Saturday, February 21, 2015
Two kinds of Random-Variationistas
?Reading the comments on Joe's article regarding 1980s bases loaded hero Pat Tabler(*), and I'm left with this impression.
(*) Seeing those stats in the 1980s, courtesy of Elias Analyst or ESPN or whoever was responsible, and I think it is that point where the silliness of all the splits data started. People look for meaning in everything, and they latched onto this one.
It's clear that Joe has two very distinct fan bases:
1. Those that start with the idea that everything is random variation around a mean, and look for evidence that this mean shifts somewhat in various conditions. A true .350 OBP hitter might be true .310 or .370, etc under various circumstances.
2. Those that start with the idea that what they observe is close to the true mean, and might accept a small amount of random variation. An observed career .360 OBP might be observed at .500 OBP or .210 OBP, etc, under various circumstances, and so, the presumed true mean might be shifted say 10 or 30 points toward the overall mean.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 150 pages 1 2 3 > Last ›Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date
FORUM TOPICS
Jul 12 15:22 MarcelsApr 16 14:31 Pitch Count Estimators
Mar 12 16:30 Appendix to THE BOOK - THE GORY DETAILS
Jan 29 09:41 NFL Overtime Idea
Jan 22 14:48 Weighting Years for NFL Player Projections
Jan 21 09:18 positional runs in pythagenpat
Oct 20 15:57 DRS: FG vs. BB-Ref
Apr 12 09:43 What if baseball was like survivor? You are eliminated ...
Nov 24 09:57 Win Attribution to offense, pitching, and fielding at the game level (prototype method)
Jul 13 10:20 How to watch great past games without spoilers