The Bob Smizik & Lemmings Beat Down Thread

[buccoman]

Payroll is the only argument Smizik has and it is an ignorant one at best. When I went house shopping in '03-'04, the realtor said I could afford a $229,000 house. I told her "yeah, I could, but I would like to be able to drive a decent car and be able to feed my family as well".

Smizik and his Lemmings want the Pirates (and say they can afford) to sign that big bat to bolster the offense while seemingly being totally ignorant of the fact that the Pirates could not afford to put any talent to make a difference around that big bat. Of course they would ***** about that too.

I'm not sure it's that simple. I'm not a lemming, and Smizk just keeps beating dead horses, but I don't think it's unreasonable for the Pirate FO to be less conservative in their approach. At the same time, given the past history of the franchise, I also understand, though don't necessarily agree, why they are afraid to take risks with their budget. I simply would argue that the Pirates are not as market-poor as some of you want to argue. I think the potential baseball market in Pittsburgh is actually very strong, and I think the FO should take a hedge on it. But the real risk is not in the market, it is in the prospects not panning out. I get it too. It's hard to pick winners in the prospect market. However, it is not unreasonable to think that the club has reached the point where investing in a proven commodity (ie "afford that big bat"), even if it takes them out of their budget safe-zone, is a worthwhile risk that could actually help the team reach their future goals. Saying that doesn't make me a lemming, or an anti, or whatever you want to label me, it just suggests that the Pirate FO is not infallible in their plan to rebuild the Pirates.

[Kipper]

I'm not sure it's that simple. I'm not a lemming, and Smizk just keeps beating dead horses, but I don't think it's unreasonable for the Pirate FO to be less conservative in their approach. At the same time, given the past history of the franchise, I also understand, though don't necessarily agree, why they are afraid to take risks with their budget. I simply would argue that the Pirates are not as market-poor as some of you want to argue. I think the potential baseball market in Pittsburgh is actually very strong, and I think the FO should take a hedge on it. But the real risk is not in the market, it is in the prospects not panning out. I get it too. It's hard to pick winners in the prospect market. However, it is not unreasonable to think that the club has reached the point where investing in a proven commodity (ie "afford that big bat"), even if it takes them out of their budget safe-zone, is a worthwhile risk that could actually help the team reach their future goals. Saying that doesn't make me a lemming, or an anti, or whatever you want to label me, it just suggests that the Pirate FO is not infallible in their plan to rebuild the Pirates.

Are you less conservative in your approach to how you budget your paychecks? There's a lot of things that all of us want, would like to have and the reality is, we can't have them. We can go out and buy them but that comes with a cost and if you are unable to make up that cost then you find yourself living in debt and eventually going bankrupt. It's why so many people are behind paying on their credit cards or have credit card debt up to their ears that they are SLOWLY paying off. There's this mentality that you can always buy something with money you don't have now and that you'[ll always make it back later. That's not only false but it's living outside of your means and it's horrible money management. You share that same mentality.

The Pirates ARE market poor. Until you can actually refute this fact then your "belief" doesn't amount to much of anything except a bias based on nothing. I've personally taken the time to do the research and make the posts and Articles with as much as I could find on the internet that the Pirates are market poor. Have you ever refuted any of those with facts suggesting otherwise? No, you never have, but sure are in a ****ing hurry to type your "belief". I'm personally tired of hearing someone's beliefs. Whether it's you are a cumdrip like Smizik or one of his pole smoking Lemmings. Stop providing "belief"s and start providing facts or simply shut the **** up.

The Pirates have a limit on what they can spend. This has never been a good baseball market. Never has, if you want some facts go look at their Attendance history, it sucks. When the Pirates were good and winning World Series, making it to the playoffs, competing annually for the playoffs, attendance sucked. It was bottom part of the league. The Pirates have never shown the ability attendance wise to support the type of payroll that you and the others "believe" they should spend.

As a Pittsburgh Pirates fan I want the financial side of this franchise to be healthy and remain healthy. In an uncapped, poorly designed revenue sharing league, the Pirates can't be the big risk takers you and others want them to be. They can't. There's no evidence to suggest that the Pirates can financially pick up the risk if it doesn't pay back and there's no owner, not Bob Nutting, not Mark Cuban that will endure losing "their own" money for too long before it's imperative that they make it back for the health of the franchise and it's debt ratio that MLB pays careful attention to (hence why we were forced to trade Aram). What you are the other "believers" have been suggesting for years in this ****ty run sport is for the Pittbsurgh Pirates to become the 1990 Pittsburgh Penguins. An uncapped league with great players bought for with money nobody really had with expectations that somewhow that money would be made back. Hence, bankruptcy. Isn't it ironic that it wasn't until the Penguins were bought out by an owner (Ron Burkle for the most part is the owner and Mario is the head piece) who is a billionaire that they started running the franchise within their markets ability? They slashed the **** out of payroll, dumped players and nnually had one of the lowest payrolls in the NHL which lasted until the 3rd season post lock out. Two season with a salary cap and the Pens still operated with one of the lowest if not the lowest (06-07) payrolls in hockey despite having the wealthiest owner of all of the sports teams in Pittsburgh. That's how you do it. Unfortunately for the Pir5ates there's no chance of a salary cap on the horizon, so they have to make due with what they can within the confines of their market. They have to be smart, conservative with their money, thrifty and get more out of their money than 3/4 of the league do. You might get excited about running another Pittsburgh team into the ground and watching them go bankrupt. not me.

[Kipper]

Payroll is the only argument Smizik has and it is an ignorant one at best. When I went house shopping in '03-'04, the realtor said I could afford a $229,000 house. I told her "yeah, I could, but I would like to be able to drive a decent car and be able to feed my family as well".

Smizik and his Lemmings want the Pirates (and say they can afford) to sign that big bat to bolster the offense while seemingly being totally ignorant of the fact that the Pirates could not afford to put any talent to make a difference around that big bat. Of course they would ***** about that too.

Payroll is the only argument Smizik has because Smizik is and always has been a lazy ****. He whines about stuff that he can never back up with any sort of concrete facts and events. Just his opinion alone on why the Pirates should spend more in this article snippet wasn't worth printing out and wiping one's *** with. There's not a single bit of evidence or facts presented there or anytime Smizik writes that backs up Smizik's "belief". That's why he writes about the same thing over and over again. He's a repetitive, 3rd rate journalist who not only lacks original material and content, he's simply too lazy to look for it. His laziness can be seen through all of the drivel he types up and unfortunately gets paid for

[exNCite]

I'm not sure it's that simple. I'm not a lemming, and Smizk just keeps beating dead horses, but I don't think it's unreasonable for the Pirate FO to be less conservative in their approach. At the same time, given the past history of the franchise, I also understand, though don't necessarily agree, why they are afraid to take risks with their budget. I simply would argue that the Pirates are not as market-poor as some of you want to argue. I think the potential baseball market in Pittsburgh is actually very strong, and I think the FO should take a hedge on it. But the real risk is not in the market, it is in the prospects not panning out. I get it too. It's hard to pick winners in the prospect market. However, it is not unreasonable to think that the club has reached the point where investing in a proven commodity (ie "afford that big bat"), even if it takes them out of their budget safe-zone, is a worthwhile risk that could actually help the team reach their future goals. Saying that doesn't make me a lemming, or an anti, or whatever you want to label me, it just suggests that the Pirate FO is not infallible in their plan to rebuild the Pirates.

I understand, but one thing you've got to remember. Investing $10 mill in an elite draft pick is much different than investing the same amount in a high profile veteran. Assuming the kid makes the team, you'll have ownership of that player for a number of years at a reasonable price. The veteran, on the other hand, plays for 1 year. Another year costs another $10 mill. To me, that's really the difference in how and why you have to build a team in a small market

[Kipper]

I understand, but one thing you've got to remember. Investing $10 mill in an elite draft pick is much different than investing the same amount in a high profile veteran. Assuming the kid makes the team, you'll have ownership of that player for a number of years at a reasonable price. The veteran, on the other hand, plays for 1 year. Another year costs another $10 mill. To me, that's really the difference in how and why you have to build a team in a small market

On top of that the investment is made with money that you have and are expecting to have. That's key. It's an investment in that you are taking money that you already have, extra you have, and spending it. Buccoman isn't really talking about that, he's talking about taking money that's not there, spending it like it's a credit card ant expecting to somehow get that money back. That's not even gambling, investments are gambling, buccoman and people like Smizik and his Lemmings are talking about money management that generally leads people and such in bankruptcy

[exNCite]

The Pirates peculiar offseason continues.

After three early off-season signings, which upgraded the team but not by much, the Pirates have become ultra-passive in what has become a somewhat soft free-agent market.

With holes to fill -- a power hitter, a starting pitcher -- the Pirates have sat back and done almost nothing. What makes that peculiar is after the team had signed catcher Rod Barajas, shortstop Clint Barmes and starter Erik Bedard and pushed their expected payroll to around the $46 million level, president Frank Coonelly gave indications more was coming.

At PirateFest, Coonelly said it was ``likely’’ the 2012 payroll would exceed what it was at the end of 2011, when it was about $52 million.

But since then it has been mostly nothing but a few minor-league signings. All this in a free-agent market for pitchers that has been buyer friendly.

It has reached a point that Tim Williams of PiratesProspects.com twice this month suggested the Pirates go after Edwin Jackson, who is one of the best free-agent pitchers available but still not signed. Williams said the Pirates not only should go after Jackson but that they could afford him.

But the Pirates have not made a move and Jackson is still available. The latest to suggest the Pirates sign Jackson is Joe Sheehan, a writer whose work often is seen in Sports Illustrated and at SI.com.

In his subscription newsletter, Sheehan wrote that there were only a few teams that had a need for Jackson and that could afford him. The Pirates were one of them. In colorful language, he made the case for why the Pirates should want Jackson

``The Pirates . . . have a payroll so low that they can easily afford to add a free-agent salary without dramatically changing their financial fortunes. Owner Robert Nutting is worth somewhere north of a billion dollars, so perhaps we can never again hear the word 'can't' associated with the Pirates and spending money. (All of the cheap, whiny owners in MLB should be shamed by what Mike Ilitch did [last] week. Compete, you spineless revenue-stealing .1 percenters, or sell to people who will.)

``The Pirates are currently slated to go to war in 2012 with the same rotation of low-strikeout pitchers who got 1) lucky in the first half and 2) hammered in the second. Jackson would immediately become the Pirates' ace, and stay that way as the team waits for Gerrit Cole to claim the title in 2014. Being just 28, Jackson should have some appeal for a team that can't compete for a few years.’’

There was no substantiation for Sheehan’s contention that Nutting’s net worth is above $1 billion. I can, however, verify the Pirates owner falls into the category of ``spineless revenue-stealing .1 percenter,’’ who refuses to compete.

The Pirates rotation looks like Jeff Karstens, Charlie Morton, James McDonald, Kevin Correia and Bedard. Morton is coming off surgery and not expected to be ready to start the season. Correia had an awful second half, which matched up well with his 2010 performance. Bedard is oft-injured.

The Pirates starting pitching depth consists of Brad Lincoln, Rudy Owens, Jeff Locke and non-roster invitees Shairon Martis and Jo-Jo Reyes. It’s not an exciting group.

But for reasons not altogether clear, the Pirates, once dubbed as aggressive early in the free-agent cycle, have become extraordinarily passive since signing Bedard in early December.

There’s money to be spent. There’s still time to spend it. Whether the Pirates are willing, remains to be determined.

Geez Bob. Do ya think that might have something to with it?

Why do I do this to myself? Why? Why?

[wvkeeper]

http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...of-the-pirates

[cocktailsfor2]

http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...of-the-pirates

If it's Bobbo, and you've already read it, can you give a symopsis or some quotes?

I WILL NOT click on any link that generates money for the P-G because of him.

[exNCite]

If it's Bobbo, and you've already read it, can you give a symopsis or some quotes?

I WILL NOT click on any link that generates money for the P-G because of him.

Not worth posting anything cocktails. Just more of the same ****.

[Kipper]

http://communityvoices.sites.post-ga...of-the-pirates

You suck by baiting me into reading that load of horse **** !!!!!

[Kipper]

If it's Bobbo, and you've already read it, can you give a symopsis or some quotes?

I WILL NOT click on any link that generates money for the P-G because of him.

Basically in a nut shell he whines in an article prior about how bob Nutting is a billionaire owner who is cheap and not willing to spend money. The entire article is a big endless crybaby tantrum, only afro perm delight, Bob Smizik can deliver for 1,000+ words. Then he turns around and dismisses the Pirates offers to Jackson and Oswalt that he whined about Bob Nutting not offering in the prior Article before whining about 19 years of losing. The only goal for Bob Smizik is to continue to promote a negative slant towards the Pittsburgh Pirates actually towards bob Nutting. 9 out of 10 times he acts like Bob Nutting is making the decisions and you know Smizik, he's too ignorant to realize that he isn't because it doesn't fit Smizik's agenda.

Same old ****

[Kipper]

....and I ask please for the future... post a snippet or portion of Smizik's **** blog Articles and refrain from posting the Link. I don't want to give his ****ty Blog any links back. we all know where to find the dip**** to read the full articles

[Shaker100]

Some Baseball Einstein name sonic just wrote a comment basically asking why Taillon has not advanced to at least AA by now. If Taillon only won 10 games at the major league level it would be double the IQ of the average Smizik reader.

[Kipper]

I can't imagine some of the stupid, and inane things that are going to drool out of the mouths over there at Retard Central in light of frank's DUI

[jleisele58]

I can't imagine some of the stupid, and inane things that are going to drool out of the mouths over there at Retard Central in light of frank's DUI

let me help you imagine:

"Roy oswalt wouldnt take offers from the pirates because Frank was drunk"

"The pirates first offer to edwin jackson was insulting because frank misplaced a decimal because he was drunk"

"The Pirates could spend more money on FA signings if Frank wouldnt spend all of the money on booze"

"Frank is the primary reason there is a new bar at PNC Park"

"Charlie Morton injured his hip tripping over a passed out Frank sleeping it off in the locker room"

That should get your started