[madgoat]

Originally Posted by Reginald Perrywinkle

Which is why no one in this thread has supported the claim I disputed, and why AMG disagreed with you.

It's k, old trolls fall off the map quick

P.s. I wasn't able to post in here on my new account. And I came back to refute your posts. Face it, the only way you can say I'm wrong is by creating a straw man, that I disputed anything other than what I quoted from you which is why you never link back to that exact quote.

the only strawman is the one you made by arguing against some fantasy position you made up for me. Your entire argument was either against a made up position of mine or based on a total lack of understanding of what a sunk cost actually means.

And why couldn't you post in here about the argument? You were in politics and here spewing your standard giants bs.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by madgoat

the only strawman is the one you made by arguing against some fantasy position you made up for me. Your entire argument was either against a made up position of mine or based on a total lack of understanding of what a sunk cost actually means.

I quoted you saying he will cost per year on average over the next 6 years 18.5 million factoring in the 50 million they paid. I said it was fallacious to factor the 50 million into the avg cost over future years. It was already paid, in that sense it was a sunk cost (unlike the potential 6 total years on the contract that were remaining and he hadn't been paid that money yet), i.e. the money is gone, it has already been spent, and there is no way to get it back. If that money isn't a sunk cost, what is? Don't quote some random article either.

When you tried to claim I was wrong on sunk costs, you posted a bit of economic theory that has little to do with what I said, but it actually showed my understanding was right. The 50 million to negotiate the right to pay Yu Darvish is similar to the airport itself, and the money paid in his contract is analogous to money paid to employees of the airport.

You keep backpedaling and claiming I'm doing different things.

And wikipedia also reminded you that there's debate about fixed versus variable, and provided the same definition of sunk cost I am using.

And why couldn't you post in here about the argument? You were in politics and here spewing your standard giants bs.

When I did post in here it was after I was watching Giants related things and I didn't read past posts and IIRC there weren't any recent posts on this specific topic. Then I lost the account.

It's okay, Giants will be in the WS and Sox won't make it. Maybe you'll have something to look forward to in your farm system.

p.s.

You could also argue that the money guaranteed to Yu Darvish is a sunk cost because that money has essentially already been spent, and there is no possible way it won't be spent (similar to a $50 million right to negotiate fee), baring something in the contract we don't know about. But that's entirely peside the point.

[madgoat]

Originally Posted by Reginald Perrywinkle

I quoted you saying he will cost per year on average over the next 6 years 18.5 million factoring in the 50 million they paid. I said it was fallacious to factor the 50 million into the avg cost over future years. It was already paid, in that sense it was a sunk cost (unlike the potential 6 total years on the contract that were remaining and he hadn't been paid that money yet), i.e. the money is gone, it has already been spent, and there is no way to get it back. If that money isn't a sunk cost, what is? Don't quote some random article either.

When you tried to claim I was wrong on sunk costs, you posted a bit of economic theory that has little to do with what I said, but it actually showed my understanding was right. The 50 million to negotiate the right to pay Yu Darvish is similar to the airport itself, and the money paid in his contract is analogous to money paid to employees of the airport.

You keep backpedaling and claiming I'm doing different things.

And wikipedia also reminded you that there's debate about fixed versus variable, and provided the same definition of sunk cost I am using.



When I did post in here it was after I was watching Giants related things and I didn't read past posts and IIRC there weren't any recent posts on this specific topic. Then I lost the account.

It's okay, Giants will be in the WS and Sox won't make it. Maybe you'll have something to look forward to in your farm system.

p.s.

You could also argue that the money guaranteed to Yu Darvish is a sunk cost because that money has essentially already been spent, and there is no possible way it won't be spent (similar to a $50 million right to negotiate fee), baring something in the contract we don't know about. But that's entirely peside the point.

except, from my FIRST POST on the issue(which I've quoted like 4 times now), I made it clear i was comparing the COST:performance of Darvish to the COST:performance of other pitchers. In that context, it doesn't matter whether the 52mil was "sunk" or not, it's 100% relevant. 112 million total could have gotten the rangers a pitcher who was better this season for sure, and quite possible over the length of whatever contract he got. Which was my point from the start and I made clear the entire time.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by madgoat

except, from my FIRST POST on the issue(which I've quoted like 4 times now), I made it clear i was comparing the COST:performance of Darvish to the COST:performance of other pitchers. In that context, it doesn't matter whether the 52mil was "sunk" or not, it's 100% relevant. 112 million total could have gotten the rangers a pitcher who was better this season for sure, and quite possible over the length of whatever contract he got. Which was my point from the start and I made clear the entire time.

Okay. Cool. I read your first post. But I never quoted your entire first post, I quoted one sentence and said fallacious. That's how it started. But you got butthurt about me claiming it was fallacious to factor a sunk cost into the amount payed in future payments and then kept trying to claim I was denying the general point about him not being worth ace starter money. That's all I ever did. I was clear.

It's funny you've conceded defeat and yet not admitted to being wrong, whatever, amazing cognitive dissonance.

You can't even prove the 50 million wouldn't have been spent on future international prospects rather than assuming it was a part of their general budget.

[Drex17]

Well my fantasy team is now oozing with young talent, Machado is being called up and I snagged him.

[madgoat]

Originally Posted by Reginald Perrywinkle

Okay. Cool. I read your first post. But I never quoted your entire first post, I quoted one sentence and said fallacious. That's how it started. But you got butthurt about me claiming it was fallacious to factor a sunk cost into the amount payed in future payments and then kept trying to claim I was denying the general point about him not being worth ace starter money. That's all I ever did. I was clear.

It's funny you've conceded defeat and yet not admitted to being wrong, whatever, amazing cognitive dissonance.

You can't even prove the 50 million wouldn't have been spent on future international prospects rather than assuming it was a part of their general budget.

I don't need to prove that, since all I've ever said was that the 50mil COULD have been spent on a guy like cj wilson. Unless you choose to take the stance AMR did like 8 months ago and claim that it COULDN'T.

The only person who conceded defeat was you the second you gave any credence to my argument because the side you've been arguing the whole time can't coexist with mine. You've all but came out and said you were wrong the whole time. I never once factored in the 52mil into future payments. Its simple. If the rangers hadn't paid a 52 million posting fee, they'd potentially have had 52 more million RIGHT NOW+the 60 from the contract in the future. total of 112mil over 6 years. I was clear the whole time, you're just super buttsore that you were dead wrong.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by madgoat

The only person who conceded defeat was you the second you gave any credence to my argument because the side you've been arguing the whole time can't coexist with mine. You've all but came out and said you were wrong the whole time. I never once factored in the 52mil into future payments. Its simple. If the rangers hadn't paid a 52 million posting fee, they'd potentially have had 52 more million RIGHT NOW+the 60 from the contract in the future. total of 112mil over 6 years. I was clear the whole time, you're just super buttsore that you were dead wrong.

lol how cute you copy me

Originally Posted by madgoat

darvish is going to cost an average of ~18.5mil over the next six(factoring in the like 50 mil the rangers had to pay to even negotiate a contract).

did you or did you not say this?

you did

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...0#post76308810

That's where the discussion started between us. Keep revising yourself, it's cool.

[madgoat]

Originally Posted by Reginald Perrywinkle

lol how cute you copy me



did you or did you not say this?

you did

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...0#post76308810

That's where the discussion started between us. Keep revising yourself, it's cool.

how did I revise anything? its all there to see. I've argued the same correct point since jump street. You've been dead wrong the whole time.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by madgoat

how did I revise anything? its all there to see. I've argued the same correct point since jump street. You've been dead wrong the whole time.

lol how cute now you're ignoring the evidence.

Your first post on the topic is different from what you claim was your first post.

This is the first post you made to me about his avg cost over the next 6 years, the very first:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...0#post76308810

Note the date. 7-29.

Here is what you keep quoting as your first post on the topic, note the date:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...2#post76344242

8-01.




Here's where you spree of incorrectness started:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post76305681

7-28

The first reply I ever made to you about that post:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post76308501

Originally Posted by Status Quo

do you know what FIP/xFIP are?o

In reply to the above, you said his avg cost over the next 6 years, factoring in the 50 million already spent, was 18.5

It's all here. You don't even know the order of the argument, but I've provided it in a modified step by step format.

[toolbandfan]

This isn't the politics section, but at least you're not just talking about the Giants for once.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by toolbandfan

This isn't the politics section, but at least you're not just talking about the Giants for once.

You're right.

Vogelsong is ridiculous. Posey is going off still. Pence is starting to hit.

When Pablo returns the lineup should be:

1-Pagan
2-Scoots
3-Melky
4-Posey
5-Sandoval
6-Pence
7-Belt
8-Crawford

That's above average omgomgomgomg


Do you still think the d-backs can pull off the comeback? I think there chances of going to the playoffs rest in Justin Upton myself.

p.s. jesus christ young went off today

[toolbandfan]

First time he's ever been thrown out apparently, and he was sucking so I guess he might as well get tossed. Upton got tossed to for some reason.

I think if they can't at least split this series tomorrow, then I don't have much hope. But there is a bunch of NL West series coming up and maybe that will probably be when we will know. 12 games against LA and SF. Maybe they'll bring up Tyler Skaggs for someone, as he is owning Reno, which is crazy hard to pitch in, but I'm not really sure who would get sent down for him. If Corbin turns out good now, and Wade Miley stays solid, I don't see a good reason they shouldn't be contending.

I think Upton will blow up soon. He's shown flashes recently, I believe it will come soon.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by toolbandfan

First time he's ever been thrown out apparently, and he was sucking so I guess he might as well get tossed. Upton got tossed to for some reason.

I think if they can't at least split this series tomorrow, then I don't have much hope. But there is a bunch of NL West series coming up and maybe that will probably be when we will know. 12 games against LA and SF. Maybe they'll bring up Tyler Skaggs for someone, as he is owning Reno, which is crazy hard to pitch in, but I'm not really sure who would get sent down for him. If Corbin turns out good now, and Wade Miley stays solid, I don't see a good reason they shouldn't be contending.

I think Upton will blow up soon. He's shown flashes recently, I believe it will come soon.

I saw Upton got thrown out. Weird ****.

I think SF has the NL West on lock (easiest schedule out of Ari and LA, 3 series against SD and Colorado remaining for Giants and they should be able to go 12-6 at worst, plus series against the cubs and stros) but LA is so shakey imo that Arizona is guaranteed a spot in the playoffs.

Did you see Crawford's play in the fifth today? Ridiculous range.

[toolbandfan]

Not bad.

Also if SF really has the NL west on lock I'm not really sure how the Dbacks would be guaranteed a spot since the wildcard race is actually more difficult to obtain than the NL west lead right now. Thankfully they're still only 5 games back in the division. One good series and one bad series by either team can put them in contention or practically eliminate them.


Buster Posey is not going to hit .400 baseball the rest of the year. Upton and Kubel are probably not going to suck the rest of the year. Kubel has been struggling of late fyi. Really hope Chris Young does ****ing something offensively soon.

Also no idea what Chris Johnson is going to do for the rest of the year. Maybe he'll be the first man on Mars, maybe he'll break his neck jogging. Who knows?

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by toolbandfan

Not bad.

Also if SF really has the NL west on lock I'm not really sure how the Dbacks would be guaranteed a spot since the wildcard race is actually more difficult to obtain than the NL west lead right now. Thankfully they're still only 5 games back in the division. One good series and one bad series by either team can put them in contention or practically eliminate them.

Lincecum is getting back on track for good it seems and we're still getting Pablo back. I think Arizona will get close but we have too many games 24 or so games against the cubs, stros, colorado and San diego.

But I agree with the last statement, my claim is just based on a hunch.


Also, the Giants went 1-7 and after the slump they remained in the NL West lead. It'll take more than one bad series to make them close to eliminated.

Buster Posey is not going to hit .400 baseball the rest of the year. Upton and Kubel are probably not going to suck the rest of the year. Kubel has been struggling of late fyi. Really hope Chris Young does ****ing something offensively soon.

Kubel exceeded expectations by quite a bit so regression is expected. Upton should turn it around but it wouldn't be the biggest surprise to see him keep sucking.

And Posey might not keeping hitting above .450 but it's not out of question to see him finishing the year hitting .350 with an OPS around .950-980. IIRC we have more games left on the road than at home too which should be good for our offense (and hopefully pitching can improve on the road, mainly looking at Zeets and Lincecum and kinda Bum).

Pence won't keep OPS'ing under .500 like he was for close to a month up until the last few games, Pablo is coming back, Scutaro will largely be replacing Theriot, Pagan isn't OPSing around .500 anymore and his last hot streak produced 3 hit streaks of 12+ games (including one around 20) and it took him a long time to cool off, Brandon Belt is out of his slump and I pray Bochy will commit to him at 1st, and Melky continues to exceed expectations.

Also no idea what Chris Johnson is going to do for the rest of the year. Maybe he'll be the first man on Mars, maybe he'll break his neck jogging. Who knows?

I'm still amazed he's done this good so far haha.

[toolbandfan]

I meant elimination for Arizona, poor writing.

Looking at game logs Posey seems to hit about the same at home in SF or away. The home crowd effect is probably at least as good for hitting as the venue.

Pence hasn't been good in July or August so far. Players don't usually come back strong from injuries, Sandoval is no guarantee, Scutaro I'll say will be solid, Brandon Belt seems just average to me. Melky I agree and I think will continue to be good.

I hope we clone Goldschmidt and have 9 of him to face Lincecum next time.

Anyone see the Oakland LAA game? I guess the Umpire was mildly concussed and started calling strikeouts on the second pitch or some deal. Not on MLB highlights though.

[Reginald Perrywinkle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by toolbandfan

Looking at game logs Posey seems to hit about the same at home in SF or away. The home crowd effect is probably at least as good for hitting as the venue.

Except away he has 14 home runs in 197 pa on the road, AT&T saps his home run totals because of the way the park plays.

Pence hasn't been good in July or August so far. Players don't usually come back strong from injuries, Sandoval is no guarantee, Scutaro I'll say will be solid, Brandon Belt seems just average to me. Melky I agree and I think will continue to be good.

Pence has been good over the last few games, I've been watching.

Sandoval's ability to return from injuries is pretty good, and it shouldn't have any effect on his ability as a hitter, just a strain. And regardless of whether he returns to AS level panda, he's still a giant improvement over Arias or Scutaro at third (in either lineup that means we'll be seeing theriot or arias which isn't good, they're both noticeably worse than scoots and moreso in comparison to Pablo) which was my point.

Belt has been avg on the year, but he has all the potential to be a great player. I'm just hoping for an OPS over .800 which would be a huge improvement (only .70 points or so to go), and he's hitting .462 in august.

Anyone see the Oakland LAA game? I guess the Umpire was mildly concussed and started calling strikeouts on the second pitch or some deal. Not on MLB highlights though.

Damn I'd like to see the video.

[slateman]

Nationals ... best record in baseball

[madgoat]

Originally Posted by Reginald Perrywinkle

lol how cute now you're ignoring the evidence.

Your first post on the topic is different from what you claim was your first post.

This is the first post you made to me about his avg cost over the next 6 years, the very first:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...0#post76308810

Note the date. 7-29.

Here is what you keep quoting as your first post on the topic, note the date:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...2#post76344242

8-01.




Here's where you spree of incorrectness started:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post76305681

7-28

The first reply I ever made to you about that post:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post76308501



In reply to the above, you said his avg cost over the next 6 years, factoring in the 50 million already spent, was 18.5

It's all here. You don't even know the order of the argument, but I've provided it in a modified step by step format.

I'm not going to waste time arguing the same points piece by piece again because I've done at least once for each post. Go back and look because you're wrong, you're stubborn, and you still don't know what a sunk cost is if you think its relevant to anything that was being argued by me.

[SmartyJones]

Doesn't matter if it's already paid or not. They still had to pay it. That's 50 mil less that they have now. That's still part of the "price" they had to pay for Darvish.

[DMC_OWNER]

From the other night's game against the Tigers