Originally Posted by RFS62
I don't believe I've ever, in the entire time I've posted here, indicted anyone as "gutless" for not following my methodology, nor did I use the term "balance" anywhere in this thread. Those were your debating techniques to cloud the issue. But since you brought it up, my belief that Casey is back is based on both his numbers, but more importantly what I'm observing, which is the heart of every post I've ever made referencing balance.
Not only have you never demonstrated a balance between observation and statistical analysis, your current rant doesn't claim to need it. Using your method, any player who posts Sean Casey numbers for 40-odd games doesn't need any more evaluation- statistical or observation. They're just "that player".
Inconsistent to say the least. What you're, in fact, doing is driving your analysis almost completely using the observation path- not the subjective.
Sean Casey is obvsiously back and anyone who doesn't profess it is right now is "gutless". That's as "unbalanced" as one can get. It's absolutely obvious because you've done this before. You did it when he started out exceptionally hot and you regressed when his OPS was @.750 for the first half of May.
You know what statheads like MWM and myself did? If you want to bring chat into it, here's the conversation:
MWM: "Has anyone noticed that Casey's OPS is .750 for May thusfar?"
SteelSD: "Yeah, but let's just hope that it's a glitch and Casey gets hot again quick."
Now, you can question MWM via PM all you want, but that's that conversation. Not "God, I hope Casey sucks." Not "Casey can't possibly keep it up." But "God, I hope he gets hot again."
Yeah, I'm a hater there, RFS. Go for it.
As far as I know, I've only once responded to a PM from you where you offered to educate me on sabermetrics so I could better understand the game. Much of the pm was nice, but I took the tone as incredibly condescending and I actually cracked up when I read it. Please feel free to post both your PM and my response if you'd like, with my blessings.
Wow. I attempted to help you out, and you laughed. Seriously. You laughed. It's patently obvious that you don't have a handle on the statistical side of "balance" but you "laughed" at my attempt to help you out??
Did you also "laugh" at the other folks I've helped out? Do you laugh right now at the posters on this board who've asked me questions? How many people are you laughing at right now? And you dare to call my "tone" condescending?
I certainly hope that you aren't laughing now, because the posters who've asked me for information and assistence aren't laughing. I think they were actually grateful. Not that my ego is driven from that, but you need to stop hiding behind your inability to produce relevant numbers to back up your positions.
I could claim to play the clarinet. But unless I actually grabbed the instrument and began playing off page music provided for me, I couldn't prove that I could play that instrument. You claim to be able to play it in concert, but can't bring a single thing to back it up.
In fact, I can't think of anything I've ever said to anyone on any thread or any PM or any chat session that I would object to you posting, if you're so inclined.
And congratulations. This thread will no doubt be closed soon, as it's become a sad little pissing match.
Between whom? You and I? No. You degenerated this into a sad pissing match quite a long time ago. The problem is that you refuse to play fair. You refuse to say what you mean and mean what you say. It's not I that's perpetuating this. It's you.
Name names. Be a man and say what you mean. If you're calling out folks, then by all means, CALL THEM OUT.
Otherwise, move along.