Originally Posted by bigredmechanism
I think the reading comprehension is perfectly fine, though I agree with P.E.R. 14 that Joe Schmoe thinking he can hit home runs by manner of luck (comparing himself to a major league centerfielder, no less) is embarrassing.
I imagine it would take the average person several thousand at bats before they could hit a lucky homerun off of a MLB pitcher, if they could even do it at all.
It was stating that if I was pulled out of the stands, and actually hit a home run, it would be luck. It is an example of an extreme case. I am not saying I am like Drew Stubbs or as good as Drew Stubbs. I was making the point just because someone does something that actually works out does not mean it was a good call or some well thought out plan. That is why I used that example. Using an extreme example to make a point is not uncommon.
Anyway, we are talking about a guy who OPS'd around .600 for the year. He OPS'd under .400 in Sept/Oct. Just think about that for a second. Under freaking .400 for over a month. Then people (or person) are saying if he succeeds in the playoffs it's not luck, but a good call by Dusty. No, in fact, that is damn near the definition of luck born out of stubbornness. You take something that has proven to be poor over a long stretch of time, with statistically relevant samples, and still continue to do it hoping things change is not only insanity but if it works out is a clear example of luck. Can it happen? Sure. Yet it if does happen, from everything we know, it will be luck. There is way too much data to think otherwise.
Drew could maybe one day turn it around. Yet after all we have seen this year, the thought he will suddenly turn it around in this year's playoffs is not a sound idea. If he suddenly turns into a star in the playoffs, it will indeed be luck. That has been my only point all along.