| RemoveRowdy http://removerowdy.com/forum/ |
|
| Rangers 2012 http://removerowdy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4808 |
Page 19 of 21 |
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
jim jack wrote: Oh, and Mark Lowe is a fag. Aw c'mon. Dirty Jobs was a fun show. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
bigboy wrote: And Buster thinks they might want Elvis.  It says Profar, not Elvis. Price for Profar makes sense to me. TB gets like 8K out there to watch. They can't afford Price, even in arbitration. And Profar is blocked unless you want to let Elvis walk (  ) or move Kinsler to the OF (  ) . I agree that he's just throwing shit out there.
|
|
| Author: | bigboy [ Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Since Elvis is brought up in the story, I was assuming that he's a possibility. I've seen plenty of Elvis for Price speculation. What's really confounding me is how the Rays are going to trade Price when he's free after this year. I guess the assumption is that the Rays will sign him and then dump his salary so they don't come up empty handed? If I'm the Rangers, I money whip Price and Elvis and tell the Rays to go shit in their collective hats. Then they'll have Profar to trade and finally get some decent pitching in here. Or a legitimate big man to clog up the middle of the lane. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Wed Sep 26, 2012 12:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Yeah, Price for Elvis makes no sense for the Rays. Price isn't a free agent until 2015. He's arbitration eligible until then, but he'll get a very handsome raise. |
|
| Author: | Sweet Greggo [ Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Trout went around in the first game, 9th inning. Turned what should have been a 1-2 pitch into a 2-1 and of course he hits the fucking thing. Nathan walking their number nine hitter. Fucking really? |
|
| Author: | jim jack [ Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
At least they found a way to win one game against those rat bastards. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Losing that first one really didn't matter as far as winning the division goes. They would still have to win one against Oakland regardless. But it was a gut punch and walking Ianetta after being up 0-2 hurt. I couldn't even enjoy meh football game at 3:00 because of the pain. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
oh, and Angel KILLER Nap not playing the first game was ignorant. Can Young not get a motherfucking day off? Ever? |
|
| Author: | Sweet Greggo [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
 x 2
|
|
| Author: | fruitdog [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 2:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
221 Yu Ks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAjWOWoH ... r_embedded |
|
| Author: | jim jack [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 4:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
While driving home from work this afternoon and listening to Ranger playoff talk, I realized I was smiling. It's the third year in a row for this, and I'm not used to it yet. I'm not taking it for granted. And I never will. |
|
| Author: | jim jack [ Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
The choices tonight are the Rangers on the radio, or the Cowboys on TV. Let's go Rangers. I turn around and look at the muted TV every once in awhile. Ouch, Cowboys. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
This A's bullpen is sick. |
|
| Author: | cap [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
HSO. Rangers ain't making it out of the first round. 
|
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
If the Rangers do happen to win the division (and I think they will), they went 3-4 against the Yankees head to head this year, so the Yankees would have the HFA in case of a tie, meaning Texas would play Detroit. |
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
That's better off. I don't want the Yanks playing Detroit in a short series again. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Of course, there's still a chance Texas and NYY could be playing the WC game. Yu vs. CC, on short rest? |
|
| Author: | cap [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. |
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
I don't think Bud would allow that to happen. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
cap wrote: Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Get ahead of ourselves by throwing out the idea of two teams in the wild card game that have already clinched at least that? Ok, shithead. |
|
| Author: | bigboy [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
or somesuch wrote: Of course, there's still a chance Texas and NYY could be playing the WC game. Yu vs. CC, on short rest? Yu on short rest? Wouldn't Friday be his day to start anyway? |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
The short rest was only meant for CC. |
|
| Author: | cap [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
or somesuch wrote: The short rest was only meant for CC. I thought you meant Yu too |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
or somesuch wrote: Yu
vs. CC, on short rest? |
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Yu doesn't scare anyone. |
|
| Author: | cap [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Tit Whistle wrote: Yu doesn't scare anyone. I hope he Pearl Harbor's their asses. |
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
cap wrote: Tit Whistle wrote: Yu doesn't scare anyone. I hope he Pearl Harbor's their asses. Too soon. |
|
| Author: | Trained Goucho [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Tit Whistle wrote: cap wrote: Tit Whistle wrote: Yu doesn't scare anyone. I hope he Pearl Harbor's their asses. Too soon. Speaking of too soon, it's Tuesday, Jeff Ross and the Burn night on comedy central. Funny stuff. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
This offense is making me sad. |
|
| Author: | Diello [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
What. |
|
| Author: | Diello [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
The. |
|
| Author: | Diello [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
FUCK?!? |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
The probability of winning tomorrow's game is 46%. The A's are now AL West favorites. |
|
| Author: | Trained Goucho [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
or somesuch wrote: This offense is making me sad. how bout their ridiculous plate approach in the 9th, down two and no one on base, trying to hit everything out of the park.
|
|
| Author: | jim jack [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
So, this is what an ill wind is like. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Looks like Tommy Hunter would be next up in the Balt rotation. They could for with Joe Saunders too since Thursday is an off day. I can't believe this fucking Oakland series even mattered. |
|
| Author: | or somesuch [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Wash in August: "I'm a big believer in Mike Young. And if the ship sinks, I'll be on it." Welp. I know all teams can look back and say "we should have gotten that one.", but I feel Wash's refusal to sit Young cost them at least one game. WAR followers believe it was more than that. |
|
| Author: | jim jack [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
I fell asleep on the couch after the last out and the radio stayed on. I woke up to postgame callers. Good grief, the amount of stupidity is mind-numbing. It made me realize that the Ticket never takes callers and is the better for it. I'm not counting Norm, of course. |
|
| Author: | bigboy [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
jim jack wrote: While driving home from work this afternoon and listening to Ranger playoff talk, I realized I was smiling. It's the third year in a row for this, and I'm not used to it yet. I'm not taking it for granted. And I never will. As bumfuzzling as the end of the regular season is turning out, this beats the dog fuck out of it being over by the end of April. I'm shocked at the number of people on Twitter and Facebook calling the Rangers "quitters". Good teams that quit don't finish with 90+ wins. Good teams that quit finish 25 back like the Red Sox.
|
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
There's one scenario I can't seem to find any info on: What happens if the Rangers win today and the O's win and Yanks lose? O's/Yanks get a playoff game for the division, but would the Rangers get Detroit or the WC winner? |
|
| Author: | fruitdog [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Tit Whistle wrote: There's one scenario I can't seem to find any info on: What happens if the Rangers win today and the O's win and Yanks lose? O's/Yanks get a playoff game for the division, but would the Rangers get Detroit or the WC winner? wouldn't it go to a head to head tiebreaker with whoever wins that Yankee/Os game. I may be wrong but doesn't Texas have the tiebreaker with the Yankees but the O's have it over Texas? |
|
| Author: | Tit Whistle [ Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rangers 2012 |
Got my answer: Rangers would get #1 seed in that scenario. |
|
| Page 19 of 21 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|