cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:Best hitter in the league, means best overall hitter.

Extra word. Not same meaning. More words mean more meaning. When one leads the league in hitting, I would sure call him the best hitter. Its called looking at a sentence and filling in the blanks. You don't need to know anything about baseball to know that.

stop being so ignorant! :mad:
calling a player the "Best hitter" is something that is interpreted by fans after looking at the stats. So when someone is leading the league in hitting, that implies that he is leading the league in a certain stat.

You aren't a bad person for getting this wrong, but you need to accept the fact that your definition is not the same as everyone elses. Someone is leading the league in hitting. That strongly implies they are the best hitter at that time.

you're right, it isn't the same as everyone else's. It's the same as everyone else's except for you.

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:Best hitter in the league, means best overall hitter.

Extra word. Not same meaning. More words mean more meaning. When one leads the league in hitting, I would sure call him the best hitter. Its called looking at a sentence and filling in the blanks. You don't need to know anything about baseball to know that.

yea YOU would sure call him the best hitter, but youre wrong, so its your opinion against what is right

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:Best hitter in the league, means best overall hitter.

Extra word. Not same meaning. More words mean more meaning. When one leads the league in hitting, I would sure call him the best hitter. Its called looking at a sentence and filling in the blanks. You don't need to know anything about baseball to know that.

stop being so ignorant! :mad:
calling a player the "Best hitter" is something that is interpreted by fans after looking at the stats. So when someone is leading the league in hitting, that implies that he is leading the league in a certain stat.

You aren't a bad person for getting this wrong, but you need to accept the fact that your definition is not the same as everyone elses. Someone is leading the league in hitting. That strongly implies they are the best hitter at that time.

the problem is that even when you admit that you are wrong, and you are very wrong, you can always just saying hitting is what you percieve it to be, and what exactly is hitting?

tysramm1 Wrote:

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:Best hitter in the league, means best overall hitter.

Extra word. Not same meaning. More words mean more meaning. When one leads the league in hitting, I would sure call him the best hitter. Its called looking at a sentence and filling in the blanks. You don't need to know anything about baseball to know that.

stop being so ignorant! :mad:
calling a player the "Best hitter" is something that is interpreted by fans after looking at the stats. So when someone is leading the league in hitting, that implies that he is leading the league in a certain stat.

You aren't a bad person for getting this wrong, but you need to accept the fact that your definition is not the same as everyone elses. Someone is leading the league in hitting. That strongly implies they are the best hitter at that time.

the problem is that even when you admit that you are wrong, and you are very wrong, you can always just saying hitting is what you percieve it to be, and what exactly is hitting?

maybe when he grows out of this philosophical phase, he'll begin to understand that there is no point in arguing with ancient baseball lingo.

:roflol:

Man. You contradict yourself yet still maintain that you are right. You take words and place them in different orders, thinking you have changed the similarity. I trapped you into mixing the words right and you still maintain you are correct. You have stopped arguing and are now just attacking my sense. Sounds like you are stuck and all out of ideas. So I will stop this now and not let you embarass yourself further.

cbfranchise3 Wrote::roflol:

Man. You contradict yourself yet still maintain that you are right. You take words and place them in different orders, thinking you have changed the similarity. I trapped you into mixing the words right and you still maintain you are correct. You have stopped arguing and are now just attacking my sense. Sounds like you are stuck and all out of ideas. So I will stop this now and not let you embarass yourself further.

what?

here let me make this plain to you.

Leading the league in hitting= best BA
Best hitter in the league= best overall hitter

oh so simple.

flyingswoosh Wrote:

cbfranchise3 Wrote::roflol:

Man.  You contradict yourself yet still maintain that you are right.  You take words and place them in different orders, thinking you have changed the similarity.  I trapped you into mixing the words right and you still maintain you are correct.  You have stopped arguing and are now just attacking my sense.  Sounds like you are stuck and all out of ideas.  So I will stop this now and not let you embarass yourself further.

what?

here let me make this plain to you.

Leading the league in hitting= best BA
Best hitter in the league= best overall hitter

oh so simple.

Woosh, your right, CBF what the heck are you talking about.

Hardcore Husky Wrote:Woosh, your right, CBF what the heck are you talking about.

:laugh: I rest my case.

cbfranchise3 Wrote:

Hardcore Husky Wrote:Woosh, your right, CBF what the heck are you talking about.

:laugh: I rest my case.

just because he always gets my name wrong doesn't mean i'm wrong.

cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

tysramm1 Wrote:cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

that's a really good point. i never thought of it like that.

tysramm1 Wrote:cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

Are you saying that because Griffey Jr. is a great homerun hitter, that makes him a great hitter (overall)?? I would have to disagree with that... The guy barely hit over .285 in 1 of his last 6-7 seasons. 2000 he hit 40 dingers, too bad he only hit .271, I think... I don't think he'll take his average over over .300 this year... Not very good for a "great hitter". He's one of the greatest homerun hitters of his time, one of the good hitters of his time, but not a great hitter(overall).

jrhessey Wrote:

tysramm1 Wrote:cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

Are you saying that because Griffey Jr. is a great homerun hitter, that makes him a great hitter (overall)?? I would have to disagree with that... The guy barely hit over .285 in 1 of his last 6-7 seasons. 2000 he hit 40 dingers, too bad he only hit .271, I think... I don't think he'll take his average over over .300 this year... Not very good for a "great hitter". He's one of the greatest homerun hitters of his time, one of the good hitters of his time, but not a great hitter(overall).

when in that whole post did he say griffey is a great hitter?

flyingswoosh Wrote:

jrhessey Wrote:

tysramm1 Wrote:cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

Are you saying that because Griffey Jr. is a great homerun hitter, that makes him a great hitter (overall)?? I would have to disagree with that... The guy barely hit over .285 in 1 of his last 6-7 seasons. 2000 he hit 40 dingers, too bad he only hit .271, I think... I don't think he'll take his average over over .300 this year... Not very good for a "great hitter". He's one of the greatest homerun hitters of his time, one of the good hitters of his time, but not a great hitter(overall).

when in that whole post did he say griffey is a great hitter?

the bolded ??'s mean that was a question...

I wanted to know if he thought Griffey was/is a great hitter and merely provided him with statisitcs and my opinion... Thats all...

I'll guess I'll change my post...

tysramm, do you think Griffey is a great hitter?

That better?

jrhessey Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:

jrhessey Wrote:

tysramm1 Wrote:cbf, since you say best hitter=best BA, does that mean that jeff bagwell is a worse hitter than morgan ensberg, this bagwell guy must be pretty terrible (heard he might have to go back to the minors) because hes only the 6th or 7th best hitter on the astros.

also for all the reds fans, griffey whos hitting around .250 but with a ton of HR's and RBI's, is just a terrible hitter, because hes almost the reds worst hitter

makes a whole lot of sense doesnt it

Are you saying that because Griffey Jr. is a great homerun hitter, that makes him a great hitter (overall)?? I would have to disagree with that... The guy barely hit over .285 in 1 of his last 6-7 seasons. 2000 he hit 40 dingers, too bad he only hit .271, I think... I don't think he'll take his average over over .300 this year... Not very good for a "great hitter". He's one of the greatest homerun hitters of his time, one of the good hitters of his time, but not a great hitter(overall).

when in that whole post did he say griffey is a great hitter?

the bolded ??'s mean that was a question...

I wanted to know if he thought Griffey was/is a great hitter and merely provided him with statisitcs and my opinion... Thats all...

I'll guess I'll change my post...

tysramm, do you think Griffey is a great hitter?

That better?

i think griffey is/was a great hitter, my maint point though is that cbf is wrong

let's clear this up. Griffey is not a great hitter. he was a great hitter, but right now he is NOT.

flyingswoosh Wrote:let's clear this up. Griffey is not a great hitter. he was a great hitter, but right now he is NOT.

&%#$!!

Swoosh and I agree on something!

:roflol: :roflol: