Christopher Sean

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

@FastbreakHoops5 Most overrated athlete in history- right next to Muhammad Ali.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

You’re arguing against a claim MLB didn’t make. “Fastest to 1,000 strikeouts as a Yankee” means fewest games/innings needed to accumulate 1,000 strikeouts in a Yankees uniform, not youngest age, earliest calendar year, or fewest seasons.

Shawkey doing it 100 years ago is irrelevant to “fastest.” Downing reaching 1,000 at a younger age measures age, not rate of accumulation. Tanaka finishing with 991 and hypothetically getting there in a full 2020 season is still a hypothetical. And Clemens doing it across six Yankees seasons doesn’t make him faster: Cole needed dramatically fewer innings—837⅔ versus Clemens’ previous record of 1,087⅓.

In fact, “fewest innings” is arguably the cleanest definition of fastest for a strikeout milestone because innings measure the actual opportunity required. Cole’s strikeout rate allowed him to accumulate 1,000 Ks with roughly 250 fewer innings of work than Clemens.

So there’s no “twistin’” here. You’ve invented several different definitions of fastest and then complained that MLB used the statistically relevant one.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Nope! YOU made the affirmative claims, so the burden is yours. “Fauci intentionally suppressed effective drugs to clear the way for profitable vaccines” is not a neutral historical observation—it alleges efficacy, suppression, intent and motive. You don’t get to declare all four “TRUE” and then demand that everyone else disprove them.

So stop shifting the burden. Name one precise allegation, cite the underlying evidence, and demonstrate the causal chain. “This event happened” does not establish Kennedy’s interpretation of why it happened.

And typing TRUE underneath an accusation is not verification—it’s just you endorsing it.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

False. This confuses “these drugs were evaluated and ultimately rejected” with “they were suppressed to protect vaccine profits.”

Hydroxychloroquine wasn’t suppressed—it received an FDA Emergency Use Authorization in March 2020 and was widely studied. The FDA revoked that authorization after accumulating evidence showed that its benefits did not outweigh its risks. The huge randomized RECOVERY trial likewise found no mortality benefit in hospitalized patients.

Ivermectin wasn’t simply dismissed either. It was tested in randomized clinical trials. The FDA’s review concluded that the available clinical-trial evidence did not demonstrate effectiveness against COVID-19.

Most importantly, you’ve provided zero evidence for the key allegation: that Fauci intentionally suppressed effective drugs in order to clear a regulatory or commercial path for vaccines. Showing that officials criticized treatments after evidence failed to establish their effectiveness does not establish a pharmaceutical conspiracy.

If Kennedy has evidence of Fauci deliberately suppressing positive clinical-trial results to protect vaccine profits, produce it. Otherwise, you’ve taken a claim about motive and simply stamped “TRUE” underneath it. That’s assertion, not verification.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

A concise response:

Misleading. Fauci/NIAID absolutely worked with Gates-funded organizations and pharmaceutical companies on vaccines. That’s normal public-health collaboration, not evidence that they displaced “traditional public health” or sanitation. During COVID, public-health agencies simultaneously promoted handwashing, ventilation, masking, distancing, testing, isolation, improved infection control AND vaccination. Vaccines received enormous attention because SARS-CoV-2 is primarily airborne/respiratory, not a disease that “basic sanitation” can control.

The claim also conflates collaboration with corruption. If the allegation is that Fauci improperly subordinated effective public-health measures to benefit Gates or pharmaceutical companies, show the evidence of that decision-making and motive.

Merely demonstrating that these parties worked together doesn’t establish it.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Partly true, but your wording smuggles in the conclusion. NIAID funded EcoHealth, and EcoHealth funded coronavirus experiments at WIV. There were also legitimate oversight failures. But that does not prove Fauci funded the creation of SARS-CoV-2, nor that those experiments caused COVID-19.

Even the “gain-of-function” label depends on whether you’re using the broad laboratory meaning or the narrower federal ePPP definition. If your claim is that the funded experiments produced the pandemic virus, provide the genomic and experimental evidence linking them. Funding coronavirus research is not itself proof of causing COVID.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

A strong response would be:

“TRUE” isn’t evidence. You’ve simply restated Kennedy’s allegation. AZT was indeed toxic at the high doses initially used—that is well documented—but that does not establish that Fauci knowingly pushed a worthless treatment or suppressed superior alternatives. AZT showed antiviral activity and clinical benefit in early trials, dosing was subsequently reduced as evidence evolved, and combination antiretroviral therapy eventually transformed HIV from a near-certainly fatal infection into a manageable chronic disease.

If Kennedy alleges that Fauci ignored a specific superior treatment, name the treatment and provide the contemporaneous controlled evidence showing it worked better. That’s the claim requiring proof. Writing “TRUE” underneath an accusation proves nothing.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

A strong direct answer to his question would be:

Yes—I’m saying the claims have to be evaluated individually, and many of Kennedy’s major claims about Fauci and COVID do not survive that scrutiny. But that’s separate from your argument. You claimed the absence of a Fauci lawsuit verifies the book. It doesn’t. “He wasn’t sued” is not evidence that his allegations are true.

If you think a specific claim is verified, name the claim and provide the underlying evidence. Then, we can evaluate it instead of using the absence of litigation as a substitute for evidence.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Honus Wagner!! NOT Roger’s Hornsby!

Hornsby received an even bigger bump than Ruth did from the Live Ball era. Actually, it was substantially bigger.

Sportsman Park III was a great hitters' park, just like the Polo Grounds for Ruth. But check out how much they moved in the fences for his road parks during the Live Ball era for Hornsby's NL.

This is crazy!!

Keep in mind that Hornsby's incredible streak of hitting started in 1921 and ended in 1925. He still had good years afterwards, such as 1 year stint with the Boston Braves when he set a team record with .387 AVG. But even that is tainted....

We will look at left field line(LF), and left center(LC)

Wrigley:
1921-1922, 327 LF, 377 LC
1923-1927, 329-325 LF, 361 LC

Ebbets Field:
1914-1920, 410 LF, 431 LC
1921-1930, 384 LF, 391 LC

Redland Field--holy crap-shocker here:
1912-1919. 352 LF, 427 LC
1921-1925, 320 LF, 360 LC

Baker Bowl:
1895-1909, 390 LF, 410 LC
1910-1924, 335 LF, 379 LC
1925-1938, 342 LF, 365 LC

Braves Field--the one year Hornsby played for the Braves(1928), they moved the fence in for him big-time:

1928, 320 LF, 330 LC

Otherwise, Braves Field from 1921-1927 was 402-404 feet to LC.

The power alley was moved in more than 70 Feet for Hornsby's 1 year stint with the Braves. The very next year after he left, they moved it out 34 feet. That team record batting average he has is very tainted

Hornsby had mostly band boxes as road parks too. The big surprise was Cincinnati with 320 to LF and only 360 to LC starting in 1921,

So not only did Hornsby receive a massive Live Ball bump. But he also received a huge ball park bump too because the NL wanted to gain some popularity with the long ball like the AL did with Ruth.

Hornsby played in a lot of bandboxes during his prime years, which greatly inflated his stats. One guy that makes him look bad is Babe Ruth. Hornsby was a 150s OPS+ guy in the Dead Ball era until the Live Ball era came along. Ruth in nasty Fenway showed 190-200 potential.

Also, after pouring over many players' stats, I found that early Live Ball players received about a 20 point advantage in OPS+ from walks and an additional 10 pt bump in OPS+ from the 4-base hit. Serious moonshot specialists like Crawford, Wagner, and Delahanty had career relSLUG numbers in the low 130s. Lajoie was also a powerful man that scored in the low 130s These strong mashers had several articles about how far they could hit a ball. Early Liveball hitters scored 10 points to higher in RelSLUG.

Guys in the 140s for their careers include Mize, Greenberg, DiMaggio, And Foxx. Gehrig stepped up to the low 150s. Ruth was a 170s guy, an insane outlier. As far as DeadBallers go, Cob topped them all. He was in the low 150s, although that included very little of a decline. But Cobb was a massive outlier in that stat as a DeadBaller. Cobb ruled Desdball hitting almost like Ruth ruled the early Live Ball days.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

This meme is basketball analysis for people who count laundry. 😂 Curry was drafted into the organization that eventually put Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Andre Iguodala and Kevin Durant around him, with Steve Kerr coaching. Why would he leave?

LeBron spent 7 years in Cleveland before leaving, returned for another 4, and delivered the franchise its first championship—including beating Curry’s 73–9 Warriors from down 3–1.

And the funniest part of using Curry as the anti-“superteam” example? After that 73-win team lost to LeBron, Golden State recruited Kevin Durant, the 2014 MVP and one of the greatest scorers ever, producing arguably the most talent-loaded team of the modern era.

Curry deserves enormous credit for four championships. But “one team” describes organizational stability, not individual virtue. Tim Duncan, Magic and Bird also stayed because championship organizations continually surrounded them with Hall of Fame talent.

LeBron winning Finals MVP for three different franchises isn’t evidence against his greatness. It’s evidence that the common championship denominator kept changing organizations while remaining LeBron James.

And accusing everyone else of “projection” while reducing 23 years of roster construction, free agency and competitive context to 1 TEAM GOOD / 5 TEAMS BAD is spectacularly unserious.

Also, slipping an unsupported PED insinuation into an argument about free agency isn’t evidence. It’s what you do when the basketball argument has run out of basketball.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

😂 So GOAT analysis is now “who won a championship closest to retirement”? Brilliant methodology. By that standard Robert Horry’s 7 rings should have ended the debate years ago.

Kareem “won rings at 37–41” while Magic Johnson was winning MVPs and Finals MVPs. Brady won at 43 because he was still an elite QB on a championship-caliber team. Those facts tell us absolutely nothing about whether LeBron’s individual longevity is historically great.

And the “bubble doesn’t count” escape hatch is even funnier. Every contender played under the same neutral-site conditions, with no home-court advantage. The Lakers went 16–5 in the playoffs and beat four consecutive opponents. Apparently championships count unless LeBron wins one, at which point we convene a Twitter constitutional convention.

Best of all: “LeBron ain’t won shit in 10 years” requires literally deleting a championship that occurred six years ago to make the sentence work.

This isn’t basketball analysis. It’s fandom doing algebra backward: start with “MJ GOAT,” invent whatever criterion produces the desired answer, and when reality interferes, announce that reality “doesn’t count.” 😂

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

This is what happens when someone understands counting stats but not player value. You’re evaluating the greatest two-way player of the modern era as if he’s a DH chasing milestones. “49 wins” is particularly hilarious—pitcher wins haven’t been a serious individual metric for decades.

If Ohtani finishes with ~550 HR plus years of frontline MLB pitching, the pitching isn’t some footnote you tack onto his batting line. It’s the entire reason the historical comparison is unprecedented.

And…declaring his pitching career over at 32 because he’s currently shut down isn’t analysis; it’s fortune-telling. You’re constructing his hypothetical retirement totals first, then congratulating yourself for disproving a career that hasn’t happened yet.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Jordan’s 51 at 38 and 43 at 40 were remarkable individual games. Longevity, however, is about sustained production.

—At 38, Jordan averaged 22.9 points on .468 TS% for a 37-win Wizards team that missed the playoffs.

—At 40, LeBron averaged roughly 24 points, 8 assists and 7 rebounds, remaining an extraordinarily productive NBA player.

And “ring chasing” is a bizarre rebuttal. Jordan’s age-38–40 Wizards never made the playoffs. LeBron was still playing meaningful postseason basketball at an age when Jordan’s teams were going home in April.

The logical error is cherry-picking maxima: one 51-point night does not establish superior longevity any more than a pitcher’s best single game establishes the better career.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

This is dilettante-level sports analysis: start with the conclusion, replace context with a morality play, then call every roster change “running.”

Jordan didn’t simply “embrace struggle.” Chicago built an elite organization around him—Pippen developed into an all-time great, Grant/Rodman provided elite defense and rebounding, Jackson installed the triangle, and the Bulls became a historically dominant defensive team.

Jordan himself never won a playoff series before Pippen arrived.

Meanwhile LeBron supposedly “ran” from Cleveland—after spending seven seasons there and taking a deeply limited roster to the Finals at 22. He “ran” from Miami after four straight Finals and two championships, returned to Cleveland, then led it to four straight Finals and the franchise’s only championship, overcoming a 3–1 deficit against a 73-win team.

And apparently he “ran” to Los Angeles, where he won a championship and Finals MVP with his third franchise.

The funniest contradiction is calling LeBron’s teams “superteams” while arguing that losing proves he should have stayed. If they were unbeatable superteams, how exactly were they getting “dominated”?

This isn’t analysis of basketball. It’s retrofitting two completely different careers into a children’s fable: Jordan persevered; LeBron fled. Roster construction, age, contracts, teammates, opponents and actual performance disappear because they interfere with the mythology.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

This is exactly how highlight-reel mythology replaces analysis. Nobody disputes that Jeter made brilliant, memorable plays or had excellent baseball instincts.

The question is whether he consistently converted balls into outs better than other shortstops.

One spectacular play doesn’t erase thousands of opportunities over a 20-year career. Defensive metrics evaluate the entire distribution of plays—including the routine and difficult balls he didn’t reach, which by definition never appear in his highlight reel. “But look at this play” isn’t a rebuttal to data; it’s selection bias.

-Great player, leader, ambassador & larger than life charisma and marketability
-Iconic postseason moments
-*Incredibly* limited defensive range & -Worst defensive player in MLB history with 1500+ games played.

ALL these things can (and, are) true simultaneously, Seth.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

@shane86580 @MoryMagisSprts Amen. He’s a pathetic 85 IQ guy who wishes it was the 80s-90s again (so he could feel relevant and successful again…)

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

PCA has a terrific MVP argument, but some of this goes too far. MVP isn’t “who would hurt their team most if removed”; it’s about total value produced.

Ohtani has been one of baseball’s best hitters and provided 14 starts of Cy Young-caliber pitching. Those innings count just as much as elite defense and baserunning. Also, team quality isn’t an individual statistic.

The Dodgers’ roster strength shouldn’t diminish Ohtani’s value any more than the Cubs’ offensive struggles should inflate PCA’s. If PCA wins because his elite center-field defense, baserunning, and offense outweigh Ohtani’s partial-season pitching, that’s a perfectly reasonable position.

But….dismissing Ohtani because he plays on a better team isn’t.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Calling it “unanimous” dismisses the strongest part of PCA’s candidacy. Ohtani’s half-season of Cy Young-level pitching is enormously valuable, but PCA isn’t just a good hitter—he’s an elite defensive center fielder, an elite baserunner, and one of baseball’s most valuable everyday players.

This comes down to a philosophical question:

“Is four months of ace-level pitching worth more than six months of Gold Glove center field plus elite offense and baserunning?”

That’s a genuine debate, not an obvious answer…

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

You’re confusing ‘unrefuted’ with ‘verified.’ A claim doesn’t become true because no lawsuit was filed. In U.S. law, public officials face an extraordinarily high bar for defamation (they must prove actual malice), and many authors avoid suit for practical, strategic, or constitutional reasons.

The question isn’t whether RFK Jr. was sued—it’s whether his specific claims are supported by high-quality evidence that withstands scrutiny.

Books aren’t evidence; they make arguments.

Each factual claim has to be evaluated against the primary documents, the totality of the research, and the broader scientific consensus.

[Christopher Sean @Ty4191]

Freddie is already top 5. Career value, peak, consistency, defense, postseason, and longevity all stack up. And unlike Gehrig, Foxx, Greenberg, or Connor, he’s done it in the deepest talent pool in history against the hardest pitching ever—fully integrated, global MLB with elite velocity and bullpens. LEAGUE DEPTH/QUALITY is EVERYTHING!!.