Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 56 of 56

Thread: A Conversation About PEDs in Today's Game

  1. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,560

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by WAKEUP View Post
    It's called 'post hoc ergo propter hoc'
    Your evidence isn't evidence at all.

    post hoc ergo propter hoc is latin for "after this, therefore because of this"

    It means your premise that Molina hit more home runs, therefore it must be steroids/peds is a common logical fallacy that states "Since Y event followed X event, Y event must have been caused by X event."

    Y event being Molina starting to have a little pop in hit bat
    x event being the steroid/ped era we used to and still live in

    Molina's home run totals the last three years:
    14
    22
    12

    It's not like he is turning in a Brady Anderson performance here. He hit less home runs in the last three years combined than Chris Davis hit this year alone.

    In 2009 Rryan Hanigan hit 3 home runs. Two years later, he doubled that to 6 while playing the same amount of games. must have been peds.

    Yadier Molina is really no different than Ozzie Smith. They are both far and away the best players at their position defensively. They both were immediately great from the start in the field, but lacked in offense.

    Both turned themselves into very good offensive players after 4-5 years in the league.

    Ozzie Smith's first 7 seasons, he was a .238 hitter with a .311 OBP .298 SLG .609 OPS. He avg'd less than 1 homer a season. The only thing he could do offensively was steal.

    In 1985 he hit .276 with a .355 OBP .361 SLG .716 OPS. He popped 6 homers in 1985 alone, after hitting only 6 total in his first 7 seasons and he hit another in the famous game 5 NLCS "Co crazy folks, Go crazy."

    In 1987, he hit .303 with a .392 OBP, .383 SLG, .775 OPS

    From 1985 - his retirement in 1996, Ozzie put up a nice .276, .355, .316, .702 slash line and averaged 30 steals a year. He had 1500 hits in that time.

    Was he on PEDs?
    This post is a classic example of the quantum leap.

    No one is suggesting that since Molina experienced a jump in power, he must be on PEDs.

    But since players on PEDs often experience an increase in power, an increase in power is circumstantial evidence of PED use.

    This cannot be reasonably debated.

    What can be debated is the weight one would place in "simply an increase in power" being connected to PED use. I would suggest virtually none.

    But it is still evidence.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    This post is a classic example of the quantum leap.

    No one is suggesting that since Molina experienced a jump in power, he must be on PEDs.

    But since players on PEDs often experience an increase in power, an increase in power is circumstantial evidence of PED use.

    This cannot be reasonably debated.

    What can be debated is the weight one would place in "simply an increase in power" being connected to PED use. I would suggest virtually none.

    But it is still evidence.
    An increase in power is no more evidence of PEDs use that a person running down a street is evidence that a crime was committed.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  4. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,560

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    An increase in power is no more evidence of PEDs use that a person running down a street is evidence that a crime was committed.
    A person running away from a crime scene would be evidence that he may have committed a crime. It couldn't convict him without a whole lot more, but it would be evidence.

    Many are confusing the fact that even exceptionally weak evidence is still evidence. Your point about "running away from a crime scene" being "evidence" is a good one.

  5. #49
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    A person running away from a crime scene would be evidence that he may have committed a crime. It couldn't convict him without a whole lot more, but it would be evidence.

    Many are confusing the fact that even exceptionally weak evidence is still evidence. Your point about "running away from a crime scene" being "evidence" is a good one.
    My point was that running down a street is not evidence of a crime. Having a career year concerning HR's is not evidence of any kind concerning PEDs. In other words, here is no crime scene. Just a guy running down the street and someone's supposition that it's possible that he's running from a crime.

    In other words, THATS not evidence. It's a conclusion based upon incomplete information. It's pure supposition that then gets used as a premise for a conclusion that player X is cheating. And it's an argument that those who make it seem willing to defend with a vigor not deserving.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  6. #50
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,966

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    An increase in power is no more evidence of PEDs use that a person running down a street is evidence that a crime was committed.
    If someone is running down the street, the thought that they may have committed a crime absolutely crosses my mind. I'm not going to draw any conclusions from it, but it does get me thinking.

    Anyway, if the only evidence against Molina was that his power increased, the PED argument wouldn't go very far. It was his increase in power at a very late age, after 5 years in the majors of very little power, plus his physical appearance, plus his association with TRL. Even those together aren't enough to be fully convincing, but they are enough to start a conversation.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  7. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,560

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    My point was that running down a street is not evidence of a crime. Having a career year concerning HR's is not evidence of any kind concerning PEDs. In other words, here is no crime scene. Just a guy running down the street and someone's supposition that it's possible that he's running from a crime.

    In other words, THATS not evidence. It's a conclusion based upon incomplete information. It's pure supposition that then gets used as a premise for a conclusion that player X is cheating. And it's an argument that those who make it seem willing to defend with a vigor not deserving.
    Running down the street is "evidence" that the person may have commited a crime. It might be the most flimsy shread of evidence imaginable, but it is still "evidence". You are confused as to what "evidence" means.

    No one is saying that someone running down the street has commited a crime, and that's the conclusion you are jumping to. You are equating "evidence" as meaning "enough evidence to convict someone".

  8. #52
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    If someone is running down the street, the thought that they may have committed a crime absolutely crosses my mind. I'm not going to draw any conclusions from it, but it does get me thinking.

    Anyway, if the only evidence against Molina was that his power increased, the PED argument wouldn't go very far. It was his increase in power at a very late age, after 5 years in the majors of very little power, plus his physical appearance, plus his association with TRL. Even those together aren't enough to be fully convincing, but they are enough to start a conversation.
    So in other words the only "evidence" is he hit 20 hrs one year.

    The phrase "aren't fully convincing" has to be the ultimate understatement as applied to the argument made concerning Molina and PEDs. There is nothing abnormal about his development as a catcher and he is well known around the league as an extremely dedicated and hard worker as well as the "Derek Jeter" of the Cards clubhouse.

    So the dude's bat developed with age, his well known, extraordinary work habits have resulted in a high level of physical fitness and Tony LaRussa happened to manage him during his 5 years of little power retiring as Cards manager essentially before the season in which Molina hit alot of homers.

    I agree these "facts" should start a conversation about PEDs but it's not the one you claim should be started based upon these "evidences". We really should be talking about the glaring lack of actual cause in many of the PEDs accusations people like to banter about under the guise of "conversating".

    Is Molina taking PEDs? I don't have a flipping clue. Is there reason to openly wonder and therefore question his integrity? At least admit it-doing so is unadulterated gossip fueled by inuendo and unsupported by facts.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  9. #53
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Running down the street is "evidence" that the person may have commited a crime. It might be the most flimsy shread of evidence imaginable, but it is still "evidence". You are confused as to what "evidence" means.

    No one is saying that someone running down the street has commited a crime, and that's the conclusion you are jumping to. You are equating "evidence" as meaning "enough evidence to convict someone".
    The only thing running down a street is evidence of is an accelerated gate that is likely accompanied by an elevated heart rate.

    I fully know what evidence means and submit you aren't differentiating between evidence and interpretation and your analysis is flawed because it entertains a conclusion that isn't supported by the evidence.
    Last edited by jojo; 10-11-2013 at 04:08 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  10. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    532

    Re: A Conversation About PEDs in Today's Game



    Clearly there are people just trolling here. Throwing up nothing but speculation to entertain themselves with the folks that would refute their speculation.


  11. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    532

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by WAKEUP View Post
    It's called 'post hoc ergo propter hoc'
    Your evidence isn't evidence at all.
    If you are going to get Logic 101 on us, I propose that you are really looking for cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Correlation does not equal causation.

    A and B cause C which causes D (string of causation)

    Steroid use at an age older than 25 is associated with increase of hitting power outside of a typical growth curve.

    Therefore increase of hitting power outside of a typical growth curve is caused by steroid use.

    In this example, the correlation between steroid use and increased hitting power/age does not imply that steroid use causes the increase of hitting power at an advanced age. Although some folks might be suspicious of players that experience an increase in hitting power at an age outside of the typical growth curve... but that does not make the conclusion valid.

    Zach Rymer of the illustrious Bleacher Report typed up a nice piece on how Yadi improved. Largely it was in how and what he was hitting not in his actual power. Bottom line... he is hitting fastballs better than he ever has in his career and putting more of them to his pull side. A Righty that can line drive into the left field leaves a lot of room for improvement for extra base hits without an overall increase in hitting power, especially if they are against fastballs. If his first 6 years were lots of line drives/hits to his power side, and right into defenders, or close to defenders.. that can explain the lack of extra base hits.

    In my mind, what should draw suspicion is if his 2005 hitting style matched his 2012 style.... just with a lot of extra pop. A little Fan Graphs research will show you that's just not the case.

    Here is some interesting reading:

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ne-post-pujols

    http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colum...9bb30f31a.html

  12. #56
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,966

    Re: Scoreboard Watching 2013 (Playoffs Edition)

    Quote Originally Posted by SporkLover View Post
    If you are going to get Logic 101 on us, I propose that you are really looking for cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Correlation does not equal causation.

    A and B cause C which causes D (string of causation)

    Steroid use at an age older than 25 is associated with increase of hitting power outside of a typical growth curve.

    Therefore increase of hitting power outside of a typical growth curve is caused by steroid use.

    In this example, the correlation between steroid use and increased hitting power/age does not imply that steroid use causes the increase of hitting power at an advanced age. Although some folks might be suspicious of players that experience an increase in hitting power at an age outside of the typical growth curve... but that does not make the conclusion valid.

    Zach Rymer of the illustrious Bleacher Report typed up a nice piece on how Yadi improved. Largely it was in how and what he was hitting not in his actual power. Bottom line... he is hitting fastballs better than he ever has in his career and putting more of them to his pull side. A Righty that can line drive into the left field leaves a lot of room for improvement for extra base hits without an overall increase in hitting power, especially if they are against fastballs. If his first 6 years were lots of line drives/hits to his power side, and right into defenders, or close to defenders.. that can explain the lack of extra base hits.

    In my mind, what should draw suspicion is if his 2005 hitting style matched his 2012 style.... just with a lot of extra pop. A little Fan Graphs research will show you that's just not the case.

    Here is some interesting reading:

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ne-post-pujols

    http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colum...9bb30f31a.html
    That's good stuff. Thanks

    This is exactly why it's valuable to speculate and ask questions about a players change in performance. It leads to a discussion and new information can be learned.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25