Jump to content

Our Friend Dave is no Prognosticator.


weams

Recommended Posts

I can't recall the last time I ever saw "Yankees" and "underrated" in the same sentence.

Sometimes you'll hear that Roy White didn't really get his due because of that five year run where the Yanks were under .500 four times in the late 60s. Mention that and the Alvaro Espinoza years to a Yanks fan and you'll likely get a tear-and-profanity laced tirade about how he can never catch a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes you long for the days when everything was just kind of made up and being wrong was totally unremarkable.

When everyone had a an opinion and they were all of equal value. And there was a Lobstah in every pot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes you long for the days when everything was just kind of made up and being wrong was totally unremarkable.

Makes me take take everything "proven" through statistics with a grain of salt. I remember after 20 innings of Bundy, there were statistical arguments that he'll never amount to anything because he's not "missing enough bats". Lol, how's that working out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me take take everything "proven" through statistics with a grain of salt. I remember after 20 innings of Bundy, there were statistical arguments that he'll never amount to anything because he's not "missing enough bats". Lol, how's that working out?

The thing is, everyone that uses advanced statistics will tell you to take it with a grain of salt. It is only the folks that don't like to use information that claim otherwise.

No one with half a brain goes to Vegas with the PETCO projections in hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, everyone that uses advanced statistics will tell you to take it with a grain of salt. It is only the folks that don't like to use information that claim otherwise.

No one with half a brain goes to Vegas with the PETCO projections in hand.

Dave would. He does believe his guesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me take take everything "proven" through statistics with a grain of salt. I remember after 20 innings of Bundy, there were statistical arguments that he'll never amount to anything because he's not "missing enough bats". Lol, how's that working out?

No,it does not make you question all stats. Just Dave's use of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, everyone that uses advanced statistics will tell you to take it with a grain of salt. It is only the folks that don't like to use information that claim otherwise.

No one with half a brain goes to Vegas with the PETCO projections in hand.

Believe it or not, I believe advanced stats are fine as long as those using them acknowledge that they can be flawed and aren't the end all and be all. So, we are more in the same page then it appears. But, if it helps, you can still pigeon hole me as an ignorant old guy with his head buried in the sand:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe it or not, I believe advanced stats are fine as long as those using them acknowledge that they can be flawed and aren't the end all and be all. So, we are more in the same page then it appears. But, if it helps, you can still pigeon hole me as an ignorant old guy with his head buried in the sand:)

I try and look past age. Lots of older folks are open to new ideas. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...