2012 Michael Pineda Performance Thread

[effdamets]

That's what I'M saying.

Oh - OK. I'll just stand by and read...

[Mr Coffee]

Oh - OK. I'll just stand by and read...

It's OK.. apparently I wasn't making myself clear.

[NYCrusader]

It isn't difficult to understand.

Still, you don't.

I understand it fine.

[Mr Coffee]

I understand it fine.

I see from your lengthy edit above that you do.

I'm glad you now agree with my first post on the subject which simply said '94 or less is a pretty broad subsection'.

[NYCrusader]

I see from your lengthy edit above that you do.

I'm glad you now agree with my first post on the subject which said '94 or less is a pretty broad subsection'.

That "lengthy edit" two about 2 minute and was the last two statements.

I don't agree with your initial statement at all because irrelevant of the "broad" argument you are making the statisical difference based on velocity says something.

As I stated in my "lengthy edit" the link is specific in what it means irrelevant of your dishonest 1 MPH argument.

edit: Here is another edit for you bro I am here to simply discuss the team that I love leave that passive aggressive crap to females.

[Mr Coffee]

That "lengthy edit" two about 2 minute and was the last two statements.

You had two one-sentence responses, one for each part you quoted. Take your time and get the whole thought out there-- you shouldn't expect the reader to have to go back. You should also add 'EDIT' otherwise it looks like you're trying to make yourself look better after the fact.

I don't agree with your initial statement at all i because irrelevant of the "broad" argument you are making the statisical difference based on velocity says something.

Yeah, it says 'no sh1t'. Do you think the idea that the harder you throw the less they hit is somehow revolutionary?

I tried to sugar coat it before but here it is--Without any other information your chart is useless. I didn't want to come right out and say it, so I said it was interesting and gently pointed out the flaw. But you didn't get the hint so now here we are.

EDIT: and you edited again-- twice. At least you pointed out one of them so we are making progress I guess.

[NYCrusader]

But you didn't get the hint so now here we are.

EDIT:At least you pointed out one of them so we are making progress I guess.

This forum is PG so it's obviously a haven for passive aggressive dudes like you.

I on the other hand am pretty straight forward and as respectful as possible so anytime you want to have a adult discussion I'm cool with that in the mean time I'll leave the passive aggressiveness to you.

Someone who shows signs of being as passive aggressive as you seem to be on a internet forum can't possibly mean good things about the social interaction of that individual in the real world.

[Mr Coffee]

This forum is PG so it's obviously a haven for passive aggressive dudes like you.

I'm pretty straight forward and as respectful as possible I'll leave the passive aggressiveness to your ilk and the females.

I don't think I could be any more direct without getting RO'd.

BTW, your second sentence is textbook passive-aggressive. I'll just go ahead and assume you were being ironic.

EDIT: Another unattributed edit. Well done.

[NYCrusader]

It's possible to be direct without getting RO'd.

You can make your points with out being passive aggressive.

Unfortunately I wasn't trying to be ironic but ironic nonetheless.

[CalYankeeFan]

Oh - OK. I'll just stand by and read...

Want some chips?

[False1]

You had two one-sentence responses, one for each part you quoted. Take your time and get the whole thought out there-- you shouldn't expect the reader to have to go back. You should also add 'EDIT' otherwise it looks like you're trying to make yourself look better after the fact.



Yeah, it says 'no sh1t'. Do you think the idea that the harder you throw the less they hit is somehow revolutionary?

I tried to sugar coat it before but here it is--Without any other information your chart is useless. I didn't want to come right out and say it, so I said it was interesting and gently pointed out the flaw. But you didn't get the hint so now here we are.

EDIT: and you edited again-- twice. At least you pointed out one of them so we are making progress I guess.

Not to mention that doesn't mean that same dynamic would exist this year even if you accept the flaws in this "all fastballs above 95 and all fastballs below 95" methodology.

If the changeup is for real and in hitters' minds, a 92 MPH fastball this year will likely perform significantly differently than a 92 MPH fastball last year since the change was really not a meaningful part of his arsenal last season..

[awy]

to be fair, the 95 mph number is not arbitrary. the threshold for hitters being able to track the ball is around there and anything faster than that requires cheating on the swing. there are studies on this on the internets

[b-ball-lunachick]

That "lengthy edit" two about 2 minute and was the last two statements.

I don't agree with your initial statement at all because irrelevant of the "broad" argument you are making the statisical difference based on velocity says something.

As I stated in my "lengthy edit" the link is specific in what it means irrelevant of your dishonest 1 MPH argument.

edit: Here is another edit for you bro I am here to simply discuss the team that I love leave that passive aggressive crap to females.

whoa - generalize much? what a ridiculous statement...

[SatchelPaigeYankee]

[snapple]

[effdamets]

Want some chips?

I'm just a stander-by now. I'm usually on the side of Mr Coffee and I misread what was written. I have to learn that when my opinion opposes his, I have to re-read because it's likely that I'm understanding the statement(s) incorrectly.

Sorry Mr C.... proceed.

[Snatch Catch]

C'mon guys. Let's get this discussion back on track and not let the bickering about Pineda's velocity overshadow NYCrusader's main point in this whole matter.

"Females" are passive aggressive.

Discuss.

[NYCrusader]

C'mon guys. Let's get this discussion back on track and not let the bickering about Pineda's velocity overshadow NYCrusader's main point in this whole matter.

"Females" are passive aggressive.

Discuss.

[NelsonMuntz]

http://youtu.be/jKGjOE_7bYI

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

C'mon guys. Let's get this discussion back on track and not let the bickering about Pineda's velocity overshadow NYCrusader's main point in this whole matter.

"Females" are passive aggressive.

Discuss.

It's going to be funny when the Michael Pineda Performance Thread gets locked

[effdamets]

It's going to be funny when the Michael Pineda Performance Thread gets locked

I guess that'd be one way to stop people from talking about his fastball velocity... (or lackthereof)

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

I guess that'd be one way to stop people from talking about his fastball velocity... (or lackthereof)

At least until the "official Michael Pineda fastball velocity thread" gets started

[Mr Coffee]

I'm just a stander-by now. I'm usually on the side of Mr Coffee and I misread what was written. I have to learn that when my opinion opposes his, I have to re-read because it's likely that I'm understanding the statement(s) incorrectly.

Sorry Mr C.... proceed.

I think I've done enough.

Any more and I'll just look like the bully at school who picks on the kid with the hockey helmet, and nobody wants to see that.

[NYCrusader]

I think I've done enough.

Any more and I'll just look like the bully at school who picks on the kid with the hockey helmet, and nobody wants to see that.

You think very highly of yourself don't you?

No disrespect meant to the woman above but we deviated from my main point which was how someone who shows signs of being as passive aggressive as you seem to be on a internet forum can't possibly mean good things about the social interaction of that individual in the real world.

[Mr Coffee]

You think very highly of yourself don't you?

Depends on who I'm being compared to.