Cellar Dwellers?

[Satyr3206]

This may be the dumbest thing I've read in a while. Don't you have to finish last to be a cellar dweller?

http://www.masnsports.com/steve-melewski/2017/02/notes-on-luis-matos-pecota-the-wbc-matt-wieters-and-more.html

 

 

[backwardsk]

I read it as "cellar dwellers" they pick perform better.  Obviously a team that you pick to win 71 games has more of a chance to beat that projection than a team that you project to win 90 games.

It was really a weak defense of their poor track record with the Orioles.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

I read it as "cellar dwellers" they pick perform better.  Obviously a team that you pick to win 71 games has more of a chance to beat that projection than a team that you project to win 90 games.

It was really a weak defense of their poor track record with the Orioles.

Yes this.  The teams they project as cellar dwellers.

[Satyr3206]

The Orioles have won the most games in the AL East in the last 5 years. To say "Cellar Dweller" and Orioles in the same sentence is ridiculous.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Satyr3206 said:

The Orioles have won the most games in the AL East in the last 5 years. To say "Cellar Dweller" and Orioles in the same sentence is ridiculous.

Cellar Dwellers in their projections.

 

[Satyr3206]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Cellar Dwellers in their projections.

 

I understand that. I also understand that if most people were that proficient in their jobs they would be unemployed.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Satyr3206 said:

I understand that. I also understand that if most people were that proficient in their jobs they would be unemployed.

Did you bother to check the accuracy of their projections of the other 29 teams before making that statement or is a sample size of 3% sufficient for you?

[Satyr3206]

I read them every year. They are rarely right.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Satyr3206 said:

I read them every year. They are rarely right.

Wouldn't it be pretty staggering if they were right?

We know that their is a wide variance in the possible outcomes from equally talented teams.

Would seem to me that not doing that great a job at something that is nearly impossible to do isn't a bad thing.  Particularly when these projections are not their main function.

[Satyr3206]

Projections are their business. That's what they do. And very poorly.

You would think just by dumb luck they would be right some of the time.

 

 

[Frobby]

On 2/9/2017 at 11:08 AM, Can_of_corn said:

Wouldn't it be pretty staggering if they were right?

We know that their is a wide variance in the possible outcomes from equally talented teams.

Would seem to me that not doing that great a job at something that is nearly impossible to do isn't a bad thing.  Particularly when these projections are not their main function.

It does beg the question, if making half-decent projections using a mathematical model is basically impossible, then why keep publishing the projections year after year?

And the answer is pretty simple: because there are a sufficient number of people out there who find the projections interesting enough to pay to have access to them, and people who like to debate them.    So, they keep doing them.    And if some people feel those projections are so lacking in credibility that they don't want to purchase accesss to them or even discuss them, that's fine.     Don't participate.