When Being Medium Is No Mean Feat

[IslandRed]

Originally Posted by M2

James has drawn a lot of ire by pointing out the value of the "average" player and by pointing out that what has been defined as "average" in the stats community is actually well above average.

I know you and others have pointed it out here. Because the best players get the most playing time, it creates a skewed average where someone putting up so-called average numbers is actually above the median for his position.

The article at the top of the thread is a good one, and reinforces the notion that "average" has significant value. It didn't specifically mention replacement level, though. A non-stats-savvy reader may wonder, if "average" is actually of positive worth rather than a neutral baseline of performance, what is the baseline, then?

[Ltlabner]

Originally Posted by M2

I've always thought cynicism/optimism was a red herring. It gets tossed out by supposed optimists in order to undercut the arguments of supposed cynics.

It happens every offseason here. You can pretty much plot in on an astral calendar. I've been told I'm just being cynical for insisting that Dave Williams, Ramon Ortiz, Cory Lidle, etc. weren't going to pan out. Yep, that's it. I'm cynical. Apparently that makes me hip now too.

And all I thought I was doing was grasping the obvious.

Yeaaa.....because no one eeeeevvveeerrr ever tries to undercut the "optimisits" by implying they are drunk on Krivskys svengali ways. Unfortuntatly, it gets used both ways. I'm not saying no one should ever critisize, but it was a breath of fresh air that the Alex G deal was not univerisally panned.

Funny, to some it was "obvious: that we traded away the future with WMP and sank the team with Bronson A. To others it was "obvious" that David Ross was chaff. To others it was "obvious" that Brandon Philips was a total waste of resources. To still others it was "obvious" that Scott Hatteburg was a washed up grandpa. To others it was "obvious" that EE should play every day and he would cary the team. To others it was "obvious" that Rich Aurila was doing nothing but setting the team back 15 years.

Some present their opinions as obvious fact. Yet when you tend to hear the same tune with most every move or deal (not from the same people mind you, but the chorus is there none the less) it's hard not to look back at all these moves from just the past year where what appeared "obvious" to those in the know wasn't and realize that it's not always as cut and dried as some would like us to belive.

[M2]

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Yeaaa.....because no one eeeeevvveeerrr ever tries to undercut the "optimisits" by implying they are drunk on Krivskys svengali ways. Unfortuntatly, it gets used both ways. I'm not saying no one should ever critisize, but it was a breath of fresh air that the Alex G deal was not univerisally panned.

So what. Seriously. A handful of people pan a move and that somehow substitutes for the majority opinion?

What we've got here is a majority that grouses about a minority that inconveniently turns out to be right far too often for the majority's tastes. On that note, how'd that deal with the Nationals work out?

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Funny, to some it was "obvious: that we traded away the future with WMP and sank the team with Bronson A. To others it was "obvious" that David Ross was chaff. To others it was "obvious" that Brandon Philips was a total waste of resources. To still others it was "obvious" that Scott Hatteburg was a washed up grandpa. To others it was "obvious" that EE should play every day and he would cary the team. To others it was "obvious" that Rich Aurila was doing nothing but setting the team back 15 years.

You mean there's a diveristy of opinion the board? The horror. FWIW, I disagreed with most of the above positions so I don't know why you'd think that would resonate with me.

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Some present their opinions as obvious fact. Yet when you tend to hear the same tune with most every move or deal (not from the same people mind you, but the chorus is there none the less) it's hard not to look back at all these moves from just the past year where what appeared "obvious" to those in the know wasn't and realize that it's not always as cut and dried as some would like us to belive.

Depends on what chorus you listen to. The "Yay Reds!" chorus is always more numerous.

As for the other stuff, there's always a range of things that can happen. In many cases though the range of negatives is a few orders of magnitude larger than the positives. In general I'd say successful baseball teams don't build themselves around having to hit on a slew of massive longshots.

[Highlifeman21]

Man. I REALLY wish we could get our hands on Orlando Hudson. I know we supposedly have our savior, Alex Gonzalez, but Phillips and Gonzalez pale in comparison to Hudson and Phillips, IMO.

BTW, has the Gonzalez move even been announced, or is this more speculation?

[Redsland]

Originally Posted by M2

Find me one poll in the history of this board which didn't have the majority of folks ratifying the move. I remember when such polls were all the rage back in the winter of 2004-5 and the results in favor were lopsided. IIRC, most people liked the Arroyo move too, though I think the ayes were fewer for that than getting Dave Williams.

In general, the Reds have spent the bulk of this century making bad moves, many of the obvious variety. Yet my guess is that your perception of the number of posters who hate every move is far, far higher than the number who actually do.

After running an Advanced Search for threads with the word "Poll" in the title, I found three post-move "whadda think of the move" threads.

In this one, about the Kearns/Lopez trade, 84 pollees liked it and 66 didn't. (One hundred six of our less opinionated brethren were "undecided.")

In this one, about the Pena/Arroyo trade, 102 supported it, 66 opposed it, and 48 were undecided.

And finally, in this one from December 2004 about the signing of one Eric Milton to a three-year deal for $25.5 million, 211 posters cheered, and I was one of just 58 who booed.

(Just to be thorough, I also ran a search for threads with the word "pole" in the title, but most of the hits were about some coach.)