|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:07:49 GMT -5
Judge started in another what? Decade or farm system? Farm system I thought You are incorrect sir! However you do son a copy of our Bronx Bombers/Heamyha home game to enjoy. As most folks that own this game do, you will probably select the sombrero-clad inger character to move around the board. We also have a Noetsi character that is rather fragile and is usually afraid to advance on the board. Choose wisely! We have a Pipps character that works wonderfully but disappears and reappears without warning… 😄 |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 21:11:12 GMT -5
How about this. I will bet you Rortvedt career BA will be below .230?
Its an easy bet for you right?
|
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:12:06 GMT -5
Judge is a purebred Yankee, my friend. Yes. Prospects are unknowable. Therefore, your creation of the straw man was foolish. Kind of what I said. Even veterans are unknowable. They just have better odds of turning out as expected… Sorry I thought he was one of the guys Cashman brought from other farm systems at the end of the Arod era when we got rid of lots of older talent. If things are unknowable the last value is the one to go with. Aka a random walk. A basic argument in time series. If most Yankee prospects go nowhere that is the way to bet. The progress of any previous Yankee prospect has no relationship to a prospect of today. In fact, they have little to do with each other at any time. If the best bet was always against we would have never had the “big four” (actually 5), nor Judge. No Mantle, no Whitey. No Blomberg. Some emerge, some submerge. Some veg traded and do well elsewhere… |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 21:13:50 GMT -5
Sorry I thought he was one of the guys Cashman brought from other farm systems at the end of the Arod era when we got rid of lots of older talent. If things are unknowable the last value is the one to go with. Aka a random walk. A basic argument in time series. If most Yankee prospects go nowhere that is the way to bet. The progress of any previous Yankee prospect has no relationship to a prospect of today. In fact, they have little to do with each other at any time. If the best bet was always against we would have never had the “big four” (actually 5), nor Judge. No Mantle, no Whitey. No Blomberg. Some emerge, some submerge. Some veg traded and do well elsewhere… As a statistical analyst I will have to disagree. The past commonly defines the present. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:13:58 GMT -5
How about this. I will bet you Rortvedt career BA will be below .230? Its an easy bet for you right? Except that I don’t bet on anything I have no control over. I seldom bet if I do have control. It’s just not something I will do. You don’t curse, I don’t bet… |
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Mar 14, 2022 21:20:12 GMT -5
Judge is a purebred Yankee, my friend. Yes. Prospects are unknowable. Therefore, your creation of the straw man was foolish. Kind of what I said. Even veterans are unknowable. They just have better odds of turning out as expected… Sorry I thought he was one of the guys Cashman brought from other farm systems at the end of the Arod era when we got rid of lots of older talent. If things are unknowable the last value is the one to go with. Aka a random walk. A basic argument in time series. If most Yankee prospects go nowhere that is the way to bet. That is not really a bet. I had a friend who was a Giant's fan (or whichever team was winning). Before each season, he would offer to bet me $100 dollars that the Yankees would not win the World Series. Essentially, he was taking the other 29 teams, while I would be represented by one team. That is neither a statistical model nor a legitimate wager. By your logic, Russ, the Yankees should only sign successful free agents and have zero reliance on the farm system, simply because there are a finite number of players in MLB, while MiLB has a larger pool of players that shall never make the major leagues. That model of team construction would be fine, if it were within the rules and feasible to field a billion dollar roster. Points of argument like this hold no value in reality and, as such, are specious. That is, superficially plausible but in the process of reality wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:22:01 GMT -5
The progress of any previous Yankee prospect has no relationship to a prospect of today. In fact, they have little to do with each other at any time. If the best bet was always against we would have never had the “big four” (actually 5), nor Judge. No Mantle, no Whitey. No Blomberg. Some emerge, some submerge. Some veg traded and do well elsewhere… As a statistical analyst I will have to disagree. The past commonly defines the present. Commonly. Not always. The more controlled the environment the more predictable the outcome. Baseball is far from a controlled environment. An assembly line even has some lack of control, as motors burn up and bearings go out. A less controlled environment like baseball that has weather issues, platoon variances, injuries, different instructors, insect bites, disease, the list goes on. I’d rather predict the results of a manufacturing plant with the few risks of production equipment breakdowns, the occasional defective component than the outcome of a player’s career. On an assembly line an employee could die and be replaced by a new employee that may be up to speed with on my days or even hours… |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:24:52 GMT -5
Sorry I thought he was one of the guys Cashman brought from other farm systems at the end of the Arod era when we got rid of lots of older talent. If things are unknowable the last value is the one to go with. Aka a random walk. A basic argument in time series. If most Yankee prospects go nowhere that is the way to bet. That is not really a bet. I had a friend who was a Giant's fan (or whichever team was winning). Before each season, he would offer to bet me $100 dollars that the Yankees would not win the World Series. Essentially, he was taking the other 29 teams, while I would be represented by one team. That is neither a statistical model nor a legitimate wager. By your logic, Russ, the Yankees should only sign successful free agents and have zero reliance on the farm system, simply because there are a finite number of players in MLB, while MiLB has a larger pool of players that shall never make the major leagues. That model of team construction would be fine, if it were within the rules and feasible to field a billion dollar roster. Points of argument like this hold no value in reality and, as such, are specious. I like how we entered such similar dissenting arguments in such diverse ways… |
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Mar 14, 2022 21:27:39 GMT -5
That is not really a bet. I had a friend who was a Giant's fan (or whichever team was winning). Before each season, he would offer to bet me $100 dollars that the Yankees would not win the World Series. Essentially, he was taking the other 29 teams, while I would be represented by one team. That is neither a statistical model nor a legitimate wager. By your logic, Russ, the Yankees should only sign successful free agents and have zero reliance on the farm system, simply because there are a finite number of players in MLB, while MiLB has a larger pool of players that shall never make the major leagues. That model of team construction would be fine, if it were within the rules and feasible to field a billion dollar roster. Points of argument like this hold no value in reality and, as such, are specious. I like how we entered such similar dissenting arguments in such diverse ways… You missed my last sentence. I had to edit. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:30:23 GMT -5
I like how we entered such similar dissenting arguments in such diverse ways… You missed my last sentence. I had to edit. Nice add… |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 21:50:00 GMT -5
How about this. I will bet you Rortvedt career BA will be below .230? Its an easy bet for you right? Except that I don’t bet on anything I have no control over. I seldom bet if I do have control. It’s just not something I will do. You don’t curse, I don’t bet… If you only bet on things you have control over you either don't bet on sports or are in organized crime.  |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 21:54:52 GMT -5
Sorry I thought he was one of the guys Cashman brought from other farm systems at the end of the Arod era when we got rid of lots of older talent. If things are unknowable the last value is the one to go with. Aka a random walk. A basic argument in time series. If most Yankee prospects go nowhere that is the way to bet. That is not really a bet. I had a friend who was a Giant's fan (or whichever team was winning). Before each season, he would offer to bet me $100 dollars that the Yankees would not win the World Series. Essentially, he was taking the other 29 teams, while I would be represented by one team. That is neither a statistical model nor a legitimate wager. By your logic, Russ, the Yankees should only sign successful free agents and have zero reliance on the farm system, simply because there are a finite number of players in MLB, while MiLB has a larger pool of players that shall never make the major leagues. That model of team construction would be fine, if it were within the rules and feasible to field a billion dollar roster. Points of argument like this hold no value in reality and, as such, are specious. That is, superficially plausible but in the process of reality wrong. You are right it was not a bet. I was making a point that some things are essentially deterministic. Or at best vary little. By my logic the Yankee farm system is consistently over valued by analyst so we can do better than free market by selling them at higher than market value for established players. Relying on a farm system to build teams when its elements almost never make it does not make a lot of sense to me. Their are teams that have farm systems I would rely on even if it took years to build. The yankee system is not one of them. It just never produces lasting talent. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Mar 14, 2022 21:54:55 GMT -5
Except that I don’t bet on anything I have no control over. I seldom bet if I do have control. It’s just not something I will do. You don’t curse, I don’t bet… If you only bet on things you have control over you either don't bet on sports or are in organized crime. Or both… |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 21:59:37 GMT -5
As a statistical analyst I will have to disagree. The past commonly defines the present. Commonly. Not always. The more controlled the environment the more predictable the outcome. Baseball is far from a controlled environment. An assembly line even has some lack of control, as motors burn up and bearings go out. A less controlled environment like baseball that has weather issues, platoon variances, injuries, different instructors, insect bites, disease, the list goes on. I’d rather predict the results of a manufacturing plant with the few risks of production equipment breakdowns, the occasional defective component than the outcome of a player’s career. On an assembly line an employee could die and be replaced by a new employee that may be up to speed with on my days or even hours… Statisticians live on what is likely. Since little is certain and known there is little choice(god knows it, we don't. It is entirely possible that reality is deterministic, but that does not matter if you don't know the true reality) . To build a successful team you have to make decisions. That is where likelihood and past events are better than nothing. If something happens more often than not, their probably is a reason it does. And it will likely continue unless something in the basic governing structure changes. |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Mar 14, 2022 22:01:01 GMT -5
If you only bet on things you have control over you either don't bet on sports or are in organized crime.  Or both… Yeah although fixing something and not betting on it makes limited sense. Its sort of like the movie that inspired dukes of hazard where the moonshiner pays taxes on the illegal whisky - it defeats the purpose. *) |
|
