CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
The challenge for BP is to avoid what already appears to be a balkanization of the user base. Right now half the content seems to cater exclusively to the newer, less statistically-oriented users who have found BP as it has grown in fame. I put John's beat reporting, Kevin's scout-quoting and Marc's fantasy content here. Another bloc of writers seem to cater primarly to the really hard-core stat guys who seem interested in the stats for their own sake.
The middle ground is where I consider my interest to be. Intelligent use of statistics to make an interesting point is really what has kept me coming to BP. It's what Joe was best at and why he will be so powerfully missed. Christina, Steven and Jay are also very good at it, but their time commitments to the book have kept them off the site, to its great detriment. BP has to find new voices, or to increase the exposure of the ones it has, in the middle ground between the stat-heads and the drop-ins to keep its content fresh and unique and worth reading.
I'm not questioning the analysis at all: it is obvious that velocity plays a huge role in both major league opportunity and major league success and I actually think the results of the study you ran are really interesting in that they show the extent to which that is true.
But it is very strange to read an article on a statistically-oriented site that says something as absurd as 80 percent of major leaguers are above the major league average in velocity. Simply saying "that's the scale so accept it" is contrary to the thinking that BP applies to other aspects of the game, right?
Right--this is really my question. Does "average" mean average major league? It appears not. Does it mean average professional? Average compared to what group?
right, but I'm not interested in the midpoint of the scouting scale.
What should be of actual interest is what constitutes an average fastball, and based on this article the scouting scale does a dreadful job of doing that. If the scale says that 80% are above average, the scale needs to be re-defined.
Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average...
If, as you say, "nearly 92 percent of all right-handers have at least average velocity, 80 percent are above average"
it would be helpful to define what you mean by average. Or at least define the set from which that average is derived. Major league pitchers? Professional pitchers? Humankind as a whole? Becaue my math says that if 80 percent are above average, the other 20% are throwing with negative velocity.
On behalf of New York residents, I would like to welcome KC fans to the Kyle Farnsworth experience. Enjoy!
I finally figured out the best way to describe new stadia in general after reading this article thanks to a casual phrase Neil dropped in: "the class segregation here feels both deliberate and complete". You know what new stadia are most like? Airplanes. They are designed intentionally to make it clear whom is in coach and whom is in first class so that the people in first class feel justified in paying what they are paying for those seats. The business model is the same too--it takes a lot of $25 tickets in the upper deck to add up to one $500 dollar seat at field level so you do everything you can to cater to the people in first class. It will be interesting to see how the stadium fills up over time--if it is like airlines, first class will be empty and coach will be overflowing. Probably not this year, but we'll see.
Unless the public got an ownership stake in the team (which they didn\'t), the team doesn\'t have any greater obligation to keep games affordable in a publicly-financed stadium than in a privately-financed one. At least not in economic terms. You could argue that they **should** try to keep things affordable, but that isn\'t really the right paradigm for what is a private-sector, profit-maximizing enterprise.
which is not to say, of course, that they get a free pass for handling the situation so poorly. That memo is ridiculous and they should at least have communicated more clearly with potential customers in case they do eventually need you to come back to the stadium.
hate to say it, but good for the Yankees. Second only to air travel, sports tickets are the most underpriced commodity on the market today. Want proof? The scalping industry. Teams are simply selling tickets too cheap, and no amount of hand-wringing about the loyal fan base can change that. The Yankees are doing what they should do here: maximize revenue. And yes, that leaves \"long-time fans\" out in the cold. But there will certainly be another sucker waiting in line for that ticket. If there isn\'t--don\'t worry! The price will come down until there is one.
I just hate that Scoggins can express so many things that are not only wrong but easy to disprove: that Rice didn\'t benefit from Fenway being only the most obvious example.
Really, is it too much to ask that somebody voting for the HOF do just a little bit of work? If a writer can\'t take his task more seriously he doesn\'t deserve a vote.
and there is the link to his blog. His analysis isn\'t great but his information is.
Sorry--didn\'t mean my post to bash you so much as to point out that ideas get around these days. I obviously don\'t know if you read Buster or not, and anyway, who really cares? It\'s a fun contest, not anything of real importance.
Does MrBattafaglia lose points for plagiarizing the idea from Buster Olney\'s blog entry yesterday?
We get it. His season hasn\'t been that great. He is going to set a record in a silly category based on arbitrary criteria. We know. Can we move on now? How many articles does the BP crew intend to write on this exact point?