soxfan1468927
Well-Known Member
I was following your lead pal.Because I looked at a larger sample size (the entire season). You've cut it down to twenty-plus games so that the numbers fit your argument.
I was following your lead pal.Because I looked at a larger sample size (the entire season). You've cut it down to twenty-plus games so that the numbers fit your argument.
Yesterday Hu and I had a enlightening discussion about quarks, gravitons and one dimensional strings. It was quite exhilarating. You shoulda been there.LOL
working on a new project...pretty interesting
Jefferson Lab | Exploring the Nature of Matter
i keep thinking of jdate lol (jlab.org)
Is that a strand of DNA commonly found in the gays?
Classic case of rising to the occasion in his walk year. Anyone that throws money at Vargas this winter deserves what they get. I hope to God it isn't the Mariners.jason vargas:
1st half - 12-3 2.62 ERA 1.147 WHIP
2nd half - 1-2 5.79 ERA 1.714 WHIP
but 5 starts in the 2nd half (for Santana/Berrios) isn't a small sample size? Santana's FIP/xFIP are each about 1.5 runs higher than his ERA, so plenty of regression is to be expected. Berrios has a 3.99 FIP, though his xFIP is 4.54.
Is that a strand of DNA commonly found in the gays?
I was following your lead pal.
That is an incorrect summary of events. But you already knew that.On another thread I said that I'd looked at the Astros' season and they've faced cupcake pitching. Today, I noticed HOU's post-ASB numbers and used the same full-season team pitching samples to determine that it's been ultra-cupcake since the ASB.
You tried to debunk that theory with Santana and Berrios but fell flat on your face and have been grasping at straws since. Now, I might have led you there, but it wasn't by example.
His first reaction after I said that you would have to dig deeper in order to really make an accurate assessment of the Astros opponents, was "Absolutely a fair point" but since he's obviously bi-polar, he couldn't stand for that.Slinky is pretty determined to discredit the Astros. Might as well let him have it.
His first reaction after I said that you would have to dig deeper in order to really make an accurate assessment of the Astros opponents, was "Absolutely a fair point" but since he's obviously bi-polar, he couldn't stand for that.
Slinky is pretty determined to discredit the Astros. Might as well let him have it.
I dug for a second and noticed Santana and Berrios, who had below league average ERAs when the Astros faced them. So I used the larger sample size of their performances leading up to facing the Astros, you decided that the smaller sample size of how they have done since then is more accurate.No, you acknowledged that I took a pretty high-level glance at who the've faced and noticed that they've faced an exceedingly cupcake pitching schedule.
You pointed out that it was a high-level glimpse, which I agreed with.
You then proceeded to dig deeper and brought up Berrios and Santana, which supported my claim.
I've said that, based on the Astros' opponents' team ERAs, they've faced a ridiculously cupcake pitching schedule and I think their offense to some extent is overrated. I've provided as much statistical support as I'm inclined to. You've provided nothing that refutes a cupcake schedule, yet you press on.
You could be right, I could be wrong, but everything I've looked at says otherwise.
If it's the reported 120 million, then they should throw the kitchen sink at Leipzig and Southampton for Keita and Van Dijk. In which case, they come out of it the better team. But if they get neither and lose Coutinho, I'll be disappointed.
They have cooled to 13-13 in their last 26 while facing only two opponents with a won-loss record over .500. Injuries are clearly costing them big time. Prior to that they went 58-27. A team simply cannot get to 58-27 on good luck and good fortune alone. If you are going to base that 85-game record on them facing poor pitching, then you may as well accept the fact that everyone in the AL is facing crappy pitching, which basically neutralizes your argument.Not really. I just made an observation. They seem to have faced very weak pitching thus far.
You and Sox haven't presented anything to refute my observation, but are pretty determined to discredit it. I might as well let you have that, I guess.
I dug for a second and noticed Santana and Berrios, who had below league average ERAs when the Astros faced them. So I used the larger sample size of their performances leading up to facing the Astros, you decided that the smaller sample size of how they have done since then is more accurate.
I also never took a stance one way or the other. I merely said that we don't have enough information to determine whether or not they have faced a cupcake pitching schedule.
By the way, ESPN sucks at their soccer coverage. And they do not care if they are right. This could be true, but nothing from Coutinho, Klopp, or Liverpool. All "sources" are from Barcelona.
They have cooled to 13-13 in their last 26 while facing only two opponents with a won-loss record over .500. Injuries are clearly costing them big time.
Prior to that they went 58-27. A team simply cannot get to 58-27 on good luck and good fortune alone.
If you are going to base that 85-game record on them facing poor pitching, then you may as well accept the fact that everyone in the AL is facing crappy pitching, which basically neutralizes your argument.
Fair enough. I did say that it could work in reverse. My only point was that looking at simply the overall team ERAs wasn't enough information to deduce whether or not they faced cupcake pitching.No, I cited Santana's and Berrios' performances since the start of June. That's two plus months - a sample of about 16% of a pitcher's season.
With that in mind, I suppose we also don't have enough information to deduce that the Astros' offense is historically relevant or head-and-shoulders above the other AL playoff contenders, which are the points I was questioning in the first place.