The Biggest Fallacy: We Need a 1B or DH

[murrayfan420]

So what? Just because you are speculating on "empirical evidence" doesn't mean you know what Huff will do next year any more than I do. Big deal. I say he won't dramatically fall off. I say he won't likely do better, but neither will Texeira. You want to bet on it?

hahah, I love how empirical evidence is in quotes like it is some made up thing. These "facts" you young kids talk about these days are crazy!

[SilentJames]

And Texira could fall down, break his hip, develop arithitis like Belle and never be the same. So much for using the past to predict the future. That is why you never break the bank on any one player, especially if you are a smaller payrolled team like the Orioles. Peter Angelos learned this lesson the hard way with Albert Belle.

You can overlearn a lesson too. How many great players have the Orioles passed on because of being gunshy due to the Belle disaster.

I was in a horrible car accident when I was sixteen, almost died, did I never drive again because of the risk? Huff could just as easily have the exact same things happen to him, that is such a useless argument.

[JTrea81]

You have no way of knowing that Huff won't out produce Texeria next season. None, nada, zilch. All you are doing is speculating. And you could very well be quite wrong.

Huff won't be on the team in 2010 and that's all that matters. We need a long term solution for 1B and having a player like Tex at 1B allows to have weaker offensive players at crucial defensive positions like SS.

Huff may be fine at 1B for 2009, but then what? Signing Tex just makes it easier to fill the other IF positions.

[Old#5fan]

Why would I want to bet on it? If you think gathering personal and historical information to try and determine the probability of getting a certain performance out of a player is a useless act, that's fine. Don't do it.

If you were offered a chance to win $500 if you could guess a number between 1 and 20, would you turn down the opportunity to have five of the non-winning numbers revealed to you simply because all speculation is created equal?

Or is it true that all speculation is NOT created equal?

Speculation is just that. Nobody is a fortune teller here that I know of.

[Old#5fan]

hahah, I love how empirical evidence is in quotes like it is some made up thing. These "facts" you young kids talk about these days are crazy!

Empirical evidence is only of much value in measuring the past. For example how good would your empirical evidence been at predicting Sean Taylor's interception totals this season had you used it two years ago?

[Lucky Jim]

Speculation is just that. Nobody is a fortune teller here that I know of.

You didn't answer my question. Is it the same level of speculation if you're choosing a single number from 20 or a single number from 15?

And, to be truthful, there are different kinds of speculation. For instance:

2: to assume a business risk in hope of gain ; especially : to buy or sell in expectation of profiting from market fluctuations

Or:

1: to take to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence

I'm working on the first. You're working on the latter. But I'm not going to get into this asinine argument with you again. If you want to believe probabilities and risk calculations are bunk, feel free. Obviously, however, it would be very silly of you to own even a single insurance policy.

[Old#5fan]

You can overlearn a lesson too. How many great players have the Orioles passed on because of being gunshy due to the Belle disaster.

I was in a horrible car accident when I was sixteen, almost died, did I never drive again because of the risk? Huff could just as easily have the exact same things happen to him, that is such a useless argument.

How about Glen Davis? Was there a lesson learned in that? I can only imagine what would happen on this board if the Orioles vastly overpaid and signed Texeira and something happend to him and he physically was done like Davis and Belle. It would not be pretty.

[Old#5fan]

You didn't answer my question. Is it the same level of speculation if your choosing a single number from 20 or a single number from 15?

And, to be truthful, there are different kinds of speculation. For instance:

Or:

I'm working on the first. You're working on the latter.

What you have typed here is a whole lot of extra verbage to essentially state the concept of "playing the odds," which of course any moron can grasp. However, when it comes to human beings (and baseball players qualify) I find any odds of predicting future performance totally unreliable when applied to a singular player.

[clapdiddy]

How about Glen Davis? Was there a lesson learned in that? I can only imagine what would happen on this board if the Orioles vastly overpaid and signed Texeira and something happend to him and he physically was done like Davis and Belle. It would not be pretty.

So, you are saying we should stay away from any high-priced talent?

[Old#5fan]

So, you are saying we should stay away from any high-priced talent?

No, more like "over priced talent."

Put it this way, I am not nearly as enamored with Texeira as a player as what seems to be the norm here on the OH. Same with Nick Markakis. I just don't see it. No way either of these two are worth huge long term contracts.

[SilentJames]

Empirical evidence is only of much value in measuring the past. For example how good would your empirical evidence been at predicting Sean Taylor's interception totals this season had you used it two years ago?

Wait? WHAT?! WHAT!

Seriously, this is silly. You can't be serious, you have to be some sort of troll.

Okay, you see dark clouds overhead and hear thunder in the distance. From past experience that tells you you should probably postpone your kite-flying getaway with your kids.

Now, the storm could blow over. It could be raining and you might NOT get struck by lightning.

You might get struck by lightning and survive!

You don't know, but you do know that it is a safer bet to not fly a kite in a thunderstorm because of past experiences.

Huff's past tells us that him repeating his 2008 numbers is not very likely. Now he COULD be better, he could be A LOT better - we don't know. The safer bet is a guy like Tex who is much more likely to put up similar numbers for a much longer period of time than Aubrey Huff.

Could Tex get shot and killed like Sean Taylor (real classy by the way) yeah. But so could anybody at anytime. If you are honestly saying that we can't rely on Tex's numbers vs Huff's numbers because Tex might get shot then you sir are suffering from a form of delusion that I don;t think can be categorized by conventional means.

I would direct you towards your local department of health and human services, they can help you more than I.

[bluedog]

And Texira could fall down, break his hip, develop arithitis like Belle and never be the same. So much for using the past to predict the future. That is why you never break the bank on any one player, especially if you are a smaller payrolled team like the Orioles. Peter Angelos learned this lesson the hard way with Albert Belle.

The O's only have 27 million committed in salary in 2010. As recently at 2007 they had a payroll of 93 million. Factoring in MASN and inflation, it seems reasonable to think the O's should have room to go to 110 - 120 million in payroll by 2010 if needed. That's a NET of 83 - 93 million available to spend.

Even if they went 18 million a season for Tex, they'd still have the equivalent of the entire current payroll (65 - 75 M) available for other players and contract extensions. So I'm not sure how signing Tex is "breaking the bank".

Additionally, 18 million a season is likely to be the typical contract for players of Tex's caliber in 4 to 5 years - heck at the rate salaries are going up, by 2015, having a player of Tex's caliber at 18 million a season might well be seen as a bargain.

So I reject the idea that an 8 year, 18 million per year contract is some kind of financial suicide for the O's. And comparing Albert Belle (a player with known physical and behavioral issues at the time he was signed) to Tex seems strange to me. If you are going to use someone to compare to Tex, why not use ARod who signed a mega-deal and has gone on to earn every penny of it?

[clapdiddy]

What you have typed here is a whole lot of extra verbage to essentially state the concept of "playing the odds," which of course any moron can grasp. However, when it comes to human beings (and baseball players qualify) I find any odds of predicting future performance totally unreliable when applied to a singular player.

I don't know what to say about this one. If that's the case, then we should never, ever sign anyone to any more than a one-year deal. There's ALWAYS a chance that someone could get hurt or under-perform for a season.

[Lucky Jim]

What you have typed here is a whole lot of extra verbage to essentially state the concept of "playing the odds," which of course any moron can grasp. However, when it comes to human beings (and baseball players qualify) I find any odds of predicting future performance totally unreliable when applied to a singular player.

That's just another one of your problems. You think in terms of single players and not in terms of the organizational big picture.

[SilentJames]

How about Glen Davis? Was there a lesson learned in that? I can only imagine what would happen on this board if the Orioles vastly overpaid and signed Texeira and something happend to him and he physically was done like Davis and Belle. It would not be pretty.

Yeah, but what about Frank Robinson? What about Rick Dempsey? What about Adam Jones?

I mean trades et al work both ways. You can't just look at the bad deals and say THAT WAS A BAD DEAL WE MUST NEVER DO THAT AGAIN!