TheDreamatorium

You’re a piece of s***.

Third, behind Hamilton and Betts.

Uh, yeah, that's not very uncommon. There's a difference between outperforming your FIP/xFIP by 20-50 points, and outperforming your FIP/xFIP by a run/a-run-and-a-half. Estrada's profile this season is pretty much identical to his career profile (in terms of batted balls and pitch/fx) and this is first season where he's outperformed his FIP/xFIP. His walks are up, and his strikeouts are down; he's going to regress.

I couldn't have imagined a worse rebuttal; it reads like an insult from a piqued Grandmother whose intractable Grandchild didn't fancy another piece of pie. I mean really, egg? The trite metonymic for embarrassment that is high in nutritional value and should be consumed with regularity? I want egg all over my face, thank-you! You may want to refrain from using a deriding line such as "Ima gonna try and cover up my idiocy" in conjunction with "But maybe the egg is hiding the shiner you got from the last American you met". I don't believe it has the lasting, subconscious effect you are hoping for. I'd venture to say that the ultimate result of such onerous, ambiguous banter is aleatory, and as such, may be interpreted as an indirect elucidation of your infirmity. But hey, I'm still trying to clear the egg out of my eyes; perhaps I didn't just read "calcaneus-protectors" and "I didn't get it" in the same gauche, nonsensical response.

Nobody is going to call me out on the "the its" typo? I'm disappointed. I guess it's just easier to belittle what makes one feel inferior.

The bitter umbrage of a self-sanctified, irascible moron; how I yearn for your claims of specious iniquity! But wait, irony will certainly play a role in your rebuttal; how will I counteract such glaring stupidity? Perhaps I must merely point out the its dwindling vestige while desiccating its dripping rectum? Of course, such narrative will inevitably result in claims of equivocation or incongruence, as is the result of any discourse when engaged with a blithe plebeian. I also imagine you will remain indefatigable, lugubrious and a concentrated stroke away from busting your inflated ego. In reality, the joke being played on me is you. You frolic aimlessly around any sort of logical confabulation in favour of a more paced, irrelevant dialogue, as if to maintain a heightened sense of purpose and intelligence (quick, claim irony!), while also recycling the same narrative in order to save yourself from an improper send-off, thus proving that your intelligence is indolent, if not non-existent. Obviously I am not without fault. I ignorantly conflated your quasi-assurance with pseudo-reason, instead of deducing the most prevalent, salient trait of your porous post to arrive at the only logical conclusion: you're a domineering misanthropist who can't properly tie his shoes.

Evidently not.

Such an American thing to say.

It's a 'Community' reference. Using a pseudonym to form an opinion on a poster is digressive at best; picayune at worst. You want me to 'dream-a-reality and wake up'? The very request is an oxymoronic paradox. If I dream a reality, and wake up, is the reality not merely a product of the dream, and therefore, in itself, a dream? In the same vein, if I dream a reality, then by definition it can't be a dream. You've created a scenario that benefits no one; just an inexplicable quandary that results in an endless, inexorably circulatory argument. My issue is not with your saccharine, cathexis obsession towards Kalfus- or any of your other strange, repetitive doctrines- but with your willingness to accentuate the faults of certain prospects, or ideologies, while doing so; it's puerile. I'm not a fan of Gibbons, and I'm not particularly confident in the ability of management to create a sustainable organization. The difference between you and I is that I'm a realist- you're delusional. The Jays have plenty of quality prospects, and copious amounts of potential. Will such promise come to fruition? I honestly couldn't tell you. There's plenty of reason to be cautious, but you're just cynical; banality is not an endearing quality.

Can you just shut the **** up?

The Mets won, so the Jays have to lose if they want a protected pick (which will be 9th). Please, please lose...