Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

So JPav and Badjam are you saying if you could pick any 25 guys from any set you would never lose? In other words any size or cap size league you take your 25 and everybody else gets who you don't want.

alk58 wrote:JPav you sunk my Battleship?

With the beeps and noises of Electronic Battleship going off in his head, I'm sure he'll try to sink Badjam's Destroyer and someone else's Submarine next...

strether, sometimes reading between the lines can not be explained in any English course. It's a combination of a feel and a slang thing combined. Also, backed by the style of communication from earlier forum entrees.


ALK. No. Having confidence in your preseason analysis is not the same as feeling you have the perfect team. The, I'll do the best I can with what the auto draft left me, is both a crutch and a reality. Sometimes the other guy got the better team but you need to realize you have a top four team. The goal is not to somehow magically create a better team than the guy that got the best draw from auto draft. The idea is to not handcuff yourself by chasing something that is unrealistic, wasting salary cap space in the process. Hang with your strategy and make the playoffs, anything can happen from there.

Badjam wrote:strether, sometimes reading between the lines can not be explained in any English course. It's a combination of a feel and a slang thing combined. Also, backed by the style of communication from earlier forum entrees.

Don't lecture me on interpretation and literary analysis, Badjam; I'm far more experienced and educated in them than you. Your "feel" and "slang" are not sufficient enough to make a successful objective semantic comparison of two statements. To make such a comparison, you need to show a strong syntactical symmetry between the two statements as well as a significant semiotic comparison between the meanings of the words.

You clearly can't do so with the phrases you presented. That's logical because they are not semiotically similar. Until you do make that successful comparison, your statement about their similarity remains erroneous.

I meant from a math point of view without caring the players name. I am trying to grasp what you are saying, but I can't get by the luck factor assuming you can't dispute the Law of Averages.
For the record now a days I make very little changes at all once season starts, and they are by trade. Most leagues I can't pick up Free Agents or there is nothing left.
I tell you this there is difference in the keeper game as opposed to the ATG8 or Retro Leagues. I for one don't do very well in the ATG's for a reason I am not quite sure yet.

l.strether wrote:

Badjam wrote:strether, sometimes reading between the lines can not be explained in any English course. It's a combination of a feel and a slang thing combined. Also, backed by the style of communication from earlier forum entrees.

Don't lecture me on interpretation and literary analysis, Badjam; I'm far more experienced and educated in them than you. Your "feel" and "slang" are not sufficient enough to make a successful objective semantic comparison of two statements. To make such a comparison, you need to show a strong syntactical symmetry between the two statements as well as a significant semiotic comparison between the meanings of the words.

You clearly can't do so with the phrases you presented. That's logical because they are not semiotically similar. Until you do make that successful comparison, your statement about their similarity remains erroneous.

Both you guys who cares,stop it. keep it to the game. You guys are smarter than me and write very well, but it shouldn't matter in here, we are baseball dudes we scratch our balls and spit sunflower seeds, geez

I need smoke a joint you children drive me crazy

If I hadn't promised my wife I'd quit, ALK, I'd put on Jimmy Cliff and light one up with you...

You asked me to explain how I knew where J-Pav was coming from with his target destroyed analogy. Just because you are not familiar with my abstract way of understanding his reply does not make it invalid. My analogy happened to be spot on. Just because your teaching does not cover it, does not give you reason to dismiss it.

I am not lecturing you just because I touched on something you are unfamiliar with. Feel and slang are real life. Sometimes you need to step back from your strict book learning and sprinkle in some real life scenarios.

First of all, you said 99.9% would agree with you, so you weren't just speaking subjectively.

Secondly, your analogy wasn't "spot on" at all. Your sentences you compared were in English, the rules of analogy and semantics ruling them are in English, and your analogy failed because of those rules in English. My teaching and education covers those rules, and I am entirely confident in saying your analogy failed, and it did.

You are just deluding yourself that your "abstract way of understanding" falls out of English rules of grammar and semantics; it doesn't. And you still haven't shown how your erroneous comparison actually works. Until you do, your saying it does is just delusion.