7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

[Dog]

Re: 7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

BLASPHEMY!


He's simply a winner.

Not only a winner, but he has the best intangibles of all time

[JBH3]

Yep, otherwise I could say something like the Phillies have owned Derek Lowe recently

Elitist stat snobs. It just "seemed" that way......too often it seems people on here have to flex their baseball referencing chops without being able to just arbitrarily discuss something. Its like conversation is only deemed valid if it is backed up by statistcal evidence which supports it or something.

Ok...so because you had some knowledge that Derek Lowe had not been "owned" by the Phillies you're supercool and can now make snide remarks. Awesome.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: 7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

Elitist stat snobs. It just "seemed" that way......too often it seems people on here have to flex their baseball referencing chops without being able to just arbitrarily discuss something. Its like conversation is only deemed valid if it is backed up by statistcal evidence which supports it or something.

Ok...so because you had some knowledge that Derek Lowe had not been "owned" by the Phillies you're supercool and can now make snide remarks. Awesome.

I dunno, I think if you're going to say something it should at least be true. No need to get all defensive when someone disagrees with what you said and points out why they disagree. That's how this started, and your tone is what brought out the "snide remarks".

[snepp]

Re: 7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

No one said everything has to be accompanied by statistical fact, but it's pretty poor form to whine about it after you've been proven wrong.

God forbid you simply acknowledge that you weren't even remotely accurate rather than getting your panties in a bunch and going on the defensive.





Oh, and FFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Tim.

[Dog]

Re: 7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

Elitist stat snobs. It just "seemed" that way......too often it seems people on here have to flex their baseball referencing chops without being able to just arbitrarily discuss something. Its like conversation is only deemed valid if it is backed up by statistcal evidence which supports it or something.

Ok...so because you had some knowledge that Derek Lowe had not been "owned" by the Phillies you're supercool and can now make snide remarks. Awesome.

Not really. Why discuss something that is statistically incorrect (Phillies owning Lowe)?

Would you want to discuss something if I said that Ryan Howard is the best offensive first basemen in baseball? No, because he isn't.

You don't need to get all worked up because you were proven wrong. Like Blzer said - he was glad to be proven wrong, not upset.

By the way, about the "backed up by stats" thing - not everything needs to be backed up by stats, but if you say something that is the opposite (or close to it) of what that stats show, the conversation won't go anywhere.

What I do when I feel like it "seems like so-and-so owns the [team]", I look up numbers to make sure I'm right.

For instance, when I was writing a game preview for the Phillies vs Lowe, I added in "The stats don't show it, but it seems like Lowe always shuts down the Phillies offense" because when I looked it up, the stats showed that he was good, but not great (as it seemed) against the Phillies over his entire career. I thought his ERA would be in the 2 range but it was in the 3 range.

Or when I was making a point that Ryan Howard's approach has changed since Greg Gross became the hitting coach, I looked it up and yep, his walks and strikeouts are up, but he's hitting less - a lot less.

Moral of the story is, when you want to make a statement, make sure it isn't totally against the numbers

[JBH3]

This was all just a test to see if anything I ever say in these threads gets attention .

End result, only when needed to be proven wrong. .....Carry on.

[TCM]

Re: 7/4 - 7/10 Game Discussion Thread

This was all just a test to see if anything I ever say in these threads gets attention .

End result, only when needed to be proven wrong. .....Carry on.

Someone needs attention.

[JBH3]

Someone needs attention.

Joke. 10 char