Peavy Cannot Promise He Will Be Ok By Spring

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

but injuries could happen to anyone

And until it happens to said person, it is not a big IF as to staying healthy.

 

[tbo41fan]

And until it happens to said person, it is not a big IF as to staying healthy.

Well see i disagree there, but thats just me

 

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

Well see i disagree there, but thats just me

I really don't get how you can say that staying healthy is a big IF for a guy who has played in, say, 950 games.

 

[tbo41fan]

I really don't get how you can say that staying healthy is a big IF for a guy who has played in, say, 950 games.

You could be healthy all year, and suddenly get an injury....

Injury's are always prevelant in sports, so they can always attack, even players that have previously always been healthy

 

[Lefty]

but injuries could happen to anyone


Well ill pose the same question to you as I did lefty...

How do we know what will or will not create discussion? Let him post what he wants and if people post, then they post.

This forum is supposed to be for Sports news, thats what dews is posting...if lefty gets butthurt because dews is posting news, then so be it

You're failing to make the distinction between "posting sports news" and "creating brand new threads for every single topic that one finds that may or may not be discussion-generating". The former is fine, if done properly (i.e. not creating brand new threads for everything and so on), it can certainly generate discussion and be fun, the latter, however, clutters up sections and makes the site look empty and forced if nobody posts in them (which, as stated earlier, is likely because they aren't clear-cut thread-worthy topics).

It's not as simple as "well if nobody posts in the threads then nobody posts in them", because there is a definite downside to having countless threads started about asinine topics that nobody posts in: prospective members/guests can see that the site looks empty, at least with regards to whatever sport they want to talk about, and the site comes off as "trying too hard" or "pressing", another turn off for prospective members.

And how do I know what will and will not generate discussion? Call it experience. I've been around sports message boards for a good while now (baseball boards especially), and I can gauge what is likely to garner big interest and posts from a specific group of people, and what's more, I know what deserves its own thread and what doesn't, these types of topics aren't thread-worthy.

 

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

You could be healthy all year, and suddenly get an injury....

Injury's are always prevelant in sports, so they can always attack, even players that have previously always been healthy

Now you're not making much sense...How are you going to call someone whose played in 7 straight seasons worth of games an injury risk? I've never heard of that before...

 

[tbo41fan]

You're failing to make the distinction between "posting sports news" and "creating brand new threads for every single topic that one finds that may or may not be discussion-generating". The former is fine, if done properly (i.e. not creating brand new threads for everything and so on), it can certainly generate discussion and be fun, the latter, however, clutters up sections and makes the site look empty and forced if nobody posts in them (which, as stated earlier, is likely because they aren't clear-cut thread-worthy topics).

It's not as simple as "well if nobody posts in the threads then nobody posts in them", because there is a definite downside to having countless threads started about asinine topics that nobody posts in: prospective members/guests can see that the site looks empty, at least with regards to whatever sport they want to talk about, and the site comes off as "trying too hard" or "pressing", another turn off for prospective members.

And how do I know what will and will not generate discussion? Call it experience. I've been around sports message boards for a good while now (baseball boards especially), and I can gauge what is likely to garner big interest and posts from a specific group of people, and what's more, I know what deserves its own thread and what doesn't, these types of topics aren't thread-worthy.

Well what are you proposing then......we dont know which articles will create discussion, and if we post all of these links in 1 thread, news gets lost, and we could lose potentially helpful discussion.

And I also have experience.
Dews for instance did this at PSD, and the Hawks forum there went from one of the least active, to now it is the most active hockey forum (well it was before we vacated )

I just dont see eye to eye with you about making the forum empty looking. i dont mind the news links

 

[tbo41fan]

Now you're not making much sense...How are you going to call someone whose played in 7 straight seasons worth of games an injury risk? I've never heard of that before...

no no no..im not calling him an injury risk

Im just saying that you cant just push people off as not having to worry about injuries because they can happen to anyone at anytime

 

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

I agree with lefty though, generally when you just post up just a link about a non-major story (I wouldn't call this major exactly) it doesn't create a whole lot of discussion

 

[USCChiFan]

You're failing to make the distinction between "posting sports news" and "creating brand new threads for every single topic that one finds that may or may not be discussion-generating". The former is fine, if done properly (i.e. not creating brand new threads for everything and so on), it can certainly generate discussion and be fun, the latter, however, clutters up sections and makes the site look empty and forced if nobody posts in them (which, as stated earlier, is likely because they aren't clear-cut thread-worthy topics).

It's not as simple as "well if nobody posts in the threads then nobody posts in them", because there is a definite downside to having countless threads started about asinine topics that nobody posts in: prospective members/guests can see that the site looks empty, at least with regards to whatever sport they want to talk about, and the site comes off as "trying too hard" or "pressing", another turn off for prospective members.

And how do I know what will and will not generate discussion? Call it experience. I've been around sports message boards for a good while now (baseball boards especially), and I can gauge what is likely to garner big interest and posts from a specific group of people, and what's more, I know what deserves its own thread and what doesn't, these types of topics aren't thread-worthy.

:yep:

 

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

no no no..im not calling him an injury risk

Im just saying that you cant just push people off as not having to worry about injuries because they can happen to anyone at anytime

You just said that everyone is a big IF to stay healthy, that's kinda the same thing as being an injury risk dude...

 

[Lefty]

Well what are you proposing then......we dont know which articles will create discussion, and if we post all of these links in 1 thread, news gets lost, and we could lose potentially helpful discussion.

And I also have experience.
Dews for instance did this at PSD, and the Hawks forum there went from one of the least active, to now it is the most active hockey forum (well it was before we vacated )

I just dont see eye to eye with you about making the forum empty looking. i dont mind the news links

I'm proposing people exercise some common sense when it comes to creating threads for found stories or just posting them in an already existent thread. Come on, an article written by some schmuck from Cleveland.com about Omar Vizquel's career isn't it's own thread, it's just not. A blurb about Brent Morel's focus not being on 2011 isn't thread-worthy. I don't care what you say or think, it's just not. This Peavy thing? That's fine, and my OP in this thread was just busting dew's balls more than anything else, but my assertions still stand.

 

[tbo41fan]

I agree with lefty though, generally when you just post up just a link about a non-major story (I wouldn't call this major exactly) it doesn't create a whole lot of discussion

I would call this major that one of your best pitchers may not be back by spring training

 

[tbo41fan]

I'm proposing people exercise some common sense when it comes to creating threads for found stories or just posting them in an already existent thread. Come on, an article written by some schmuck from Cleveland.com about Omar Vizquel's career isn't it's own thread, it's just not. A blurb about Brent Morel's focus not being on 2011 isn't thread-worthy. I don't care what you say or think, it's just not. This Peavy thing? That's fine, and my OP in this thread was just busting dew's balls more than anything else, but my assertions still stand.

I guess we will just have to disagree.

i find the links fine, and I do think its helpful to the forum. Like I said, ive seen dews do this before and it worked

 

[Got teeth? Keith doesn't.]

I would call this major that one of your best pitchers may not be back by spring training

Well see i disagree there, but thats just me

 

[tbo41fan]

Well see i disagree there, but thats just me

and thats fine.

 

[DewsSox79]

here, if it makes it easier, i wont mess with this forum. il leave it alone. il stick to the hawks forum do my thang there. no worries.

 

[DewsSox79]

this arguement is Special person.

lefty, instead of complaining about writers, and threads and users opinions why dont you actually contribute to the discussions instead of just crying about everybody.

 

[Rush]

Any serious proposals on making the site better, feel free to PM me.

 

[JCM]

nothing wrong with this thread imo.

dews is just trying to keep the forums active.