Padres acquire Milton Bradley

[love_that_reefer]

Originally Posted by HollywoodLeo That being said, your opinion is rather asinine and makes zero sense. You keep resting on the Padres overall record while conveniently neglecting the fact that what won them games prior to the trade regressed in the process. But if you want to carry the "bottom line, they were 22-22 since his acquisition" then fine, that's your opinion.....just don't carry the double standard opinion that KT is a bad GM for not getting any other "big bats" at the deadline, because the one he got apparently doesn't make a difference for this team no matter how many RBIs he hits.

Nothing has changed which was my whole entire point in July. Is this an impact bat? No, not one bit. Bradley has done well but it did nothing to change this team. So yes, it does make sense.

Originally Posted by HollywoodLeo It has everything to do with this situation because if they had him and if he were producing the same as a Padre they would not have traded for Milton Bradley.

This one is hilarious! No, it doesn't have one thing to do with the other. If, if , if. So ****ing what? It still has nothing to do with this topic! Rowand having 20 homer power and saying Bradley will not change anything have nothing in common.

Originally Posted by HollywoodLeo Bullshit. I fail to believe you randomly chose to PM me an "I told you so" PM that just so happened to coincide with this ongoing "debate".

Bullshit, bullshit. I was actually looking at stats and saw that Rowand has exceeded 20 homers and did it quite some time ago. Often I go look at every teams stats as i have favorite players on each team. Again, Rowand has nothing to do with Bradley and sent the PM as a slight joke but also telling to I told you so at the same time, something you tried to do by resurecting this thread but failed.

Originally Posted by HollywoodLeo True. But I generally only use it when it seems to be effecting your logic, as it is in this thread.

Nope it sure isn't affecting anything but does leave one with an open mind, something you guys don't have.

[padrefanforever]

love_that_reefer;309827]Nothing has changed which was my whole entire point in July. Is this an impact bat? No, not one bit. Bradley has done well but it did nothing to change this team. So yes, it does make sense.

100% wrong......

Bullshit, bullshit. I was actually looking at stats and saw that Rowand has exceeded 20 homers and did it quite some time ago. Often I go look at every teams stats as i have favorite players on each team. Again, Rowand has nothing to do with Bradley and sent the PM as a slight joke but also telling to I told you so at the same time, something you tried to do by resurecting this thread but failed.

Ballpark factors figured in please.........Rowands power #'s would dissolve in Petco, just like everyone else.

Nope it sure isn't affecting anything but does leave one with an open mind, something you guys don't have.

And you will never admit to being wrong, even if it's as obvious as now

[padrefanforever]

Bonds and Sosa cleared waivers

[love_that_reefer]

Just to respond.
1. Nice "argument" Even though eh isn't an impact bat I am still wrong? Interesting but you think he is the next Bonds

2. Maybe, maybe not but who cares since Rowand has no part in any of this discussion.

3. I have admitted to being wrong in the past and will do so when i am in fact wrong.

And your last comment is also irrelevant.

[padrefanforever]

.362 BA .455 OBP .676 SLG
9 hr ......that's a HR every 11.6 AB's
4 2b
1 3b

That's an extra base hit every 7.5 AB's......

.....if a person doesn't think that's an impact bat.......THEY'RE STUPID........this isn't an "arguement" anymore, it's not even a debate....it's an exercise in futility with a buffoon about what is clearly an impact bat since arriving here......only a ****ing moron would think otherwise.........guess we know what you quailify for eh ?

[padrefanforever]

.....and NOBODY thinks he's the next Bonds you douche

[HollywoodLeo]

Originally Posted by love_that_reefer Nothing has changed which was my whole entire point in July. Is this an impact bat? No, not one bit. Bradley has done well but it did nothing to change this team. So yes, it does make sense.

Basically what you're saying is they needed to get one individual person who can win games all by himself.

While that would have been nice, that person does not exist.

Bradley has done just as well, if not better than anyone else they "should have" acquired. at the deadline...and he only cost us a minor league relief pitcher.

Originally Posted by love_that_reefer This one is hilarious! No, it doesn't have one thing to do with the other. If, if , if. So ****ing what? It still has nothing to do with this topic! Rowand having 20 homer power and saying Bradley will not change anything have nothing in common.

So, a non move that would have resulted in the non-acquisition of the player that is in question has nothing to do with how that particular player has or has not helped the Padres?

Originally Posted by love_that_reefer Bullshit, bullshit. I was actually looking at stats and saw that Rowand has exceeded 20 homers and did it quite some time ago. Often I go look at every teams stats as i have favorite players on each team. Again, Rowand has nothing to do with Bradley and sent the PM as a slight joke but also telling to I told you so at the same time, something you tried to do by resurecting this thread but failed.

I've only "failed" because you choose to not see what's right in front of your face and are stuck arguing in circles to avoid saying "you know, I was actually wrong once."

I'm willing to put aside all arguments in regards to the bandbox that Rowand plays in (as compared to PetCo), along with Kevin Towers saying the deal was never actually on the table and accept the fact that it would have been a good deal for the Padres, despite my counter-arguments at the time.

I don't see why you can't accept Milton Bradley's performance for what it is.

Originally Posted by love_that_reefer Nope it sure isn't affecting anything but does leave one with an open mind, something you guys don't have.

I have a very open mind.

I'm not the one looking at a guy with a 1.136 OPS and still trying to cling to a futile argument that he's not helping the team he plays for.

Who's the one that's not having an open mind here?

Puff away

[padrefanforever]

Role role role yer joint,
twist it on the end,
take a puff,
thats enough,
pass it tooooo a friend...........

* sung to the tune of row row row your boat

[love_that_reefer]

So, a non move that would have resulted in the non-acquisition of the player that is in question has nothing to do with how that particular player has or has not helped the Padres?

What non-move? What the hell are you talking about? We are talking about a guy who you thought didn't have 20 homerun power. Oddly enough, it has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever. Holy Christ!

I have accepted his performance if you cared to read. I am right as it did not change a thing as the Padres have not done anything. Have I once blamed Bradely for this? No. Is a big bat who can provide protection for those who needed it? No. Have the Padres played any better? No. Did anyone once bring up Rowand? No. You can "respectfully disagree" and I will do the same. And as I do that I will puff a joint and watch the Padres play the same baseball I have all year.

[padrefanforever]

Please stop smoking weed.........your brain is turning to mush before everyones eyes.........it's really sad...........

INTERVENTION IS COMING

[HollywoodLeo]

The discussion in this thread has pretty much ended.

I think we've reached the point where we just have to accept each other's collective opinions.