PDA

View Full Version : He Said WHAT? (ZIPS!)


jabrch
03-16-2007, 06:32 PM
Based on bad data - we can make bad analysis.

http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/ (http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/)
http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/ (http://yankeefan.blogspot.com/)
Scroll down about 3/4 of the way. Based on heavy analysis, these gents think we have a 2% chance of winning the division and a 1% chance of winning the wild card.

I really wish these folks would put their money where their mouth is. THey predict we average 75 wins, with 85 being the most and...catch this...out of 100 runs of this data (and when I think of this, the runs do come to mind, they say the minimum result was a 58 win season.

58 wins? 58 wins? Where do people come up with this garbage?

HomeFish
03-16-2007, 06:37 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.

skobabe8
03-16-2007, 07:17 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.

Thats exactly why I'm not worried about this season.

oeo
03-16-2007, 07:19 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.

You'll defend the Twins (or the Tigers for that matter), though. Yes, the Twins and Tigers are so unbelievably good. :rolleyes:

RKMeibalane
03-16-2007, 07:20 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.

Oh, for goodness sake, shut up.

Chisox003
03-16-2007, 07:22 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.
:raincloud:

Your act is beyond stale.

RKMeibalane
03-16-2007, 07:25 PM
:raincloud:

Your act is beyond stale.

I can't wait until FWC reads this thread.

jabrch
03-16-2007, 07:29 PM
It's Homefish. Why do you guys read his drivel?

RKMeibalane
03-16-2007, 07:30 PM
It's Homefish. Why do you guys read his drivel?

I only read the last sentence of his post, which was more than enough to figure out the general theme of his post. One would think that being banned for most of last season would force Homefish to change his tune, but he apparently still hasn't learned his lesson.

SABRSox
03-16-2007, 07:46 PM
Ugh... zips is so completely useless. Why do people pretend that prediction is a valid field of sabermetrics?

Blueprint1
03-16-2007, 07:55 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.


Why do you keep coming back? Please go away.

MarySwiss
03-16-2007, 07:58 PM
It's Homefish. Why do you guys read his drivel?

Exactly! If he had anything positive to say, he wouldn't be HomeFish.

Dan Mega
03-16-2007, 09:05 PM
Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.

No "clear" 5th starter but I'm willing to bet that Danks or Haeger could be somewhat successful for a 5th starter in that stop.

An aging lineup, who? Besides Thome who is really *that* old on this team, too old to produce? Paulie, Dye? Will 1 year of age make that much of a difference from their huge 2006 seasons?

Nothing reliable at the top of the lineup- this can be made for almost every AL team besides the Yanks and Mariners.

In the end, I think you're crazy if you think they'll win closer to 75 than 95 games. I am hoping for 100+ but I predict low to mid-90's.

FarWestChicago
03-16-2007, 10:57 PM
In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.Yes!! That's our Fish. And I'm sure I'll be banning your ass for the season before May ever arrives. :thumbsup:

FarWestChicago
03-16-2007, 10:58 PM
:raincloud:

Your act is beyond stale.:dunno: Why do you turn on your brethren?

spiffie
03-16-2007, 10:59 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here.
Any time you would like to lay any sum of cash down on the under of the Sox getting 75, or even 81 wins, you let me know.

Ziggy S
03-16-2007, 11:02 PM
I'm going to make two points.

1. I wouldn't be too worried about a prediction coming from a sabrmetrics hound who just happens to be a fan of the evil scum laden New York Yankees.

2. If HomeFish has reasonable points for why our beloved will be a below .500 team, our optimism heading into a World Championship season doesn't have many reasons to waver.

IndianWhiteSox
03-17-2007, 06:57 AM
I'm going to make two points.

1. I wouldn't be too worried about a prediction coming from a sabrmetrics hound who just happens to be a fan of the evil scum laden New York Yankees.

2. If HomeFish has reasonable points for why our beloved will be a below .500 team,our optimism heading into a World Championship season doesn't have many reasons to waver.

Is that supposed to be in teal or deep pink.

Back to the thread, Homefish shut the **** up you BP :dtroll:.

Ziggy S
03-17-2007, 11:42 AM
The World Title reference was what I thought was deep pink. The reasonable part referring to HomeFish was obviously teal.

downstairs
03-17-2007, 11:48 AM
Any time you would like to lay any sum of cash down on the under of the Sox getting 75, or even 81 wins, you let me know.

And that is exactly what I would love for any writer or other person who makes predictions- based on sabermetrics, math, or a feeling- to do. Put your money where your mouth is.

It is one thing to say the Cubs $300 million spree will garner them 30 more wins this year and an NL Central title. It is another thing to say you're putting $1000 of your own cash on the line. If the latter was the situation, a lot of people would think much longer and harder about the realities of the situation.

PaulDrake
03-17-2007, 01:03 PM
Oh come on now, don't selectively quote to make them look bad. 58 wins was the worst outcome in 100 simulations; since they predicted 75 wins with a range of between 85 and 58, most of their runs were almost certainly much closer to 85 than 58.

Neither 85 wins nor 75 wins is an absurd prediction for this team. We have no clear 5th starter, our hitters are aging, we have a lot of question marks in the bullpen, we have nothing reliable at the top of the lineup, and we're in the same division as two (and, in my opinion, three) of the best teams in baseball.

In the end, I think 75 wins is a more realistic prediction than most of those made in the preseason prediction thread here. Now this is truly dark cloud negativity. If you have a concern here and there, you get lumped in with this. No clear 5th starter yes, and everyone here who reads me knows I don't like Floyd. That being said, a wonderful opportunity is being given to Danks and Haeger and they may respond. The 5th starter situation is not hopeless. The Sox are a veteran team, but I'm betting that Dye, Konerko, Pierzynski, Iguchi, and yes Erstad still have some high octane in the tank. I'm optimistic about the bullpen and if Pods is true to form he's due for a good year. Yeah, if everything you say comes to pass, the Sox will be a losing team. Why even entertain the thought of such a train wreck of a season? Any reasonably objective look at the Sox should project them on the winning side of the ledger. How much remains to be seen. Again, you make those of us who have a criticism here and there get lumped in with the likes of you.

Frater Perdurabo
03-17-2007, 02:13 PM
Now this is truly dark cloud negativity. If you have a concern here and there, you get lumped in with this. No clear 5th starter yes, and everyone here who reads me knows I don't like Floyd. That being said, a wonderful opportunity is being given to Danks and Haeger and they may respond. The 5th starter situation is not hopeless. The Sox are a veteran team, but I'm betting that Dye, Konerko, Pierzynski, Iguchi, and yes Erstad still have some high octane in the tank. I'm optimistic about the bullpen and if Pods is true to form he's due for a good year. Yeah, if everything you say comes to pass, the Sox will be a losing team. Why even entertain the thought of such a train wreck of a season? Any reasonably objective look at the Sox should project them on the winning side of the ledger. How much remains to be seen. Again, you make those of us who have a criticism here and there get lumped in with the likes of you.

You're right; HomeFish is the poster child of Dark Clouds.

FarWestChicago
03-17-2007, 02:16 PM
You're right; HomeFish is the poster child of Dark Clouds.Yes, but Lip is the first and foremost. Fish has always been a Lip wannabe who goes over the top in an attempt to displace the true Master.

soxinem1
03-17-2007, 11:36 PM
It amazes me how not one pitch is thrown, hit, or fielded, but some lame supposed-stat junkies still think they can predict who wins, loses, etc. Like they picked the White Sox and Tigers to win pennants the past two seasons too, right?

If there is any bright side to this nonsense, maybe the White Sox themselves will look at this mess and let it motivate them, and put a chip on their shoulders.

Frater Perdurabo
03-18-2007, 01:36 AM
Yes, but Lip is the first and foremost. Fish has always been a Lip wannabe who goes over the top in an attempt to displace the true Master.

True, but Lip has been at it on WSI a lot longer. IMHO Lip also deserves far more latitude because he brings so much to the WSI community - the interviews, the history lessons, etc.

HomeFish only brings chronic, unrepentant and petulant negativity. I also would say it's joyless, but I get the feeling HomeFish takes some sort of fetishistic pleasure in trying to get us all riled up over his over-the-top negativity. Put another way, I'm certain Lip cried tears of joy when the Sox won the World Series. I think HomeFish was happy, too, but got himself all worked up believing that we believed that he saw the event though "carnage visors" (the opposite of rose-colored glasses).

Then again, I think most of us get some sort of fetishistic pleasure here, myself most certainly included. :redface: