Thursday, July 25, 2002 | |
Why couldn't he just say what he was obviously thinking "No, I don't want to come to Cincinnati?" Then say the very next day he's open to going somewhere, after saying "I promised my family!" You know what? That's all about Rogers. Go Mohler.
10:54:19 PM |
ESPN.com: MLB - Standings at trade deadline often tell final result By Alan Schwarz What a bunch of malarky.....I only have to think back 3 years to my own team's situation in the standings to refute this. He's giving all these stats about who's in first July 31 ,by how many, and how many of those in first and second and third end up winning the thing.
So, right now, the Reds are 3 1/2 back. That's even better than 2 games back! They just gained a game and a half! Any glance at the chart has exactly ONE striking bit of infiormation, and it ain't how surprised we should be that 101 of 139 teams that were in first place July 31 actually finished first (that means over 1/3 of them didn't), but somehow, when you move from 2-2.5 games back to 3-3.5, the number of teams that came back from those deficits jumps from 3 to 10! What it means it statistics are entirely random , and that 3.5 is basically a nothin' lead. Not to say I wouldn't rather be 3.5 up, but in 1999, the Reds not only trailed July 31, but most of the year, and often at around 3, and even fell 4 and a half back in mid-September, and still overtoook the Astros only to fall into a tie with the Mets for the wild card. Up, down, up down. So far, the Reds have been up 5, down 4, down 1, down 4.5, and now its 3.5. Another huge hole in this grandiose satisitical condundrum:
Which kindof overlooks how there is NO dropoff whatsoever from 2-2.5 to 3-3.5, in fact there is a dramtic reversal. That was conveniently skipped over, for it kind of betrays how impossibly random it is. I guess I read the article though, didn't I? 9:52:54 PM |
Here ya go Fehr, owners, and company. Chew on this one a while:
6:59:51 AM |