2/5=40%

Brilliant[ly stupid].

about 2 years ago Sam Page 14 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

They must have had tony reali working around the clock to come up with GWBSQ (games with better starter quotient)

by HotChipWillBreakYourLegs on Nov 19, 2009 8:47 AM EST reply actions

...The free agent power hitters, the Matt Hollidays [...], are not difference-makers.

What? A WAR last season of 5.7 seems pretty difference making to me.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Nov 19, 2009 9:08 AM EST reply actions

Yeah but don't you remember that one missed catch that everyone saw?

That catch was worth over -9000 wins.

by Gina on Nov 19, 2009 9:41 AM EST up reply actions

-1 = -9,000. Let's hope that's notOmar logic...And (gulp), it sounds like it is...

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Nov 19, 2009 10:07 AM EST up reply actions

dude, yeah

66.6% of our outfield would be superior to most other teams’s!

by Pack Bringley on Nov 19, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions

That's honestly pretty embarassing for ESPN

A multi billion dollar company can’t even hire some decent editors …

by Balagast on Nov 19, 2009 9:53 AM EST reply actions

You've never heard of Miguel Cabrera-League?

by Bieser's Balk on Nov 19, 2009 10:20 AM EST up reply actions

If you have a clearly better starter 40 percent of the time to start,and then in other matchups throughout the season, say you add on another 30 percent of having the better starter in the matchup, that’s a clear advantage you have 70 percent of the time. Why is that a joke to you people? It’s just simple math.

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Nov 19, 2009 7:57 PM EST reply actions

Wait wut?

by Gina on Nov 19, 2009 8:09 PM EST up reply actions

i'm not understanding why the concept in the article posted is funny

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Nov 19, 2009 8:53 PM EST up reply actions

I'm not understanding what your math is saying

by Gina on Nov 19, 2009 8:56 PM EST up reply actions

don't you get it?

sign lackey and we’ll have a 70% winning percentage. Add Halladay and that will be up to 90%. If Ollie performs well, 110, and we all know Pelf’s going to pull it together, so 130. That’s not only a perfect 2010 season but a very strong start to 2011.

by Pack Bringley on Nov 19, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions

no

say you add John Lackey with Santana- 40 percent of the time overall (each pitcher starts 20 percent of the season’s games) you have the better starter

out of the remaining 60 percent, 30 percent of the time with Pelfrey/Maine/Perez (or whoever the bottom 3 are) you have the better matchup (If it’s Pelfrey vs. Eric Stults, for example)

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Nov 21, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions

I'm pretty sure the joke is: No shit, Sherlock.

I’m not following you math either, as an aside. How are you coming up with 70%? With a five-man rotation, you can only get intervals of 20 when you want to divide things up by the percentage of games where you’ll “be in it”, or “have the advantage”, or whatever term is used, based on who the starting pitcher is.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Nov 19, 2009 9:36 PM EST up reply actions