03-04-2010, 08:25 PM
<!--quoteo(post=81587:date=Mar 4 2010, 05:13 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Mar 4 2010, 05:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=81581:date=Mar 4 2010, 05:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 4 2010, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Just for example...in 2008, MLB batting average was .264. For every guy that hit .290, 20 guys hit .238? Really?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I admitted in my first rebuttal to your questioning of his statement, perhaps the math isn't exact, but are you really going to argue with the basic premise? (That superstars are really hard to come by, and decent players are a dime-a-dozen, and can often be easily replaced by a good AAA guy, or a decent platoon?)
Remember the Angels GM who, when unloading Nolan Ryan, said "He went 16-14 last year. Big deal, we'll replace him with two guys who'll go 8-7."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. What I'm going to argue is that 10% over league average is not a superstar and that the discrepancy between 10% over and 10% under is nowhere near 20 to 1.
And there's nothing for you to 'admit." It's on James...he's a (perhaps THE) stats guy. He doesn't get to be hyperbolic about numbers like that. I say that as one that likes Bill James a lot.
And Butcher, I think you contradicted yourself. I think you just explained the main reason that there aren't 20 .238 hitters for every .290 hitters.
As I admitted in my first rebuttal to your questioning of his statement, perhaps the math isn't exact, but are you really going to argue with the basic premise? (That superstars are really hard to come by, and decent players are a dime-a-dozen, and can often be easily replaced by a good AAA guy, or a decent platoon?)
Remember the Angels GM who, when unloading Nolan Ryan, said "He went 16-14 last year. Big deal, we'll replace him with two guys who'll go 8-7."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. What I'm going to argue is that 10% over league average is not a superstar and that the discrepancy between 10% over and 10% under is nowhere near 20 to 1.
And there's nothing for you to 'admit." It's on James...he's a (perhaps THE) stats guy. He doesn't get to be hyperbolic about numbers like that. I say that as one that likes Bill James a lot.
And Butcher, I think you contradicted yourself. I think you just explained the main reason that there aren't 20 .238 hitters for every .290 hitters.