry-over.
good job.
oh wait, i think we're off topic again