User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.6221 seconds
54 querie(s) executed

Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Regardless of who is doing the interviewing, the story is still coming from Fred Durst.
And it was confirmed from Fred's buddy/security guy, for whater that is worth.
Not much. To me, at least.
Fred Durst is closer to middle age than his twenties.
Maybe you can point to a better source, but according to www.freddurst.com, he was born August 20, 1971, which makes him 32 as of this writing (his baseball age would also be 32 :) - that makes him almost 3 years removed from his twenties - so unless you consider 35 middle aged, I wouldn't consider him closer to middle age than to his twenties.
I dunno. A fading rockstar claims that he had wild 'n' crazy sex with a young popstar (who claims to be a virgin, to add some spice to the story); the young popstar denies it, there are no collaborating stories or evidence (not that there necessarily would be collaborating stories for a story of this, um, nature) except from the rockstar's buddy/posse-member/employee and that is supposed to be believable? I ain't buying it. It's too contrived, too adolescent-fantasy (especially all the goofy details), and Fred Durst is too much of a loser for me to believe it for a minute.
What the ****? She runs marathons, listens to much cooler music than I do and is, in general, much younger than me (I'm three chronological years younger than she). It seems ludicrous to attribute middleage hood on her, but she insists it begins at 35. I had written it off to womanly obsession with age until I read post 13.
So, can someone set me straight?
If you figure you'll live to 70, 35 sounds about right. I expect most healthy people now in their 30s will live to something more like 100, so I'd say 45 is a better number than 35. But 35 isn't toally insane.
The man is quite blue, and doesn't seem to have the usual filter between brain and mouth.
That said, it bugs me that people assume he was drunk or even "drinking" because he's Irish and he had a beer in his hand. I recall him on the Daily Show (just before he really broke out) talking about how when he went out people would give him a hard time about being Irish and not getting totally sloshed because he would nurse an Amstel Light while they were chugging Bud or Guinness.
The funny thing about Farrell is that he doesn't have to be drunk to go blue on live TV. But let's not buy into stereotypes.
Statheads, for instance.
Is that the question "when the hell are you and your talentless, caterwauling ilk getting the f*** off my television screen?" Because I can explain why *I*, at least, am asking that question.
Which one is Limp Bizkit?
SeanForman.
Back when they were promoting their annual Comic Relief specials, Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg, and Robin Williams joined the Mets' announcers for an inning or so. At one point, one of the players got hurt (hit by a pitch, I think) and started jumping up and down and shaking his injured hand/finger/wrist in agony. Crystal announced that the player was dancing, "doing the F***ing Chicken down there". After three golden seconds of silence from Tim McCarver, Crystal correctly identified the dance as the Funky Chicken.
You got SO told. *Eight* times.
Good for you.
As for the rest of this thread, the first time through I was having a brainfart and was thinking of Colin Quinn, not Colin Farrell, as the "offensive" guest. Sometimes it's good for threads to be resurrected, just so I'll know what the hell we're talking about.
I am not being sarcastic when I ask this:
How did you get here / find this thread?
Your inability to spell and complete your quotation marks makes you an unlikely critic, however.
I wasn't talking to you, anyway.
Of course, your grammar and sentence structure is horrific.
For another thing, I don't think you have any idea about such arcane literary techniques such as hyperbole, sarcasm, or punctuation.
Finally, r u hot?
Were you looking for pictures of VorosMcCracken (heart-throb to teen statisticians around the world)? Was it while researching Farrell's UZR?
Thanks for the tip.
i took a quick look at the team zr's for ss and 3b, 2001-03. i wanted to see how close they came to my estimate for observed standard deviation (.025). the answer is, pretty close, but there is an important caveat attached.
at ss I got a 3 year average of .843 with a st. dev. of .027, very close to the estimate. but that doesn't tell the whole story. the skewness parameter is -.766, which is highly significant. what does that mean? two things. 1)there are a lot more teams with above average shortstops (49)than there are with below average ones(41). however, 2)the difference between the worst shortstop (.741) and the average is much greater than the difference between the best (.918) and the average. the distribution is skewed to the left. this is not a normal distribution; it's not even close. that makes sense, when you think about it. there is a practical limit to how good a shortstop can be. only Superman or the Flash or bullseye could get to every ground ball, and only the guy with the big red "s" could throw out every runner from deep in the hole. on the other hand, a really bad shortstop is limited only by the patience of his manager. (incidentally, the yankees rank either 29th or 30th all 3 years.)
did I hear an impersonation?
If these claims are false, Durst is slime. If what he says is true, Durst is classless for going forward with the details to the national media.
Agreed on all fronts. I hate is music but tried to keep it out of the post.
You should really have a doctor look at that.
Of course the only good reason to pay attention to detail is for the nookie.
You could stop going to work like I did.
Some browsers, if they don't get a response for a certain amount of time after posting form data, will go ahead and post it again. And again. And again.
What I do is wait about 30 seconds after hitting "Post Comment", copy the text of my post to the clipboard, then reload the thread. 9 times out of 10, my post is already there. If it's not, I just paste it and post it again.
I guess those T-shirts, sweatshirts and thongs must be working...
10% more attractive, guaranteed!
Damn you!
*:^)
Yeah, you'we pwobabwy wight.
Yeah, you'we pwobabwy wight.
Anyway, one ML exec would tell you, and I'd agree, that Strong Bad's DVD commentaries on the "King of Town" and the "In Search of the Yello Dello" cartoons may be the funniest on the site.
Personally, I think anything Strong Bad is good. Especially "Dangeresque II, this time it's not Dangeresque I," and "The Caper" are the best Strong Bad emails.
"I don't care about the crosswords, man! The Jumbles! Go for the Jumbles!"
Good choices all (especially the Stunt Double e-mail: "Tonight, dyin's not on the menu"). I could go on for hours, but I think Teen Girl Squad and the 1936 cartoons deserve at least a mention.
Everybody! Everybody!
Teen Girl Squad is the name of my fantasy football team.
I think Loaiza won't win. It's too out-of-nowhere; he got a lot of press early, which probably hurt him, since now nothing he's doing is really news. (To be fair, 1 run in 8 innings against the Tigers isn't relaly news.) Even though he has 18 wins. Halladay may also have peaked too soon with the winning streak. Pedro getting rocked by the Yankees may doom his candidacy with only 10 wins. Which leaves... Tim Hudson. Is he really going to win? I have no doubt that he's the best candidate. He doesn't have the wins, but he's leading the league in ERA and winning percentage. Even if "the point of a pitcher is to help his team win", Hudson's team is 24-5 in his starts against Loaiza's 19-8. Of course, Hudson's had more help from his defense, but I don't think the voters will see this.
Leaving aside the question of whether he _should_ win, will he really win? It seemed improbable when he had only 9 wins a month ago, but now his win total is respectable and he's leading the league in ERA.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main