NotThatGuy

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/31/chris-davis-opens-up-about-his-adderall-suspension-it-was-a-moment-of-weakness/

Swisher was coming off 3 consecutive seasons where his Value was $25.5M or higher. They signed him for 4 years, $14M each. He just got injured and took a dive. Bourn had 4 consecutive seasons where his Value was $26.6M or higher (including a $40.1M season the season before the Indians signed him). They signed him for 4 years, $12M each. He, too, just happened to tank.

As a parent of a 7-year old who has had issues with hyperactivity and verbal defiance, which have been brought to our attention by preschool and elementary school teachers and specialists ... yes, I'm aware of how easy it is to get the diagnosis you want. Even though they start or end their assessments with "we're hesitant at this age to do anything ..." they always discuss things in a way that it's up to US to pursue further. Basically, we're driving the ship, and if we want him to be diagnosed ADHD and put on meds, we could have that done. And, well, we're using some of the top folks in their field, not your typical pediatricians. We have, instead, opted to handle things through our own parental behavior modification techniques, and they have worked fabulously. The kid's a sweetheart, a leader and smart as hell ... he's flourishing, and staying on task (for the most part), regardless of his overall interest level. Now, that's not to say that's the answer in all situations (or, even, many situations) - just indicating that the way the ADHD diagnosis is treated is, in our case, much different than you would see with a typical physical issue (where they rightfully don't give a blip about what you think is the right diagnosis and treatment, because it's their job to figure that out for you, and the child). I can only imagine what it's like when the kid is older, and they're no longer saddled by the "he might be too young for meds" line of reasoning. I do have older nieces and nephews who have conveyed to me that Ritalin and Adderall are pervasively used like caffeine in high schools and college - a boost to help you study for exams, by folks who don't need to take the meds daily to address a legitimate mental disorder.

Boxy ... it's a shame, but I'm not long for the board once again. I speak substantively on a topic, get personally, and baselessly insulted ... I don't respond in kind ... instead I take the high road and simply tell them not to attack me and to speak substantively ... and I'm given a warning by your favorite moderator (who welshed on a bet with me, because he's an upstanding citizen who should be moderating a board). It's an insane asylum in here.

As an alleged doctor, I find your unsubstantiated personal attack to be far more disturbing. If you have some knowledge to drop, drop it. If you don't, drop it. As I have friends who are pediatricians, and as one of my sons has been suspected of having mild ADHD, and has gone through much of the initial testing/diagnostics toward determining where/if he falls on the ADHD spectrum, and I've personally researched it extensively, out of parental concern, I'm always willing to hear more viewpoints and gather more information. But it has to be substantive.

Because it's a mental disorder. And, as a member of society, it's a bit scary that the ADHD diagnosis is so prevalent, and increasing at a pretty alarming rate. Even though it's (usually) a comparatively benign mental disorder, and can often be controlled well by meds, it's still a mental disorder ... and if you have 10%+ and rising walking around with it, well ... that's alarming. Just as it would be if we had 10%+ of the population needing to take medication just to walk normally, and that number was rising by about 2-2.5% every 4-5 years. Either we have an issue with doctors not being able to properly diagnose the disorder, or we have doctors that aren't properly treating the disorder, or we have a serious issue with a large, increasing segment of the population needed drugs just to get through the day and act "normal." (or some combination thereof) It's scary.

That was a generic statement. In another statement, he mentioned he took it "a couple of times" last year in moments of weakness, despite not getting the Therapeutic Use Exemption he typically gets. http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/31/chris-davis-opens-up-about-his-adderall-suspension-it-was-a-moment-of-weakness/ What that might set up as a narrative is that whatever level he's playing at, he does better with Adderall ... then in the year he doesn't take it, (for most of the year, at least), he stinks ... and despite knowing he doesn't have the exemption, he's so desperate, he feels it'll help him, and he takes it anyway. Then he gets the exemption again, and this year, he's good again. And that would beg the question ... if this was really an "everyday life" sort of thing, as he claims, and as others claim ... how in the world would he just forget to file for a TUE, and then not be taking it for most of the season, and only a couple times, during moments of weakness? Now, perhaps you could write the narrative that he tried to go off it, and thought he could go on in his everyday, and baseball, life without it ... it didn't work, and he took it a couple times because he realized he needed it, but that's completely unsupported right now (though possible). Whereas there is some circumstantial evidence to support the "performance enhancer usage" narrative.

Don't forget Napoli and Drew. And the trade of Melancon for Hanrahan which North criticized, also netted the Brock Holt for the Sox.

The petty personal shots are unnecessary. When you're wrong, just admit it and move on. And, for the record, Boxcar didn't start in on you until well after you made the comments I highlighted, so unless you broke the space/time continuum while posting, his "one line replies" couldn't have had any effect on you making your "the people" comments. I know you'll come back with some MBA, lawyer or "corporate" digs, but those are just facts. Actual, true facts, not dreamt up realities or hypotheticals. Stick to the facts - to what actually exists - and you'll have less people to try to put down as being "corporate," unless you actually mean to make "corporate" synonymous with "reality." Thanks. It was a pleasure conversing with you, and I'm glad the dispute was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties involved.

I honestly have no idea what you're rambling on about. YOU ... not Stangstag, nor the invisible man controlling your thoughts ... YOU typed the following, in your initial "attack": "When it was Trout 10ish - Cabrerra 6 the people said Trout was obviously the MVP and one was an idiot to think otherwise. When it was Trout 6.5, Donaldson 6.3 they said the same, the 0.2 difference seemed just as relevant as the 4 WAR difference." [boldface added for emphasis] That was a reference to multiple people ... hence "the people" and "they." And it was commentary on not relying solely on WAR, because "the people" did collectively think that way, and you didn't think that was proper. Perhaps you just forgot what you typed.

GD = o2c? Troll Patrol ... get on this immediately! We're moving to Red!

Troll Patrol powers ... activate. Form of, a virgin. http://topaces.com/app/wa/mediaEntry?mediaEntryId=604

Don't ask, don't tell. http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BaBLHEV0Zfs/maxresdefault.jpg

Olerud363 -- "the people" said 0.2 difference in WAR is definitive enough that you should be ashamed of yourself if you think differently. Boxcar -- no one said that. Olerud363 -- one person said that. So we can agree that both posters were wrong. Boxcar was wrong in that 1 person said it, rather than 0, but that mistake is irrelevant to the larger point. Olerud is wrong as to the larger point - that somehow "the people" (a term to be interpreted as indicative of a collective way of thinking, which would necessitate having to know WAR to more than one decimal if players were tied out to the first decimal) had determined that 0.2 WAR was definitive proof that one player was inarguably more valuable than another. Unless, of course, Olerud wants to try to argue that "Stangstag" is some kind of collective mind - some kind of alien life form collecting or controlling the minds of others. So, let's hear your alien theories, Olerud.

... for an Asian. You guys are smart.

'Cause your a dumny.

You also invented the internet.

Well, he has a drinking problem, which explains his erratic behavior (including the irrational lashing-out power trips), and he welshes on his drinking bets, so he lacks the integrity and accountability to be a stand up guy. And, so, you folks saw that and said "we want him watching over us! He's reasonable!" And then you put on your tinfoil miners' hat, grabbed your torch and pitchforks, and went troll hunting (all whilst constantly bitching about everything AA and Gibbons do, in very troll-like fashion).

We're all sure your mind isn't the only thing entered when you think about a DP.

If 5 is old enough to understand that my usage of the term was further belittlement of the person whom I was belittling, then, sure. I'm 5. Which would make you a late-term aborted fetus. Maybe mid-term.

I'm pretty sure I'm NotThatGuy and that you're baubau, and not Bautista. I know you're not Bautista, because he is old enough to have touched a boobie (besides his mother's), so he wouldn't have a suggestive photo of a woman as an avatar.

Exhibit K. Sorry, Exhibit _K.

So, ignoring the grammatical error (which, apparently just fits in with the tough guy persona you're desperately trying to cultivate now that you've been outed as a creepy, wrong-minded stalker of posters, right? Because f*** the rules of the English language, because you're too cool/tough to worry about that), your stance is that we should ignore what you write, because you're too awesome to give a f***, but you'll spend your time worrying about others, because they're losers. Is that right? Your wife should be arrested for marrying a child.

Most of the drama on this board is self-inflicted. If you'd just let people vent in Game Day Threads, without coming down on them, you'd cut out on most of the drama. Because that's what normal fans do - they're fans of a baseball team, which is a completely irrational thing to be, when you actually think about it. And when they watch the game, they're emotionally venting. They'll call the best player on the team a bum when he strikes out in a key situation. They'll say the team stinks, and won't amount to anything when they blow a game, even though they're leading the division. Stop treating those folks like trolls and you'll cut down on 50% of the drama. And, otherwise, stop trying to be Sherlock Holmes Jr. Stop trying to ferret out the next troll. These Doggs or Metallijays or whomever? Let them go. They're just going to create more accounts and keep posting. And, really, they don't do much wrong. They're just noise. Put them on ignore and move on. Far worse is the guys yapping about "troll!" and pointing at each member as Dogg, and then having 5 posts about it, and then harping on it for the rest of the thread. The junior detectives are the ones ruining the board, much more than the spammers like Dogg. Do yourselves a favor and try to go 2 days without insulting another poster, or accusing someone of being someone else, and watch how much more pleasant the board will become. Learn to accept opposing viewpoints, and different ways of enjoying the game (even if that enjoyment is through misery). It's not the lack of moderation, or the improper moderation (although we can all be honest here and say that o2c is pretty much the opposite of what you'd look for in a mod). It's those who are more concerned with who's who, and that some voices should be silenced, than they are with simply enjoying (even if negatively), the Jays, and baseball, generally. Unfortunately, I fear the board is FAR too invested in creating the troll drama than they are in worrying about the Jays, or just being respectful humans. At some point, when you're sitting around with your cyberbuddies, contemplating why you can't have a decent board, rather than pointing at excuse A, B or C - you might want to look at yourself. Or you'll just create yet another board where you have to run from the villains you created and perpetuate. And you'll talk about how good it is to get away from the former villains, only to create more villains, or not be able to handle the ones that follow you to the new board.

If he can't keep his woman in line, what makes you think he can handle a virtual room full of kids and mentally-challenged adults?