August call ups

Philosophically speaking.....
If a high strikeout total proves poor plate discipline, does a high walk total prove good plate discipline?
And what does having high totals in both mean?

I never said a high strikeout total proves poor plate discipline, I said exceedingly high totals--particularly 190+--does. However, if you want to answer your rhetorical question, I'd look forward to your viewpoint.

As to the Adam Dunn types (high K's and BBs), they're not common, but I would definitely look forward to your viewpoint on them as well.

Actually, as I showed above and in my last post to you, I effectively countered and debunked your and Valen's erroneous viewpoints. You both clearly showed you were unable to counter that, and you show so again.

Have an excellent day...

We will leave it up in the air as to who debunked who. Your viewpoint was backed up with nothing more than demanding me do your research which I won't waste my time on. If you can agree to that we can leave this conversation and move on. If you persist in attempting to have the last word saying you are correct and everyone else is in error then I'll play along. The ball is in your court. Let it sit there.

Philosophically speaking.....
If a high strikeout total proves poor plate discipline, does a high walk total prove good plate discipline?
And what does having high totals in both mean?

What does it mean if the HBP total is high??? LOL

Actually, as I showed above and in my last post to you, I effectively countered and debunked your and Valen's erroneous viewpoints. You both clearly showed you were unable to counter that, and you show so again.

Have an excellent day...

We will leave it up in the air as to who debunked who. Your viewpoint was backed up with nothing more than demanding me do your research which I won't waste my time on. If you can agree to that we can leave this conversation and move on. If you persist in attempting to have the last word saying you are correct and everyone else is in error then I'll play along. The ball is in your court. Let it sit there.

Gee that's funny, what happened to this:

LMB signing off.

And my last three posts made it clear who debunked who; you're just having a hard time accepting it. And my viewpoint was backed up on much more than your research that you still refuse to do to back up your point. I made that clear in this post:

Yes it is getting tedious...because your argument is still completely and utterly unsubstantiated and you have buried yourself deeper and deeper. You posted this, arguing that the success of the top 10 strikeout leaders showed excessive strikeouts could still be productive, as previously shown by Chris Davis:

2013 Chris Davis had 199 K's so apparently had no idea of the strike zone. He also had a .370 OBP, batted .286, 42 doubles, 53 HR and 138 RBI. I don't think the O's were complaining too much about his K rate in 2013,

The top 10 all-time most K's in MLB history include players such as ARod, Reggie Jackson, Mike Schmidt, Willie Stargell, Jim Thome, Sosa and Canseco. I know longevity adds to this list but my point is that K's are not bad as long as you are also contributing in other ways like the above players did.

Using this to get back to Baez.....I think his 900+ OPS way overshadows his high K rate. If he continues to rake the K's are forgotten.

So, I, rightly believing most of those players didn't have 190-200 K's in a season like Chris Davis, asked you to provide proof they did:

As to the Hall of Famers and other greats, go back and see how many of them struck out 190-200 times often. I would imagine most, if not all, of them didn't.

You have continually refused to and/or evaded providing that evidence as proof, just as you do so here. Again, if you fail to do so, the lifetime performances of the top ten strikeout hitters fails to support your argument above.

If you fail to do so again, you will have completely confirmed that, and our discussion is over.

And you did fail so again. And, considering you lied and said you were signing off, the only one trying to have the last word is you. So, you can actually sign off or you can try to have the last word. The ball is in your court. Let it sit there.

That's all wonderful and irrelevant. You still didn't show any of those players had 190-200 K's per season as I asked.

Perhaps I was addressing the general discussion and not just debating with you which would be a waste of time. Not Not going to play that game.
There are other people who exist here.

It followed my post and directly addressed the topic of my post in direct debate with you and LMB. So it was perfectly rational for me to address it. I'm not playing that game with you. And considering you haven't been able to address or counter my arguments, debating me would be a waste of your time.

There are other people who exist here, so start a discussion on a different subject with them. Considering you couldn't counter my last post to you, I'm certainly through with this one with you...

That's all wonderful and irrelevant. You still didn't show any of those players had 190-200 K's per season as I asked.

Perhaps I was addressing the general discussion and not just debating with you which would be a waste of time. Not Not going to play that game.
There are other people who exist here.

It followed my post and directly addressed the topic of my post. So it was perfectly rational for me to address it. I'm not playing that game with you. And considering you haven't been able to address or counter my arguments, debating me would be a waste of your time.

There are other people who exist here, so start a discussion on a different subject with them. Considering you couldn't counter my last post to you, I'm certainly through with this one with you.

Must be time to go for l.whatever to start another thread so he can try and be right once again. What a coward, as usual. When hell freezes over, others may offer to do his own research. Always the quitter in these topics when the going gets tough, he quits.

I like it how he starts with Deer/Kingman class, which I have already come back and stated based on my own research are not even in the same category when it comes to strikeouts, as Deer K's 30% more than Kingman did (something that I was surprised to actually see), to HOF K leaders to top 10 all time, he just keeps bending to make his case.

There are certainly others here that would love to see the "pink bar" put on individuals so they cannot post to a thread. How cool would that be?

All the "pink bars" as he cannot stand being called out on his ratings book comments where he shot himself down and has no facts to back it up, poor guy

Oh, boy, a Bellevuedave pink bar. Unlike Bombers, Dave and his consistently hostile, erratic, and irrational posts are on permanent ignore. I'm never going near that lad's bizarre "thoughts" again...

Did you ever notice that this never happens in threads he starts???

There are certainly others here that would love to see the "pink bar" put on individuals so they cannot post to a thread. How cool would that be?

ATG board

No silliness happening there anymore!