PDA

View Full Version : BP: The Last Straw (aka I'm done)


Mr. White Sox
04-11-2006, 07:06 PM
BP Hitlist (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4960), with teams like the Devil Rays ahead of the White Sox. We know they're a biased website, but this seals the deal (from the 'email' link):

Dear Jerkass: Add me to the list of readers who think your Hit List has totally jumped the shark. The 2005 White Sox proved themselves to be Clutch Gods, and Ozzie Guillen practices santeria, so a return to the World Series is practically guaranteed, unlike what your stupid PECOTA system says. Pull your head out of a book and watch a ballgame some time, you moron; I suggest tuning in to hear Hawk Harrelson tell it like it is, because he's a genius. In closing, get bent. Sincerely -- [Insert Name Here]

I will no longer look at BP and their statistical system as anything worth considering; if they're not willing to adapt to obvious flaws in their system, I'm not willing to do anything but mock them

Ol' No. 2
04-11-2006, 07:14 PM
Trust us, it's Ed Sprague (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/spraged02.shtml) you need, not Jim Thome (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/thomeji01.php).:rolling: You can't make up stuff like this.

MarySwiss
04-11-2006, 07:19 PM
Interesting. I was in Borders today and I saw the BP 2006 book. I just started to laugh. Honestly. People looked at me as though they thought I was insane. (Been getting a lot of that lately!) :cool:

Chisox003
04-11-2006, 07:32 PM
A year ago, this pisses me off. It frustrated me.

Now, :rolleyes:

See ya in October after we only win 88% of the division. :bandance:

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2006, 07:43 PM
According to them, only 3 teams will win 90 games this year. 7 teams won 90 games last year. 10 in 2004, 8 in 2003, 11 in 2002, 8 in 2001, 7 in 2000, 9 in 1999, 6 in 1998, etc, etc

They are just being ridiculous to think there will be less 90 win teams than at any point in the last 15 years (or probably further, I got tired of checking).

Thome's Homey
04-11-2006, 10:30 PM
We're supposed to go 81-81, according to PECOTA. God, I hate BP. That email link pissed me off, too. My subscription is being cancelled at the end of the month, for sure. I've had enough of their Billy-Beane-loving ****.

Soxfanspcu11
04-11-2006, 10:41 PM
We're supposed to go 81-81, according to PECOTA. God, I hate BP. That email link pissed me off, too. My subscription is being cancelled at the end of the month, for sure. I've had enough of their Billy-Beane-loving ****.
dude, edit your post, your going to get banned. Just type the word and let the fliter do it's thing.

Thome's Homey
04-11-2006, 10:44 PM
I just sent this to their customer service department via their "contact us" link at the bottom of the page:


http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4960

In the above page, there is an email link (in the White Sox section). Resident moron Jay Jaffe took quite a shot at White Sox fans everywhere. You know, some of us take what BP says about our team with a grain of salt and continue to give you money. Now you expect us to pay you after you've insulted the fans directly? This quiet fellow isn't standing for that. When my subscription expires, I will not renew it...Ever. I suspect that there are others like me that will take the same action. How is it good business to alienate the entire fan base of a major league team? Shame on you, Baseball Prospectus.

Sincerely,
A soon-to-be-former Subscriber

beckett21
04-11-2006, 10:46 PM
I can't understand why anyone would give these idiots any of their hard-earned money. I'm now dumber for having read that.

Soxfanspcu11
04-11-2006, 10:51 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't these the same "experts" that have the Sox chances of winning the central division in 2005 at 88% or something??

Also, ThomesHomey, you got on that quick! Nice job! Just do that from now on, otherwise you will have to take a few days off.

Tragg
04-11-2006, 11:02 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't these the same "experts" that have the Sox chances of winning the central division in 2005 at 88% or something??

Also, ThomesHomey, you got on that quick! Nice job! Just do that from now on, otherwise you will have to take a few days off. Yes, they still call Cleveland the best team in baseball in 2005.
I do think that they said we were the best team in the Central in 2004....that's what a lot of blowout wins and 2 run losses do for you.....that sophisticated margin of victory pecota methodology

I will say that the article is intended to be light hearted and funny...not serious analysis. No reason to take it seriously. That Ed Sprage/Jim Thome comment shows that the intent is humor.

SouthSide_HitMen
04-11-2006, 11:18 PM
I will say that the article is intended to be light hearted and funny...not serious analysis. No reason to take it seriously. That Ed Sprage/Jim Thome comment shows that the intent is humor.

I don't think so.

Here is their PECOTA projections for Thome:

357 AB, .263 BA, 66 R, 22 HR, 62 RBI, 0 SB

Here are some of their idiotic White Sox projections (which led PECOTA to pick them 4th and BP writers to collectively pick them 3rd).

3B Joe Crede 464 AB, .259 BA, 56 R, 20 HR, 68 RBI
RF Jermaine Dye 466 AB, .264 BA, 67 R, 22 HR, 73 RBI, 6 SB

SP Jose Contreras 180 IP, 4.39 ERA, 1.33 Ratio, 10 Wins
SP Freddy Garcia 200 IP, 4.32 ERA, 1.34 Ratio, 11 Wins
SP Mark Buehrle 225 IP, 4.10 ERA, 1.29 Ratio, 13 Wins
RP Bobby Jenks 55 IP, 4.26 ERA, 1.48 Ratio, 3 Wins, 22 Saves

My one time subscription (bought before I ever came here) is done and I am very happy.

Tragg
04-11-2006, 11:24 PM
I don't think so.

Here is their PECOTA projections for Thome:

357 AB, .263 BA, 66 R, 22 HR, 62 RBI, 0 SB

Here are some of their idiotic White Sox projections (which led PECOTA to pick them 4th and BP writers to collectively pick them 3rd).

3B Joe Crede 464 AB, .259 BA, 56 R, 20 HR, 68 RBI
RF Jermaine Dye 466 AB, .264 BA, 67 R, 22 HR, 73 RBI, 6 SB

SP Jose Contreras 180 IP, 4.39 ERA, 1.33 Ratio, 10 Wins
SP Freddy Garcia 200 IP, 4.32 ERA, 1.34 Ratio, 11 Wins
SP Mark Buehrle 225 IP, 4.10 ERA, 1.29 Ratio, 13 Wins
RP Bobby Jenks 55 IP, 4.26 ERA, 1.48 Ratio, 3 Wins, 22 Saves

My one time subscription (bought before I ever came here) is done and I am very happy.
I'm talking about that specific article in which we're ranked below Tampa. It's meant to be funny.

I know that their statistics say we'll win 81 or so games....but look at the bright side - it's a 10 game improvement from their projection last year
Their projections are ridiculously inaccurate (as I said, they said after 2004 was over, that we were the best team in the central, which was ridiculous) - and even more ridiculous is that they never question their methods, only look for exuses, coincidences, luck, etc.

Tragg
04-11-2006, 11:26 PM
sorry - double.

Thome's Homey
04-11-2006, 11:35 PM
The author sent me a response...Likely a ready-made form one that he'll send everyone who complains. I think he's full of crap and I'm still cancelling.

Dear Jason,

It's with great regret that I read your email. I'm sorry to see that you took such offense at what was supposed to be a harmless bit of fun lampooning the rather formulaic overreactions of a few White Sox fans who sent me emails -- some of which didn't exactly uphold the positive spirit of repartee I've come to appreciate from BP's readership - - in response to my last Hit List. If so, I apologize profusely and sincerely.

While I suspected my little stunt might raise a few hackles, I hoped that our readers could share a laugh at the idea of someone getting all blustery and irate over a preseason ranking, and at the idea of someone taking the trouble to code a ready-made email at the click of a button. Judging by the response I've received, at least some did. I am sorry that you were not among them.

I have a great deal of respect for what the White Sox accomplished last year, and I can appreciate the joy their fans felt upon their triumph. I also think that the preseason ranking which provoked such ire -- a ranking that is a function of our forecasting systems, not of my personal tastes, by the way -- underestimates them for some of the same reasons last year's system did. Check our staff picks and you'll see I chose them for the AL Wild Card. Despite the few bad apples that sent me emails in response to last week's list, I did have thoughtful dialogues with several White Sox fans as well, and hold the collective Sox fanbase in high regard.

I enjoy watching the way the White Sox have confounded our predictions because it makes us ask "why?" and actually learn something from it. I found Nate Silver's essay on the team in BP06 to be the best in the book, for my money, and came away having learned much. I'm sure many of our readers, White Sox fans or not, did as well.

I'm blathering on here, Jason, because I feel guilty for having dampened your pleasure in our product to the point that you'd as soon be rid of it. Again, I apologize. I do hope you'll take the time between now and when your subscription expires to reconsider. There are some fantastic writers and thinkers at BP (trust me, I don't count myself among them) and even if you choose never to read the Hit List again, I hope you find enough value in what we offer to remain a subscriber.

Sincerely,

Jay Jaffe
Author, Baseball Prospectus

beckett21
04-11-2006, 11:39 PM
The author sent me a response...Likely a ready-made form one that he'll send everyone who complains. I think he's full of crap and I'm still cancelling.


I have no doubt that's a canned response. Looks like they were ready for the Sox Army. Idiots.

SouthSide_HitMen
04-11-2006, 11:42 PM
but look at the bright side - it's a 10 game improvement from their projection last year.

My bright side is my one time subscription expired and it didn't automatically renew (like MLB.com). I guess Oakland (who of course will win the World Series each and every year) and Boston fans can keep them in business.

Will Carroll provides injury reports and analysis which is better than what we get from MLB (such as the lies coming out of Cubs and Dodgers camps this Spring about the health of Prior and Gagne) and is the only person worth reading on the site (IMO). He doesn't provide any statistical analysis, VORP, NERF, TANG or anything else.

I also think that the preseason ranking which provoked such ire -- a ranking that is a function of our forecasting systems, not of my personal tastes, by the way -- underestimates them for some of the same reasons last year's system did.

The definition of insanity is to repeat the same behavior (or calculations) over and over and expect different results. Your predictions are wrong every year (they literally picked the A's or Red Sox to win the World Series each year for the past several years) and yet you continue to peddle these results, even though you admit you were wrong last year and will probably be wrong this year and beyond (and you do not adjust the system even though you know it is wrong).

Thome's Homey
04-11-2006, 11:45 PM
Will Carroll provides injury reports and analysis which is better than what we get from MLB

That's how they got my money. The only BP feature I put any faith in at all is the "Under the Knife" series. I have seen him do some silliness not related to injuries, but I ignore it for the sake of the excellent information.

Tragg
04-11-2006, 11:52 PM
It's also one of the few publications in which you can read an article written by a genuine transvestite. That's worth one month of subscription alone.


I like it for the winter meetings. That's about it. Not that they are terribly skilled at it...they still don't the value of throwing in an extra prospect to get the trader to pick up the salary.

voodoochile
04-12-2006, 01:33 AM
The author sent me a response...Likely a ready-made form one that he'll send everyone who complains. I think he's full of crap and I'm still cancelling.

Dear Jason,

It's with great regret that I read your email. I'm sorry to see that you took such offense at what was supposed to be a harmless bit of fun lampooning the rather formulaic overreactions of a few White Sox fans who sent me emails -- some of which didn't exactly uphold the positive spirit of repartee I've come to appreciate from BP's readership - - in response to my last Hit List. If so, I apologize profusely and sincerely.

While I suspected my little stunt might raise a few hackles, I hoped that our readers could share a laugh at the idea of someone getting all blustery and irate over a preseason ranking, and at the idea of someone taking the trouble to code a ready-made email at the click of a button. Judging by the response I've received, at least some did. I am sorry that you were not among them.

I have a great deal of respect for what the White Sox accomplished last year, and I can appreciate the joy their fans felt upon their triumph. I also think that the preseason ranking which provoked such ire -- a ranking that is a function of our forecasting systems, not of my personal tastes, by the way -- underestimates them for some of the same reasons last year's system did. Check our staff picks and you'll see I chose them for the AL Wild Card. Despite the few bad apples that sent me emails in response to last week's list, I did have thoughtful dialogues with several White Sox fans as well, and hold the collective Sox fanbase in high regard.

I enjoy watching the way the White Sox have confounded our predictions because it makes us ask "why?" and actually learn something from it. I found Nate Silver's essay on the team in BP06 to be the best in the book, for my money, and came away having learned much. I'm sure many of our readers, White Sox fans or not, did as well.

I'm blathering on here, Jason, because I feel guilty for having dampened your pleasure in our product to the point that you'd as soon be rid of it. Again, I apologize. I do hope you'll take the time between now and when your subscription expires to reconsider. There are some fantastic writers and thinkers at BP (trust me, I don't count myself among them) and even if you choose never to read the Hit List again, I hope you find enough value in what we offer to remain a subscriber.

Sincerely,

Jay Jaffe
Author, Baseball Prospectus

Translation: Oh god please don't cancel. I might actually have to get a job if enough people stop reading my blathering nonsense. Come on, keep those checks coming. I really really need the money. I mean I totally sucked at stocking shelves...

Realist
04-12-2006, 04:36 AM
The author sent me a response...Likely a ready-made form one that he'll send everyone who complains. I think he's full of crap and I'm still cancelling.



I got the same letter, but for whatever reason, he also sent me a 3x5 glossy - no autograph though. :(:

http://www.badtasteadvertising.com/images/crap/propellerhat.jpg

Flight #24
04-12-2006, 10:34 AM
The definition of insanity is to repeat the same behavior (or calculations) over and over and expect different results. Your predictions are wrong every year (they literally picked the A's or Red Sox to win the World Series each year for the past several years) and yet you continue to peddle these results, even though you admit you were wrong last year and will probably be wrong this year and beyond (and you do not adjust the system even though you know it is wrong).

It's not just insanity, it's arrogant insanity. As in "I know the Sox officially clinched the division based on MLB's tiebreakers, but my system is better, so I'll still rate them as having an 88% chance at the ALC title".

All because........MLB's system that head to head results and actually playing each other might be relevant in determining which team is better. FOR SHAME cries the BP-crew, that's obviously a small sample size! Thus H2H results are meaningless, as are the actual playoffs in determining the best team.

Oh yeah, and WHEN you score runs doesn't count, winning 10-1 and losing 1-0 is actually great because your run differential is 10-2, so you must be a great team rather than a .500 one.

SouthSide_HitMen
04-12-2006, 12:15 PM
It's not just insanity, it's arrogant insanity. As in "I know the Sox officially clinched the division based on MLB's tiebreakers, but my system is better, so I'll still rate them as having an 88% chance at the ALC title".

All because........MLB's system that head to head results and actually playing each other might be relevant in determining which team is better. FOR SHAME cries the BP-crew, that's obviously a small sample size! Thus H2H results are meaningless, as are the actual playoffs in determining the best team.

Oh yeah, and WHEN you score runs doesn't count, winning 10-1 and losing 1-0 is actually great because your run differential is 10-2, so you must be a great team rather than a .500 one.

I would chalk up the 88% projection to laziness for not updating the damn thing before they looked even more pathetic (though I wouldn't be surprised if a several BP staffers were convinced the 88% projection was still valid after that warm Autumn day in Detroit when the White Sox clinched the AL Central while the best team in baseball choked for the remainder of the week).

Flight #24
04-12-2006, 12:20 PM
I would chalk up the 88% projection to laziness for not updating the damn thing before they looked even more pathetic (though I wouldn't be surprised if a several BP staffers were convinced the 88% projection was still valid after that warm Autumn day in Detroit when the White Sox clinched the AL Central while the best team in baseball choked for the remainder of the week).except that they actually took the time to make the snarky comment on their website instead of just updating the projection.

My assumption would be that when you have a model that contradicts reality, at the very least you'd say something like "Hey, the model doesn't factor in MLB tiebreakers, so the 88% you see is obviously meaningless" rather than what they DID say, which was basically "MLB's method is inferior to ours, so we'll continue to say that Cleveland is the better team".

jackbrohamer
04-12-2006, 12:47 PM
BP's hardcover book used to feature who they felt were "up and coming" players. They had Richard Hildago and Josh Phelps on the only 2 issues I ever read. So they are literally NEVER right about ANYTHING

Ol' No. 2
04-12-2006, 02:10 PM
It's not just insanity, it's arrogant insanity. As in "I know the Sox officially clinched the division based on MLB's tiebreakers, but my system is better, so I'll still rate them as having an 88% chance at the ALC title".

All because........MLB's system that head to head results and actually playing each other might be relevant in determining which team is better. FOR SHAME cries the BP-crew, that's obviously a small sample size! Thus H2H results are meaningless, as are the actual playoffs in determining the best team.

Oh yeah, and WHEN you score runs doesn't count, winning 10-1 and losing 1-0 is actually great because your run differential is 10-2, so you must be a great team rather than a .500 one.Thome is exactly the kind of guy they'd be gushing over if he played for the A's. High OBP and OPS through the roof. But because he's with the White Sox they'd rather have Ed Sprague. *****

miker
04-12-2006, 06:05 PM
I'm sorry, how many World Championships has Baseball Prospectus won?:?:

ma-gaga
04-12-2006, 06:33 PM
Thome is exactly the kind of guy they'd be gushing over if he played for the A's. High OBP and OPS through the roof. But because he's with the White Sox they'd rather have Ed Sprague. *****

Let's check that. Frank Thomas:

PA: 245, AVG/OBP/SLG: 227/331/469, HR 14...

They must have forgotten to add in the "Billy Beane Modification Factor".

I thought their "email link" was funny. But it wasn't offensive to me. :cool:

rainbow6
04-14-2006, 08:30 PM
Does it have to be repeated again that the Ed Sprague comment was an obvious joke?

I guess so...

Thome's Homey
04-15-2006, 12:03 AM
https://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4977

New article. Oh, poor Barry! No one is out there defending him! The media has acted shamefully in its persecution of poor Barry! What a poor, mistreated guy!

How can one website be so dumbassed?