Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a <b>black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport</b>. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Uh.. that dude from Iowa who likes college football, has a cool wife, and tends to be a little strident at times...you know the dude?
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a <b>black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport</b>. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on insufficient sample size.
I like you guys a lot.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img] You've never witnessed an actual baseball game.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/kb.gif[/img] WTF? I watched one <i>with you</i>, at Wrigley Field.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16869:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a <b>black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport</b>. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on <b>insufficient sample size</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sipes, I tend to agree with you, Especially since you just mentioned my main point.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16870:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:57 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img] You've never witnessed an actual baseball game.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/kb.gif[/img] WTF? I watched one <i>with you</i>, at Wrigley Field.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 1,238
Threads: 11
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
I don't know how anyone could have such self confidence to assume that because he witnesses something, it is therefore true in general across all cases. I believe it's possible that some players perform better in high pressure situations, but I have not seen the proof one way or the other.
Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16870:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:57 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img] You've never witnessed an actual baseball game.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/kb.gif[/img] WTF? I watched one <i>with you</i>, at Wrigley Field.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rollin.gif[/img]
Posts: 1,238
Threads: 11
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16869:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a <b>black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport</b>. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on insufficient sample size.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can be pretty faulty.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16868:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:55 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 03:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Uh.. that dude from Iowa who likes college football, has a cool wife, and tends to be a little strident at times...you know the dude?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You clearly don't read/comprehend anything I write.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16870:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:57 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img] You've never witnessed an actual baseball game.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/kb.gif[/img] WTF? I watched one <i>with you</i>, at Wrigley Field.
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pretty accurate . . . Being in a stadium and actually watching the festivities are 2 totally different things, just sayin'.
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16881:date=Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM:name=dk123)-->QUOTE (dk123 @ Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16869:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a <b>black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport</b>. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on insufficient sample size.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can be pretty faulty.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can also be very accurate and statistical analysis can also be very faulty. I have never met a person who deals with statistics in the real world who does not take them with a grain of salt. If you come up with your premise first and then do the stats, how can it not be biased. That is the way it is in academics/science. Theory then data then statistical analysis to back it up. Not to say it is always wrong, but it tends to be biased.
I like you guys a lot.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16896:date=Feb 9 2009, 05:08 PM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 05:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16881:date=Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM:name=dk123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dk123 @ Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16869:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on insufficient sample size.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can be pretty faulty.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can also be very accurate and statistical analysis can also be very faulty. I have never met a person who deals with statistics in the real world who does not take them with a grain of salt. If you come up with your premise first and then do the stats, how can it not be biased. That is the way it is in academics/science. Theory then data then statistical analysis to back it up. Not to say it is always wrong, but it tends to be biased.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sipes, I think that is true. Undeniably true.
But what about those times when the stat findings <i>contradict</i> your original theory? Wouldn't that actually strengthen your faith in the stats, because they actually went <i>against</i> your human biases?
Here's my baseball example: I wondered, <b>who is the clutchest guy in all of MLB?</b> Who has the rep, who have we all seen come through countless times?
My answer was Manny Ramirez. He bludgeoned the Cubs in the playoffs. He bludgeoned the eventual champion Phillies. He's a World Series MVP. To me, he really seems to slough off pressure, and come through. Ice-water in his veins.
And i don't think I'm alone...if you polled all baseball fans about this question, I would bet that Manny would be the #1 answer to the question "Who is the most clutch hitter in baseball?"
So then I thought, "what was the single most clutch situation of his career?" And the answer was easy...the late innings of Game 7 of the World Series. And lo and behold, he'd actually lived out that very situation! A perfect experiment!
So what took place? Eighth inning, one-run ballgame, <i>everything</i> on the line...
Manny strikes out.
But wait...the game goes to extra innings! The ultimate baseball fan's dream: an extra-inning, super intensity Game Seven.
So Manny comes up in the 10th inning, tie ballgame, man on base. The runner on base represents the game-winning, <i>World Series</i>-winning run! You want a clutch situation?
Manny strikes out.
Well, there goes my theory about Manny being "clutch." Done in by those darn ol' "statistics" again.
That, and the old "small sample size" thing.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=16937:date=Feb 9 2009, 05:35 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 05:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16896:date=Feb 9 2009, 05:08 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 05:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16881:date=Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM:name=dk123)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dk123 @ Feb 9 2009, 04:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16869:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Feb 9 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16862:date=Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 9 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=16861:date=Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 9 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well, that's accurate, rok. I agree with that 100%. Stats can't tell you everything, and nothing replaces the joy of watching a ballgame.
But a few people on the site have turned it into a black-and-white thing, a line in the sand: if you bring stats into any baseball discussion, you must never watch the actual sport. Ludicrous as hell, yet some posters still cling to it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who? Everybody likes stats, it's just usually they don't tell the whole story.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It just seems to me from watching baseball and life in general that clutch has to exist. Just because stats use math, does not necessarily make them more valid than human observation. Statistical analysis is based on many assumptions(biases) that are explained away by invoking the law of large numbers. Unless the stats disagree with the person's opinions and then they are based on insufficient sample size.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can be pretty faulty.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Human observation can also be very accurate and statistical analysis can also be very faulty. I have never met a person who deals with statistics in the real world who does not take them with a grain of salt. If you come up with your premise first and then do the stats, how can it not be biased. That is the way it is in academics/science. Theory then data then statistical analysis to back it up. Not to say it is always wrong, but it tends to be biased.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sipes, I think that is true. Undeniably true.
But what about those times when the stat findings <i>contradict</i> your original theory? Wouldn't that actually strengthen your faith in the stats, because they actually went <i>against</i> your human biases?
Here's my baseball example: I wondered, <b>who is the clutchest guy in all of MLB?</b> Who has the rep, who have we all seen come through countless times?
My answer was Manny Ramirez. He bludgeoned the Cubs in the playoffs. He bludgeoned the eventual champion Phillies. He's a World Series MVP. To me, he really seems to slough off pressure, and come through. Ice-water in his veins.
And i don't think I'm alone...if you polled all baseball fans about this question, I would bet that Manny would be the #1 answer to the question "Who is the most clutch hitter in baseball?"
So then I thought, "what was the single most clutch situation of his career?" And the answer was easy...the late innings of Game 7 of the World Series. And lo and behold, he'd actually lived out that very situation! A perfect experiment!
So what took place? Eighth inning, one-run ballgame, <i>everything</i> on the line...
Manny strikes out.
But wait...the game goes to extra innings! The ultimate baseball fan's dream: an extra-inning, super intensity Game Seven.
So Manny comes up in the 10th inning, tie ballgame, man on base. The runner on base represents the game-winning, <i>World Series</i>-winning run! You want a clutch situation?
Manny strikes out.
Well, there goes my theory about Manny being "clutch." Done in by those darn ol' "statistics" again.
That, and the old "small sample size" thing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's what, back in 1997? He was a 25-year-old then.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->That's what, back in 1997? He was a 25-year-old then.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK, so clutchness is <b>not</b> an <i>inherent trait </i>that some guys like Jeter and Reggie just have in spades...it's something that "grows" with age. That's your story?
At age 25, Manny had just completed his 3rd straight full season with an OPS+ above 140 (for comparison, the last time the Cubs have had a player with an OPS+ that high, in even a <i>single</i> season, was back during D. Lee's monster year in 2005)...he was a superstar, and the best player on pennant-winning team. I fact, this was his <i>second</i> World Series, having led the Tribe to the '95 Series too. So he was hardly some unexperienced rook.
When Bobby Thomson hit his famous pennant-winning homer, he was 27. When Bill Mazeroski hit his World Series-winning blast in 1960, he was 23.
If Manny was truly "clutch," he would have won that Series for the Tribe with a timely hit.
But he didn't, because "clutchness" isn't an actual trait. Excellence is, and Manny has done well in other tight situations because he's an excellent hitter.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
|
