It's a Latin "rule." It's one of the very few word order rules in Latin, and somebody, at some point, decided Latin was better than English, so they ought to teach Latin rules as English rules.
However, it's perfectly acceptable to end a sentence with a preposition in English. It's just a bit weak, unless it can't be avoided.
Which is why: "Guys on whom you believe the consensus may be/is wrong" is better.
Your wisemen don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick...
TheMeXiKaN wrote: "Guys that you think the consensus might be wrong on."
Never end a sentence with a preposition. There is your grammar lesson for the day.
If you think an 11th grade English teacher knows anything about grammar, then sure, use that as a rule. In their flawed world view, grammar rules govern language. But that is backwards. The language comes first, then the rules.
Grammar rules really describe how a language works. If you can understand what someone is saying, then it has to be grammatically correct (if it didn't follow the real rules of grammar and syntax, you wouldn't understand the message).
Anyone that tries to tell you that an understandable communication is grammatically incorrect had better be using a written language that predated its spoken counterpart. Then their "rules" could govern the language, instead of describing how it functions. But last I checked, we weren't speaking or writing in binary here in the FBC.
quietstorm wrote:It's a Latin "rule." It's one of the very few word order rules in Latin, and somebody, at some point, decided Latin was better than English, so they ought to teach Latin rules as English rules.
However, it's perfectly acceptable to end a sentence with a preposition in English. It's just a bit weak, unless it can't be avoided.
Which is why: "Guys on whom you believe the consensus may be/is wrong" is better.
"Ending a sentence with a preposition- that is something up with which I will not put."
-Churchill
But, uh, the fact that Bonds is going in rounds 3-8 in the mocks doesn't mean there's a consensus that he belongs there. It just means there's at least one guy in each league who's a believer. There might be four who have him on their 'avoid at all costs' list.
BritSox
Hall of Fame Hero
Posts: 5223
Joined: 5 Mar 2005
Bases this season: 0
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: You don't care, do you? No... because you're unconscious.
luckygehrig wrote:I don't if there's still such a huge consensus for Joe Mauer, but I've been hurt by him the last couple of years. Sure, he's been injured, but even when healthy, he hasn't hit to the supposed potential that he has.
Also, I disagree with Iconoclastic about Jason Bay. The guy's a beast and he doesn't even have anyone hitting around him in that lineup. The guy's gonna be huge for quite awhile and deservedly so. I definitely think he could be early second round value.
I agree with you on Mauer. Frankly, if not for the 10-12 SBs he brings to the table, he would be more or less in the same medicore caliber as most of the other top 12 ranked Cs not named VM. I understand there is upside, but his power is subpar even for a C. Basically avg and a little SB help.
For fantasy purposes, I agree, although Mauer is a player who's real life offensive value and fantasy value are pretty far apart.
2005 VORP 1. Victor Martinez - 60.3
2. Jason Varitek - 45.6
3. Joe Mauer - 40.9
4. Michael Barrett - 33.4
5. Jorge Posada - 32.6
6. Ben Molina - 28.9
7. Jason Larue - 27.4
8. Mike Piazza - 25.1
9. Ramon Hernandez - 25.0
10. Javy Lopez - 24.7
11. Ivan Rodriguez - 24.4
12. Javier Valentin - 23.7
13. Damian Miller - 21.9
14. Paul Lo Duca - 21.5
15. Rod Barajas - 21.1
Martinez was in a class by himself, but Mauer and Varitek made up a very small second tier. What is really scary, in a fantasy respect as it relates to whatever power the 6'4", 220 pound Mauer might develop, is his GB/FB ratio... career of 1.91. If things don't change, he is going to have to hit an unusually high percentage of his fly balls for homeruns to approach high homerun totals.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by quietstorm » Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:21 am 
