Montreal Escorts

The Official MERB 2010 Baseball Thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,383
3,288
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
Real scientific study EB, now if you could leave the absolute f'n nonsense out of this thread it would be appreciated!

The study comes from The Nielsen Company and was reported by the Wall Street Journal. The company website calls itself the global leader in Media Information and also does political polling that is routinely reported on as factual and scientific by all major media outlets. If the WSJ considers their study to be scientific, it must be scientific given that almost every major media outlet is using this company to compile and analyze data of this kind not to mention political polls.

I am not sure what the purpose of this study was, but I assume it was done to find out which teams fans felt strongly about hating, and I assume The Nielsen Company polled using a diverse control group and a neutral question.
 
Last edited:

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Sabermetrics predicted nothing for the Red Sox. Sabermetrics suggest that the easiest way to improve your team is by improving the defense and the pitching. If the players don't perform, that says nothing about sabermetrics.

Nate Silver, a performance analyst and the creator of Pecota, projected the Sox to win based on his performance projections for the players. I'm not going to go into how he goes about it as it's way too complex to explain in few words. Thus far, the players are not performing up to expectations and, of course, Pecota can't project injuries. And, of course, no performance analysis system is going to project performance over a three week stretch. In fact, both Lester and Beckett are performing exactly as they did last April. Lester spent the final four and a half months as the best pitcher in the AL and Beckett improved enough to wind up with a decent, if slightly sub-par season for him.

Right now, they're only four games behind the Yankees, despite the fact that the Yankees have four starters performing at a level they can't possibly maintain. One thing that has the Sox where they are is...luck. One piece of sabermetric analysis is Pythagorean standings, which are based on teams' run differential. Both the Rays and Yankees have the records their diffential suggests they should have. The Sox have won one more game than they should have. The Sox have won 5 straight one run games. Luck has been on their side.

And, by the way, knowledgeable Sox fans aren't worried. You don't worry in April.

Hello Rumples,

Actually the correct phrase would be...you don't panic in April. Worry, yes.

No experienced sports analyst I have heard or read, nearly all in the Boston area, thinks this team as constructed will make it past the top contenders. I didn't say they don't have a chance, I'm talking about the overall analysis. The Red Sox are struggling against contending teams, just like last year, including being swept at home by the Rays. And last year they took the first 8 straight from the Yankees.

Theoretically, the pitching staff should be good over the year and defense should be fairly reliable too. But what they can prove against the contending teams is what counts, not winning "5 straight one run games" against some of the most hapless teams in the Majors. And the fact is the Sox have very recently fattened their record on those teams. So while no one should panic in April, there are enough reasons to be concerned. When only one starter (Lackey) has a win against a contender there should be concern.

BTW...I'm not the enemy. The reality is there are significant problems and they need to be dealt with.

Kudos to Francona for taking Ortiz out of the lineup at the very last moment and inserting Lowell the other night for the win.

Cheers,

Merlot
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Hello all,

You know what rumples, I never thought that I would see the day that we agreed on something, finally that day has arrived.:)

You also agreed with letting Rumples call you an FM for years.

Right now, they're only four games behind the Yankees, despite the fact that the Yankees have four starters performing at a level they can't possibly maintain. One thing that has the Sox where they are is...luck. One piece of sabermetric analysis is Pythagorean standings, which are based on teams' run differential. Both the Rays and Yankees have the records their diffential suggests they should have. The Sox have won one more game than they should have. The Sox have won 5 straight one run games. Luck has been on their side.

And, by the way, knowledgeable Sox fans aren't worried. You don't worry in April.

Actually the correct phrase would be...you don't panic in April. Worry, yes.

No experienced sports analyst I have heard or read, nearly all in the Boston area, thinks this team as constructed will make it past the top contenders. I didn't say they don't have a chance, I'm talking about the overall analysis. The Red Sox are struggling against contending teams, just like last year, including being swept at home by the Rays. And last year they took the first 8 straight from the Yankees.

Theoretically, the pitching staff should be good over the year and defense should be fairly reliable too. But what they can prove against the contending teams is what counts, not winning "5 straight one run games" against some of the most hapless teams in the Majors. And the fact is the Sox have very recently fattened their record on those teams, which is fine, but not nearly as encouraging as beating the best teams. So while no one should panic in April, there are enough reasons to be concerned. When only one starter (Lackey) has a win against a contender there should be concern.

BTW...I'm not the enemy. The reality is there are significant problems and they need to be dealt with.

Kudos to Francona for taking Ortiz out of the lineup at the very last moment and inserting Lowell the other night for the win.

I am not sure what the purpose of this study was, but I assume it was done to find out which teams fans felt strongly about hating, and I assume The Nielsen Company polled using a diverse control group and a neutral question.

"Purpose"...so some someone could have fun sticking it to other teams fans. :rolleyes: But a Jman showed, there's always another such poll.

Cheers,

Merlot
 
Last edited:

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
merlot, I challenge you to give me the name of one, just one, sports analyst in the Boston area. Remember, I said analyst. Journalists and talk show hosts are not analysts, so don't give me Glen "Joe.T" Ordway, Dan "Joe.T" Shaughnessy, or Bob "Joe.T" Ryan.
 

Special K

‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^›
May 3, 2003
5,076
4
38
Red Sox Nation
Visit site
The study comes from The Nielsen Company and was reported by the Wall Street Journal. The company website calls itself the global leader in Media Information and also does political polling that is routinely reported on as factual and scientific by all major media outlets. If the WSJ considers their study to be scientific, it must be scientific given that almost every major media outlet is using this company to compile and analyze data of this kind not to mention political polls.

I am not sure what the purpose of this study was, but I assume it was done to find out which teams fans felt strongly about hating, and I assume The Nielsen Company polled using a diverse control group and a neutral question.

EB, explain to me from your study what the fuck this means, "The formula helps determine whether consumers have positive, negative or neutral reactions to brands in their online messages. Nielsen's "Sentiment Rankings" range from 5 to minus-5. No team finished with a negative number."
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Done.

Hello Rumples,

merlot, I challenge you to give me the name of one, just one, sports analyst in the Boston area. Remember, I said analyst. Journalists and talk show hosts are not analysts, so don't give me Glen "Joe.T" Ordway, Dan "Joe.T" Shaughnessy, or Bob "Joe.T" Ryan.

Here you are: Nick Cafardo

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseba...ty_as_even_red_sox_owner_henry_shows_concern/

The Red Sox’ struggles are no longer a media/fan concern.

The concern goes much higher up.

“Of course I’m concerned,’’ wrote Sox owner John Henry in an e-mail. “We can’t dig ourselves too deep a hole. The Yankees and Tampa Bay are so strong.’’

All one has to do is look at the team that demolished the Sox this Patriots Day weekend, the Rays, who went 11-16 to start last season and never recovered. In the AL East, you just can’t be 4-9 after 13 games, 6 games behind the Rays and 5 1/2 in back of the Yankees, and think it’s going to be easy to come back.

That’s why it wasn’t too early to be concerned about David Ortiz after only two games of the season. It wasn’t too early to question whether Mike Cameron was a suitable replacement for Jason Bay. It wasn’t too early to wonder whether Victor Martinez could be the full-time catcher and still maintain his hitting.

And so we wonder, even though it’s still very early in the season, what can be done to shake things up?

Every day the players come to the park and hope this is the day they become what everyone thinks they should be — a 95-win team that makes the playoffs. The Sox were 2-6 last season, then won 11 straight and became that team. We understand the concept of slow-starting players because there are a ton in the majors, the Yankees’ Mark Teixeira (hitting .114) a prime example.

This start doesn’t have to be catastrophic, but Henry’s concern is legitimate. Even if the Sox claw back and end up with the third-best record in baseball, that won’t be enough because New York and Tampa Bay may well have the two best records in the majors. The 1996 Red Sox wound up being a pretty good team after a 6-19 start. In fact, they finished 85-77 and Kevin Kennedy did a pretty good job managing but got fired when he didn’t make the playoffs.

There are no such things as major shakeups in baseball because there are guaranteed contracts and it’s hard to sit a player making $12 million. Injuries certainly take their toll on any team, and the Sox have been without their leadoff hitter/igniter Jacoby Ellsbury. The Sox are 1-6 since Ellsbury exited the lineup after a collision with teammate Adrian Beltre last Sunday in Kansas City. They lost two out of three to the Twins, then were swept in four games by the Rays.

Henry wouldn’t comment on whether he believes there needs to be a shake-up, indicating that was more general manager Theo Epstein’s responsibility.

But here are 10 things to consider:

1. Teams have stolen successfully against the Sox 23 out of 24 times. The Rays were 10 for 10. The Angels may make veteran Mike Napoli available, but he’s an offensive catcher. And then what would you do with Martinez and Jason Varitek?

2. David Ortiz is down to .158 after an 0 for 3 yesterday. How much longer will the Sox stick with him? Will they make Mike Lowell the full-time DH at some point? As of yesterday, Ortiz hadn’t met with Ron Jackson, his former hitting coach, who is in town. When asked if he would call Jackson, Ortiz said he would. Not that that would be the cure-all for Ortiz’s ills, but when desperation hits, don’t you try anything and everything to get out of a slump?

3. Jon Lester has been terrible — 0-2 with an 8.44 ERA over three starts. He hasn’t run away from his poor start and nobody feels worse than he does. Teams have sent young starters — even those with track records such as Lester’s — back to the minors before. The Indians did it with Cliff Lee in 2007, and he came back the following year and won 22 games and the American League Cy Young award. The Sox likely would not consider something that drastic, but it would send a strong message.

4. Daisuke Matsuzaka to the rescue? Who knows whether Matsuzaka will add stability to the Sox rotation. Strange to see Tim Wakefield and trainer Mike Reinold going into manager Terry Francona’s office for a closed-door meeting, where Epstein and Ben Cherington also were sitting. Is something wrong with Wakefield?

5. Should the Sox consider Jermaine Dye? The Sox were interested in acquiring him a few years ago. Granted, his offense slipped the second half of last season with the White Sox and he remains unsigned after recent talks with the Nationals fell through. Dye hit .179 with 7 homers and 26 RBIs in his final 246 at-bats with the White Sox last season. He had hit .302 with 20 homers and 55 RBIs in his first 81 games. But Francona is familiar with him and he could add some righthanded power. The Sox, of course, currently don’t have a lot of room on their bench with Varitek, Bill Hall, Lowell and Jeremy Hermida.

6. It has to be a concern that Cameron has had such a tough start defensively and that he’s had a rough time physically with kidney stones and perhaps another ailment he was undergoing tests for at Massachusetts General Hospital yesterday. So far one has to question the swap of positions, with Ellsbury going to left, given that Ellsbury was prone to highlight catches and had knowledge of center field in Fenway. But UZR rules.

7. Might the bench be reconfigured a bit? Hall has had some defensive issues as the super utility player. Granted, he hasn’t played center at Fenway very often and hadn’t played short since his 35-homer season in Milwaukee in 2006. The Sox really don’t have a true backup at shortstop. This could become an issue.

8. There is lots of inconsistency in middle relief with Manny Delcarmen, Ramon Ramirez, Scott Schoeneweis, and Scott Atchison leading up to Daniel Bard and Hideki Okajima. The plan was for the starters to go seven and hand it over to the setup guys and closer, but it hasn’t often worked out that way. That doesn’t mean it won’t.

9. Sometimes the advent of a young player with an attitude can help spark a team. Josh Reddick had a red-hot spring training, but he has had a poor start at Pawtucket, hitting .147 with one homer and four RBIs. The Sox have had him ready to come up with Ellsbury and Cameron’s physical woes and if there is something else wrong with Cameron, Reddick may be called on.

10. Sometimes it’s best just to do nothing, to just play it out and hope the damage isn’t too much to overcome. It’s tough to do sometimes, given the pressure put on by two divisional rivals. One can always look back to last season, when the Yankees went 0-8 against the Red Sox, then won 9 of 10 against them and won the World Series.

Nick Cafardo can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @nickcafardo.


BTW Rumples...telling someone to find "one name" isn't an answer.

Cheers,

Merlot

PS

Didn't take long, did it. Or will you say he isn't a sports analyst?

Nick Cafardo bio:

Cafardo covers news relating to the Boston Red Sox for the Boston Globe sports section. He covers issues associated with Major League Baseball and writes the Sunday baseball notes column. He also writes a baseball column on the Boston Red Sox and is a contributor on the New England Sports Network (NESN) Red Sox pre-game show. He previously served as beat writer for the Red Sox and New England Patriots and was the national football writer for the Globe. Cafardo authored the “The Impossible Team,” the story of the 2001 Super Bowl champion New England Patriots and “None but the Braves,” the story of the 1995 World Champion Atlanta Braves. Before joining the Globe, he covered the Red Sox for the Patriot Ledger (Quincy, Mass.) and Brockton Enterprise, where he covered the climb of Marvin Hagler to middleweight boxing world champion. Cafardo has been a member of the Boston Globe sports staff since November of 1989.
 
Last edited:

Special K

‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^›
May 3, 2003
5,076
4
38
Red Sox Nation
Visit site
Didn't take long, did it. Or will you say he isn't a sports analyst?

Nick Cafardo bio:

Cafardo covers news relating to the Boston Red Sox for the Boston Globe sports section. He covers issues associated with Major League Baseball and writes the Sunday baseball notes column. He also writes a baseball column on the Boston Red Sox and is a contributor on the New England Sports Network (NESN) Red Sox pre-game show. He previously served as beat writer for the Red Sox and New England Patriots and was the national football writer for the Globe. Cafardo authored the “The Impossible Team,” the story of the 2001 Super Bowl champion New England Patriots and “None but the Braves,” the story of the 1995 World Champion Atlanta Braves. Before joining the Globe, he covered the Red Sox for the Patriot Ledger (Quincy, Mass.) and Brockton Enterprise, where he covered the climb of Marvin Hagler to middleweight boxing world champion. Cafardo has been a member of the Boston Globe sports staff since November of 1989.

Pretty sure he's a journalist but then again, what's the f'n difference between journalist and analyst?
 

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
Cafardo covers news relating to the Boston Red Sox for the Boston Globe sports section. He covers issues associated with Major League Baseball and writes the Sunday baseball notes column. He also writes a baseball column on the Boston Red Sox and is a contributor on the New England Sports Network (NESN) Red Sox pre-game show. He previously served as beat writer for the Red Sox and New England Patriots and was the national football writer for the Globe. Cafardo authored the “The Impossible Team,” the story of the 2001 Super Bowl champion New England Patriots and “None but the Braves,” the story of the 1995 World Champion Atlanta Braves. Before joining the Globe, he covered the Red Sox for the Patriot Ledger (Quincy, Mass.) and Brockton Enterprise, where he covered the climb of Marvin Hagler to middleweight boxing world champion. Cafardo has been a member of the Boston Globe sports staff since November of 1989.
FAIL. Gotta tell ya, Merlot, you're not very good at following directions. Again, analysts, not journalists. Much as I love him, as opposed to Ryan and Shaughnessy, Nick is a journalist, not an analyst. Just look over the bio. Baseball beat writer. Football beat writer. Boxing writer.
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Pretty sure he's a journalist but then again, what's the f'n difference between journalist and analyst?

Hello SK,

When people like Charles Barkley get hired as "analysts" one wonders whether there's more value and credibility in being an analyst ( because you starred in a sport) or being a sports writer of many years (who must be knowledgeable on many sports).

FAIL. Gotta tell ya, Merlot, you're not very good at following directions. Again, analysts, not journalists. Much as I love him, as opposed to Ryan and Shaughnessy, Nick is a journalist, not an analyst. Just look over the bio. Baseball beat writer. Football beat writer. Boxing writer.

So you are telling me someone who has been a sports writer or journalist successfully for a major paper for 21 years is not also a defacto analyst???

No one is taking directions from you. If you don't want to respond to my posts that's fine with me. If you want to belittle them that's fine too. But you haven't said anything in this thread you didn't basically say about the team last year when they got the snot beat out of them by Tampa Bay. Your "analysis" wasn't correct then, and your credibility is as on trial as mine. Despite your all your capabilities with stats and analysis I was the one who predicted (analyzed no matter how amateurishly) last year the Sox would not do well against the best teams in the playoffs...not you.

Cheers,

Merlot
 
Last edited:

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
Pretty sure he's a journalist but then again, what's the f'n difference between journalist and analyst?
A journalist reports the news; his expertise is in gathering information not analyzing performance. An analyst analyzes performance, using his expertise to build his teams roster or project a teams performance. John Sickels is an analyst. Rob Neyer is an analyst. Keith Law is an analyst. Bill James is an analyst whose expertise has helped the Red Sox win two championships.

Frankly, I think things are looking pretty good for the hose. They have 1, count 'em, one pitcher who has performed well to date, Clay Buchholz. They have two hitters, Pedroia and Scutaro, who are doing what they're supposed to do. Three players perfoming up to par and still playing .500 ball, despite opening the season with 10 of their first 13 game against 3 of the 4 best teams in the league.
 

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
So you are telling me someone who has been a sports writer or journalist successfully for a major paper for 21 years is not also a defacto analyst???
Oh, yeah, he's quite the expert. Football, baseball, boxing. You're so full of shit, Merlot, you should change your name to Eagerbeaver.

You haven't said anything in this thread you didn't basically say about the team last year when they got the snot beat out of them by Tampa Bay. Your "analysis" wasn't correct then, and your credibility is as on trial as mine. And I was the one who predicted (analyzed) last year the Sox would not do well against the best teams in the playoffs...not you.
I said nothing about the playoffs. I'm smart enough to not predict short series. (see: Canadiens, Montreal.) You know, Merlot, you're so full of shit, you should change your name to Joe.T.
 

Special K

‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^›
May 3, 2003
5,076
4
38
Red Sox Nation
Visit site
A journalist reports the news; his expertise is in gathering information not analyzing performance. An analyst analyzes performance, using his expertise to build his teams roster or project a teams performance.

Using Merlot's example of Charles Barkely, ex NBA Hall of famer, when he appears on say Sportscenter doing analysis on the current playoffs would you then consider him an analyst?
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Hello all,

Oh, yeah, he's quite the expert. Football, baseball, boxing. You're so full of shit, Merlot, you should change your name to Eagerbeaver.


I said nothing about the playoffs. I'm smart enough to not predict short series. (see: Canadiens, Montreal.) You know, Merlot, you're so full of shit, you should change your name to Joe.T.

So what a credible analyst or respectable poster does is tell everyone they're "full of shit". Wasn't this the type of thing YOU demanded everyone not do this year

Using Merlot's example of Charles Barkely, ex NBA Hall of famer, when he appears on say Sportscenter doing analysis on the current playoffs would you then consider him an analyst?

Exactly the point. Many are paid big bucks to speak under the label analyst who really aren't doing any of what Rumples defines as an analyst. In any case, it's pretty weak to belabor the use of a single word instead of answering the point.

Cheers,

Merlot
 
Last edited:

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,383
3,288
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
Special K,

My definition of what constitutes an expert is anyone who can survive a challenge in Court under the Daubert standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard

If a scientific methodology is involved it's scientific. I am pretty sure that if you got the best attorney in Boston to mount a Daubert challenge on the Nielsen study and I got the second best attorney in Boston to defend Nielsen, Nielsen would win and the study would be upheld under the Daubert standard.

You give me enough of a retainer and I will disclose Joe T as an expert witness on gambling patterns in pro football and have him survive a Daubert challenge.
 
Last edited:

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
Using Merlot's example of Charles Barkely, ex NBA Hall of famer, when he appears on say Sportscenter doing analysis on the current playoffs would you then consider him an analyst?
I would certainly say that Barkley's an analyst, however, I would also suggest that his "analyses" lack much in the way of sophisticated thought.

You know, Merlot, you're so full of shit, you should change your name to Eagerbeaver
Actually, this just sounded good for effect. The truth is that the Beav, bless his horny heart, has, since his discovery of Baseball Prospectus, become a much better student of the game. While he still tends to see the game through pin-striped colored glasses, it's good to see he's reaching for knowledge in the right places.
 
Last edited:

rumpleforeskiin

It's a whole new ballgame
Jan 20, 2007
6,560
28
48
49
Where I belong.
My definition of what constitutes an expert is anyone who can survive a challenge in Court under the Daubert standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard

If a scientific methodology is involved it's scientific. I am pretty sure that if you got the best attorney in Boston to mount a Daubert challenge on the Nielsen study and I got the second best attorney in Boston to defend Nielsen, Nielsen would win and the study would be upheld under the Daubert standard.

You give me enough of a retainer and I will disclose Joe T as an expert witness on gambling patterns in pro football and have him survive a Daubert challenge.
So what you're saying here, Beav, is a) that you'd only trust an analyst who could survive a Daubert challenge and b) that Daubert challenges suck. Now that's what I call advance Merlotian thinking.
 

Jman47

Red Sox Nation
Jan 28, 2009
1,296
0
0
Who else is calling Robbie Cano for the triple crown?

Dammit Joe.t!:mad:

As a Red Sox fan I normally would post opposite you on this subject...However...As a FBB team owner who happens to have Cano you and I actually managed to agree on something - holy shit boys, in less than a week Joe.t agreed with 2 Sox fans now on something...

But as I started to say - dammit, now you went ahead and cursed Cano by laying the prediction out there...:rolleyes:

Have fun,

Jman
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Toronto Escorts