Real MLB Thread

[Cheeks]

#mathishard

So is coming up with all of those Counsell posts I didn't make you claimed I did.

Be sure to explain where I got it wrong on the "mathishard" part.

[Cheeks]

NM

I won’t argue just for the sake of arguing.
[/quote

It's ok.  I took my wife to dinner tonight, we had ESPN on in the car listening to the Yankees broadcast...she's a huge baseball fan.  They were talking about this topic and the broadcasters were poking holes in it regarding the pitching as well as weather. It made me smile.  The one guy was saying he did think the balls were falling a little flat, the very next batter for the Yankees hit a homerun which caused the play by play guy to rib him. 

[wadesworld]

So is coming up with all of those Counsell posts I didn't make you claimed I did.

Be sure to explain where I got it wrong on the "mathishard" part.

He explained it. You don’t understand. I’ll try to explain it. You won’t understand. Math is very hard for you.

Every piece of contact has an angle the ball is launched at and an exit velocity the ball exits off the bat at. Balls with the same exit velocity and launch angle are traveling shorter in the post season, despite warmer temperatures (which you incorrectly claimed was colder weather’s fault) than they were in the regular season. Quality of pitcher/pitch, ballpark dimensions, etc. don’t matter one iota to the discussion. Distance traveled compared to launch angle and exit velocity. It’s simple math. Which you don’t understand. It’s okay.

[Cheeks]

He explained it. You don’t understand. I’ll try to explain it. You won’t understand. Math is very hard for you.

Every piece of contact has an angle the ball is launched at and an exit velocity the ball exits off the bat at. Balls with the same exit velocity and launch angle are traveling shorter in the post season, despite warmer temperatures (which you incorrectly claimed was colder weather’s fault) than they were in the regular season. Quality of pitcher/pitch, ballpark dimensions, etc. don’t matter one iota to the discussion. Distance traveled compared to launch angle and exit velocity. It’s simple math. Which you don’t understand. It’s okay.

No, it really isn’t.  Weather Temperature, humidity, wind), etc all influence. Night games, day games, velocity of pitch, spin rate of pitch.   Some great counter arguments all over Internet today, including a few PhDs that properly argue the tools to determine bay speed, launch angle, etc are error prone just as radar guns measuring speed have a +/- of several mph.  With every variable comes less certainty.

Math isn’t hard, believing that the data is iron clad to come up with these results without factoring in error rates, weather, etc...is.  Thanks. 

[wadesworld]

No, it really isn’t.  Weather Temperature, humidity, wind), etc all influence. Night games, day games, velocity of pitch, spin rate of pitch.   Some great counter arguments all over Internet today, including a few PhDs that properly argue the tools to determine bay speed, launch angle, etc are error prone just as radar guns measuring speed have a +/- of several mph.  With every variable comes less certainty.

Math isn’t hard, believing that the data is iron clad to come up with these results without factoring in error rates, weather, etc...is.  Thanks.

Spin rate, velocity, etc. all contribute to...you guessed it, the exit velocity and launch angle.  Those are the two factors that matter here.

Weather has been...warmer.  So when you believed the weather would help your argument it was an all important factor.  When you found out the fact that the weather hurt your argument it became too small of a sample size to take into consideration.  Weird how that works.

[jsglow]

Chico’s is trying to destroy another baseball thread. I said I would end this thread before he made it unreadable again. We are getting close o that point.

Just get back on your meds and go away.

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

[🏀]

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

Yep, it’s beyond ignore at this point.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

OK, I will no longer reply to him nor will I call him out.  Completely ignore is what I will do.

[lawdog77]

OK, I will no longer reply to him nor will I call him out.  Completely ignore is what I will do.

For the love of ones higher ppwer, posters need to stop quoting him as well.

[Lennys Tap]

Lots of "Chico obsession" here. Where is Fluffy to call all of you guys out and claiming Chico is inhabiting a large part of your brains?

FWIW, Wades, Jockey, Glow and others are 100% correct on substance (math) here. Doesn't matter, of course. Chico will do what he always does - move the goal posts, obfuscate, change the argument, etc. - anything to not admit the obvious - that he is provably wrong. Sorry, there I go again. Fluffy will say I'm "obsessed" and that Chico inhabits a large place in my brain. Sorry.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Lots of "Chico obsession" here. Where is Fluffy to call all of you guys out and claiming Chico is inhabiting a large part of your brains?

FWIW, Wades, Jockey, Glow and others are 100% correct on substance (math) here. Doesn't matter, of course. Chico will do what he always does - move the goal posts, obfuscate, change the argument, etc. - anything to not admit the obvious - that he is provably wrong. Sorry, there I go again. Fluffy will say I'm "obsessed" and that Chico inhabits a large place in my brain. Sorry.

He does. It’s obvious. Stop responding to his every post

[Jockey]

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

It’s too bad. There are some really good discussions here before he destroys them.

At least he hasn’t destroyed your recruiting thread. That’s the first thing I check every day on Scoop.

[tower912]

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

I agree with this analysis. 

[Cheeks]

A Statistician weighed in on the thread on Twitter and MLB reddit.

Comparing 2430 MLB regular season games vs only 16 playoff games (when the article was released) is statistically laughable.  He / she used more appropriate words.  Statistical significance to compare the two cohorts is not appropriate and would require wild extrapolations.

[jesmu84]

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

Care to expand? What makes you think he's trying to destroy the board? That seems to imply intent, rather than just unknowingly doing it. Who are the others?

Most importantly, is there another online community you frequent more?

[wadesworld]

A Statistician weighed in on the thread on Twitter and MLB reddit.

Comparing 2430 MLB regular season games vs only 16 playoff games (when the article was released) is statistically laughable.  He / she used more appropriate words.  Statistical significance to compare the two cohorts is not appropriate and would require wild extrapolations.

So you were willing to argue your point despite the too small sample size...until you realized everyone knew you had it wrong. So now the argument is inconclusive due to the insignificant sample size.

Never change Cheeks (but please change usernames when this one, like 4 or 5 others of yours, get permabanned).

[Cheeks]

Not quite.  He's actually trying to destroy Scoop (along with a few others).  I come here far less often.  I'm sure others are the same.  It's a shame really.

I'm trying to destroy Scoop, give me a break Glow.  Absolutely not the case. 

[Cheeks]

Lots of "Chico obsession" here. Where is Fluffy to call all of you guys out and claiming Chico is inhabiting a large part of your brains?

FWIW, Wades, Jockey, Glow and others are 100% correct on substance (math) here. Doesn't matter, of course. Chico will do what he always does - move the goal posts, obfuscate, change the argument, etc. - anything to not admit the obvious - that he is provably wrong. Sorry, there I go again. Fluffy will say I'm "obsessed" and that Chico inhabits a large place in my brain. Sorry.

Statisticians, in fact, saying you are wrong on the math.

[Cheeks]

So you were willing to argue your point despite the too small sample size...until you realized everyone knew you had it wrong. So now the argument is inconclusive due to the insignificant sample size.

Never change Cheeks (but please change usernames when this one, like 4 or 5 others of yours, get permabanned).

My point remains and from the beginning, I said the small sample size was an issue...and so were the other issues.  It's been fun watching real statisticians, etc, take these ridiculous arguments to the woodshed on the internet.  Enough where the author has actually conceded on some points.  But in having a discussion, that isn't allowed?  To question those results, or is it because of who is questioning them? 

Where are all those Counsell posts you mentioned?  See, you were wrong, they don't exist...I call you out on it like you call me, and nothing. Interesting.

[wadesworld]

My point remains and from the beginning, I said the small sample size was an issue...and so were the other issues.  It's been fun watching real statisticians, etc, take these ridiculous arguments to the woodshed on the internet.  Enough where the author has actually conceded on some points.  But in having a discussion, that isn't allowed?  To question those results, or is it because of who is questioning them? 

Where are all those Counsell posts you mentioned?  See, you were wrong, they don't exist...I call you out on it like you call me, and nothing. Interesting.

See the 2018 MLB thread.  You're not this stupid.  But you would rather appear to be this stupid than admit, "Hey, I don't know what I'm talking about, that's my bad."

[Cheeks]

See the 2018 MLB thread.  You're not this stupid.  But you would rather appear to be this stupid than admit, "Hey, I don't know what I'm talking about, that's my bad."

Can you provide a link for me, that would be great.  I am not going to search for it and since it was constant weighing in, shouldn’t take you long.  Much appreciated.

[wadesworld]

Can you provide a link for me, that would be great.  I am not going to search for it and since it was constant weighing in, shouldn’t take you long.  Much appreciated.

Lol shouldn’t take long but you don’t want to put in the work. You don’t have time for Scoop, you’re going to limit your appearances like you’ve said you’d be doing since your first post as “Cheeks.”

5,000 posts later...

[MU82]

I am again going to try to ignore this irritant who has been permanently banned multiple times.

It isn't easy, as he is constantly quoted, and he lies and/or misrepresents what so many say that we feel compelled to set the record straight. But I am going to try.

[ATL MU Warrior]

I am again going to try to ignore this irritant who has been permanently banned multiple times.

It isn't easy, as he is constantly quoted, and he lies and/or misrepresents what so many say that we feel compelled to set the record straight. But I am going to try.

See Wades, this was a simple thing to do.

[tower912]

So, Correa had himself a game.      Will St. Louis be able to take the curse off their bats on the road?   You know, baseball.