Peter Keating: O's Rebound a Mirage

[Sports Guy]

That was not the poll. The poll is - can the current team be a .600 win team next year? There has been no poll on whether this is a .600 win team now.

Even I had to vote no, the current team can't sustain a .600 preformance level because the team will have more injuries then they currently have. If injuries are what you mean by luck then I agree with you.

But yet you are saying that if we brought back this team and they were healthy, that you think we are a 600 team and you are just flat out wrong.

[wildcard]

But yet you are saying that if we brought back this team and they were healthy, that you think we are a 600 team and you are just flat out wrong.

Opinions are like noses, everyone has one. In this case no one will be proven wrong because this same team will never play in 2011.

[Frobby]

For all the people crying over this article, I find it funny that in a poll of about 120 OHers, that only 2 think this is a 600 team...That tells me that people do believe we have been lucky on some levels and that this team can't sustain this over 162 games.

So, what exactly is the issue again?

There are a couple of things. First, the thread title suggests that the author is saying that the entire improvement is a "mirage." That isn't true, and "mirage" is an awfully pejorative word.

Second thing -- I really don't think of what is happening right now as "luck." A good hitter might hit .250 one month and .350 the next. That doesn't mean he's "lucky" when he is hitting .350, it means he's hitting the ball better. I am not saying that there is zero "luck" involved, but I would never say that variations in W-L or stats are mostly the result of luck.

[Sports Guy]

Opinions are like noses, everyone has one. In this case no one will be proven wrong because this same team will never play in 2011.

I am not trying to prove anything...I am just trying to get you to give an actual answer...You either believe that this team, when healthy, would win 98+ games or you don't. So, which is it?(or are you going to continue to avoid the question?)

[SrMeowMeow]

I am not trying to prove anything...I am just trying to get you to give an actual answer...You either believe that this team, when healthy, would win 98+ games or you don't. So, which is it?(or are you going to continue to avoid the question?)

It's not worth arguing with someone who's just not approaching things with the same sincerity.

[wildcard]

I am not trying to prove anything...I am just trying to get you to give an actual answer...You either believe that this team, when healthy, would win 98+ games or you don't. So, which is it?(or are you going to continue to avoid the question?)

Asked and answered in another thread.

So if the O's do something for 2 months can the do the same for 6 months with good health. There is a good chance they could. They would have to prove they couldn't. Buck has gotten them to believe they can win. Expect they should win. That is a very dangerous team.

However, there is not way to go into next season expecting to be has healthy as they are now for a whole season. That is why they need to add more quality players this winter.

[SrMeowMeow]

There are a couple of things. First, the thread title suggests that the author is saying that the entire improvement is a "mirage." That isn't true, and "mirage" is an awfully pejorative word.

Second thing -- I really don't think of what is happening right now as "luck." A good hitter might hit .250 one month and .350 the next. That doesn't mean he's "lucky" when he is hitting .350, it means he's hitting the ball better. I am not saying that there is zero "luck" involved, but I would never say that variations in W-L or stats are mostly the result of luck.

I agree, sometimes people say "luck" when they mean "expected variation" or something. Hitters actually being better or worse at different times is factored into our estimate of their true talent. A guy who hits .300 for 10 seasons has many legitimate cold and hot streaks in that time - times where he's locked in, and times where he's flailing. They average out to something very close to his true talent.

However, often luck is just luck. Sometimes home runs blow out of the park, sometimes they blow in. Sometimes your balls in play find gaps and holes, and sometimes they find fielders.

Luckily, you can adjust for both. Maybe I should get "Regression" tattooed on my forehead.

[wildcard]

It's not worth arguing with someone who's just not approaching things with the same sincerity.

I beg your pardon.

The quality or state of being sincere : honesty of mind : freedom from hypocrisy

If you are questioning my honesty, I take issue with that.

[SrMeowMeow]

I beg your pardon.

The quality or state of being sincere : honesty of mind : freedom from hypocrisy

If you are questioning my honesty, I take issue with that.

Yes, I think you're arguing a bad point because your pride is involved. But if you sincerely believe that the only thing keeping the Orioles from playing .600 ball this season was injuries, then I question your intelligence.

[DrungoHazewood]

There are a couple of things. First, the thread title suggests that the author is saying that the entire improvement is a "mirage." That isn't true, and "mirage" is an awfully pejorative word.

Second thing -- I really don't think of what is happening right now as "luck." A good hitter might hit .250 one month and .350 the next. That doesn't mean he's "lucky" when he is hitting .350, it means he's hitting the ball better. I am not saying that there is zero "luck" involved, but I would never say that variations in W-L or stats are mostly the result of luck.

I know a lot of people hate the word luck. They like to think that people mostly control their outcomes. It's kind of anti-American to suggest that someone could work hard, do their best, do everything right, and still have bad luck do them in.

But I think you have to say that can happen. Take a simulation of baseball. A really good one like Diamond Mind, or OOTP set up right, and you put 30 identical teams into the sim. All with identical ratings, stats, attributes, etc. Play them all in a balanced 162-game schedule with injuries turned off, so everybody stays healthy all year. You'll get teams that win 70 games, and teams that win 90 games. Occasionally you'll get a team win 95 or 100, or 60, 65. And if you're telling me that wouldn't happen in real life, I'll have to disagree.

[DrungoHazewood]

Yes, I think you're arguing a bad point because your pride is involved. But if you sincerely believe that the only thing keeping the Orioles from playing .600 ball this season was injuries, then I question your intelligence.

I'm not going to question his intelligence. I have no reason to think wildcard isn't a smart guy. He just doesn't care that the evidence doesn't support his conclusions. I think most of us have subjects where we are kind of like that.

[SrMeowMeow]

I'm not going to question his intelligence. I have no reason to think wildcard isn't a smart guy. He just doesn't care that the evidence doesn't support his conclusions. I think most of us have subjects where we are kind of like that.

Sorry, I just can't respect that kind of thinking. We're not just talking about ambiguity here - we're talking about evidence that is directly and factually contradictory.

EDIT: That's all I'll say about this. I don't want to stray into personal attacks, but if you enter a debate with the mindset that you're not going to keep an open mind and approach things based on facts and evidence, what's the point? I'm stepping out of the thread, though.

[Sports Guy]

Asked and answered in another thread.

So if the O's do something for 2 months can the do the same for 6 months with good health. There is a good chance they could. They would have to prove they couldn't. Buck has gotten them to believe they can win. Expect they should win. That is a very dangerous team.

However, there is not way to go into next season expecting to be has healthy as they are now for a whole season. That is why they need to add more quality players this winter.

That's not an answer...You are dancing around the question and acting as if you are giving me an answer...Its a simple yes or no.

[wildcard]

Yes, I think you're arguing a bad point because your pride is involved. But if you sincerely believe that the only thing keeping the Orioles from playing .600 ball this season was injuries, then I question your intelligence.

My pride? What do my pride have to do with this discussion. I have pride in many things outside on this site but it doesn't apply here.

I still take issue with you questioning my honesty. I would never do that to you.

The O's went through a learning stage for many of the young players that caused them to not be able to play .600. Injuries are certainly a reason as was the management turmoil on the club.

But that is in past now that Buck in on board and many of the young players have matured.. I think the O's will be capable of .600 next year with a few additions.

[bej6789]

Who is this guy?

The FPP of the Orioles doesn't match the UZR when the IDQ is below the TDS of the starters between innings 3 and 9.

Formula's are fun.

But how about this formula: Orioles score more then opponent = win.

Who. Cares.