PDA

View Full Version : The List Of Past Statistics, Anyone Else Had Enough???


Soxfanspcu11
10-22-2006, 03:20 AM
So, as I have been watching the playoffs, I have been hearing NONSTOP announcers, radio personalities, dj's. fans, etc. going ON and ON about how "The team who wins game BLANK of BLANK goes on to win BLANK, 98% of the time" and so on and so on. The story is ALWAYS the same.

The "stat-heads" of the world are constantly trying to push past facts on us to try and "predict" the result of a particular series. I, for one, have HAD MY FILL!!!! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

There is a reason the games are played, because the result is never for sure, ANYTHING can happen. Professional sports are NOT a fantasy league, the players on the field determine what will happen. NOBODY gave St. Louis a chance to win even 1 single game in this World Series because of SOOOOOOO many "stat-head" predictions.

Detroit swept St. Louis during the regular season. The National League is nothing compared to the American League. Verlander is 256-0 in the first game of the series. These of course are all exagerations, but I did here during the game tonight that some sports columnist picked Detoilet in 3 GAMES!!!! YES! 3 GAMES!!!! Despite the fact that you have to win four, he picked Detoilet in 3 games because of how much better he percieved Detroit to be, because of, well, the LIST OF PAST STATISTICS!!!:rolleyes:


I, for one, am just completely sick of it! You can not go through one inning, quarter, lap, segment, etc. of baseball, football, basketball, hockey, racing, bowling, etc. without hearing about what someone or some team did in the past.

Yes, I know that past statistics do play a part in the current game, but they do not play as big of a part that some of these morons would have you think.

If all these games are determined on paper by PAST stats, then what is the point of playing them??? On paper, based on PAST stats, Detoilet sweeps this series with NO problem! Why even bother playing it???

I dunno, maybe I'm just going on a ridiculous tangent, but I am just so sick of hearing it. Yes, I would like to hear some past stats. Yes, I would like to hear who typically wins the series if a certain team wins game one. Yes, I would like to know the past history of homefield advantage. But let's keep it at that!

The games are played on the field by the players, past stats have nothing to do with the players currently on the field. When asked about the Sox, Mark Burlz said it best, "1959 had nothing to do with me". Using past stats to determine the current outcome of a team is just beyond stupid. At least is my opinion. Thank you all for listening to my rant!:supernana:

QCIASOXFAN
10-22-2006, 04:02 AM
:unsure: It was only one game, granted the Cards were not even guaranteed that. So what are your thoughts on Jeff Weaver in the playoffs vs the regular season?:dunno:

johnny_mostil
10-22-2006, 02:03 PM
So, as I have been watching the playoffs, I have been hearing NONSTOP announcers, radio personalities, dj's. fans, etc. going ON and ON about how "The team who wins game BLANK of BLANK goes on to win BLANK, 98% of the time" and so on and so on. The story is ALWAYS the same.


Don't blame the "stat-heads" for this, this is just broadcasters trying to fill time. Most stat-heads cringe at being told things like "teams up 3-2 have won the series 75% of the time" because that's exactly the result you'd converge to if the teams just flipped coins for the games!

A postseason series is too short and the teams (even these two) too closely matched to be predetermined. [This is the thing Yankee fans don't get; if you make the playoffs, your chance of winning the pennant against three other teams that are basically as good as you are is still only about 25%.] Now, there's a difference between the season quality of the Tigers and the Cardinals, but it's far less than a game in a 7 game series, and the Cardinals' chance of winning the series when it started was probably 46% or so. Now it's up to 54% or so.

Soxfanspcu11
10-22-2006, 04:51 PM
:unsure: It was only one game, granted the Cards were not even guaranteed that. So what are your thoughts on Jeff Weaver in the playoffs vs the regular season?:dunno:


I was using game 1 of the 2006 World Series as an example. A small segment of the large problem that is these statistics.

And as the Cardinals being my second favorite team, Jeff Weaver in the post season is certainly an enigma, but it makes it no less awesome!:supernana:

October26
10-22-2006, 06:33 PM
So, as I have been watching the playoffs, I have been hearing NONSTOP announcers, radio personalities, dj's. fans, etc. going ON and ON about how "The team who wins game BLANK of BLANK goes on to win BLANK, 98% of the time" and so on and so on. The story is ALWAYS the same.

The "stat-heads" of the world are constantly trying to push past facts on us to try and "predict" the result of a particular series. I, for one, have HAD MY FILL!!!! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

There is a reason the games are played, because the result is never for sure, ANYTHING can happen. Professional sports are NOT a fantasy league, the players on the field determine what will happen. NOBODY gave St. Louis a chance to win even 1 single game in this World Series because of SOOOOOOO many "stat-head" predictions.

Detroit swept St. Louis during the regular season. The National League is nothing compared to the American League. Verlander is 256-0 in the first game of the series. These of course are all exagerations, but I did here during the game tonight that some sports columnist picked Detoilet in 3 GAMES!!!! YES! 3 GAMES!!!! Despite the fact that you have to win four, he picked Detoilet in 3 games because of how much better he percieved Detroit to be, because of, well, the LIST OF PAST STATISTICS!!!:rolleyes:


I, for one, am just completely sick of it! You can not go through one inning, quarter, lap, segment, etc. of baseball, football, basketball, hockey, racing, bowling, etc. without hearing about what someone or some team did in the past.

Yes, I know that past statistics do play a part in the current game, but they do not play as big of a part that some of these morons would have you think.

If all these games are determined on paper by PAST stats, then what is the point of playing them??? On paper, based on PAST stats, Detoilet sweeps this series with NO problem! Why even bother playing it???

I dunno, maybe I'm just going on a ridiculous tangent, but I am just so sick of hearing it. Yes, I would like to hear some past stats. Yes, I would like to hear who typically wins the series if a certain team wins game one. Yes, I would like to know the past history of homefield advantage. But let's keep it at that!

The games are played on the field by the players, past stats have nothing to do with the players currently on the field. When asked about the Sox, Mark Burlz said it best, "1959 had nothing to do with me". Using past stats to determine the current outcome of a team is just beyond stupid. At least is my opinion. Thank you all for listening to my rant!:supernana:
Indeed. I'm sick of "statville" as well. I believe that history is important if it is relevant to the discussion. But like you said, they beat the stats to death. Since you brought this up, I'm thinking the broadcasters must be paid by the stat? :?:

Seriously, when I can no longer stand the TV broadcasters, I turn the volume down and listen to the radio. But then the radio announcers are feeding me more stats! I've completely stopped watching the pre-game shows because of the "stat heads." I'm with you. Enough is Enough!

23Ventura
10-26-2006, 09:35 PM
haha, I'm watching the World Series right now, and Joe Buck just said, in the 2 previous times that these teams have met in the World Series, the winner of game 4 has gone on to lose. I see exactly what you meant when you started this thread. Somebody better tell the players before they go and try to win tonight.

SoxSpeed22
10-27-2006, 12:10 AM
23Ventura wins.
Also, teams who win 4 games in the series have an 88% chance of winning the series.
Those who were here last year with the division would get this.