This season is already over.

[UBlink]

to elabortate on goony's evil jersey's post, toss the "1 or 2 run game" out the window and look at this:

 

When the Cubs score 4 runs or fewer, they are 2-9.

When the Cubs score 5 runs or more, they are 5-3.

 

the winning percentage isn't off the charts for the 5+ runs, but the alarming number is that the Cubs have score 4 or fewer in 11 out of 19 games so far. That's not going to win you games consistently no matter your luck/pitching/manager

 

So luck and managing have no impact on how many runs you score?

 

less impact than the players holding the bats

 

No argument with that, but in a 1 or 2 run game the impact of luck and managing might make enough difference to change the outcome.

 

Judging the shape and location of a distribution from a relatively small sample is likely to be imprecise.

[David]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

[David]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

You're right, the outcome would've been exactly the same if Lee had been on third base. The same pitch would've been made with the same velocity and location even with a different number of outs, runners in scoring position, and a different delivery.

 

Thank you. Didn't even see this when I made my reply.

[jersey cubs fan]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really assume Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

EDIT> I do not think the season is over, but at this point in time the Cubs are not a good team. But with the mediocrity that is the NL Central they still have a shot.

 

You can't assume Aramis would get the same pitch and would hit a homerun, had Lee stayed still. That doesn't make the SB attempt any less dumb. The Cubs have been reckless on the base paths. Some people call it aggressive. I call it stupid. Lou's boys have run themselves out of more than 1 inning, and that's doubly tough when you don't get on base all that frequently to begin with.

[CubinNY]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

 

No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way.

 

I'm going on what actually happened.

[jersey cubs fan]

why are people pretending that 2-run losses are determined by luck?

[David]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

 

No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way.

 

I'm going on what actually happened.

 

The problem is, it very likely wouldn't have actually happened had Lee still been on base.

 

The play was stupid, there's no doubt about that. But you can't argue that the run cost us the game because you think that, in your own hypothetical universe, Aramis would've hit a 2 run HR in that spot.

 

You're talking to me about hypotheticals while you're the one saying a hypothetical run in an alternate reality would've won the game. Really, what on earth are you talking about??

Edited April 24, 2007 by David

[UBlink]

why are people pretending that 2-run losses are determined by luck?

 

Some are arguing that luck is more likely to play a role in a 2 run loss than in a 5 run loss.

[CubinNY]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

 

No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way.

 

I'm going on what actually happened.

 

The problem is, it very likely wouldn't have actually happened had Lee still been on base.

How in the wide, wide world of sports can you possibly say that?

[David]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

 

No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way.

 

I'm going on what actually happened.

 

The problem is, it very likely wouldn't have actually happened had Lee still been on base.

How in the wide, wide world of sports can you possibly say that?

 

You can't be serious.

[CubColtPacer]

I agree that Lee was safe, but you can't really assume that Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all.

 

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal.

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans.

 

ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING

 

Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said?

 

Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all."

 

Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out.

 

This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game.

 

So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened?

 

The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way.

 

You're the one making asinine statements.

 

No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way.

 

I'm going on what actually happened.

 

The problem is, it very likely wouldn't have actually happened had Lee still been on base.

 

Exactly-Aramis is up with a 1-2 count. The pitch that a pitcher throws with 1 out and Lee on 2nd is completely different from the pitch that he throws with 2 outs and nobody on. For one, he is much more willing to waste a couple of pitches and risk walking Ramirez in the first scenario then in the second one, and so the pitcher is going to throw more strikes that could possibly be driven with nobody on.

[C.C.]

Only a Cubs fan I tell ya! The most creative minds on the planet. Curses, luck, hypotheticals...It's just bad baseball guys. It really is.

[David]

On top of that, wasn't he also pitching from the stretch while Lee was on, and the windup when Aramis jacked it?

[Chocolate Milk]

Why are we talking about Lee steal as an example of the Cubs bad play costing them games? Lee was safe. He was erroneously called out.

[Soriano12]

Not only is this season over, but I'm pretty sure 2008 is tanked too.

[ctcf]

Not only is this season over, but I'm pretty sure 2008 is tanked too.

 

I was gonna with the rest of the decade actually.

[David]

Why are we talking about Lee steal as an example of the Cubs bad play costing them games? Lee was safe. He was erroneously called out.

 

CubinNY brought that example in. Still, I wouldn't argue with him about it being a bad play. Yes he was safe, but it's not really about the outcome anyway. It was a bad decision to attempt the steal. Even if he's safe, it was a bad decision. Process over outcome.

[CubinNY]

On top of that, wasn't he also pitching from the stretch while Lee was on, and the windup when Aramis jacked it?

 

Yes, and we all know that pitching from the stretch is so much more effective than pitching from the windup. While, I bet you he would have just blown it past Aramis had he been in the stretch. Or better yet, if Lee is safe a butterfly would have landed on a dandelion and distracted Jenkins just enough that Aramis would have been able to hit an inside the park HR on liner.

[UBlink]

Only a Cubs fan I tell ya! The most creative minds on the planet. Curses, luck, hypotheticals...It's just bad baseball guys. It really is.

 

In a sport where even the best teams lose over 35% of their games, it's not difficult to believe that there is a degree of randomness associated with the outcome of a game (or several games).

[Chocolate Milk]

Actually, some teams do have better W-L records in one run games than others. What is the correlation?

 

Bill James published an article three years ago in which he reviewed Tom Ruane's article, and added the useful insight that a team's record in one-run games can be projected by the ratio of its runs scored to runs allowed

 

Go figure.

[Banedon]

On top of that, wasn't he also pitching from the stretch while Lee was on, and the windup when Aramis jacked it?

 

Yes, and we all know that pitching from the stretch is so much more effective than pitching from the windup. While, I bet you he would have just blown it past Aramis had he been in the stretch. Or better yet, if Lee is safe a butterfly would have landed on a dandelion and distracted Jenkins just enough that Aramis would have been able to hit an inside the park HR on liner.

 

I'm confused. Where is this dandelion? I haven't seen any at Wrigley...if you're saying the dandelion is in the ballpark, I'm calling shenanigans. I mean come on...lets be realistic.....

[Chocolate Milk]

Why are we talking about Lee steal as an example of the Cubs bad play costing them games? Lee was safe. He was erroneously called out.

 

CubinNY brought that example in. Still, I wouldn't argue with him about it being a bad play. Yes he was safe, but it's not really about the outcome anyway. It was a bad decision to attempt the steal. Even if he's safe, it was a bad decision. Process over outcome.

 

Oh I understand that wasn't the best decision, but a player being called out when he was safe is a better example of bad luck than bad play, imo. The Cubs have no control over the officiating.

[CubinNY]

Even if he's safe, it was a bad decision. Process over outcome.

That's the point. And there have been quite a few more examples of dumb play that cost the Cubs this year.

 

Luck probably plays a role, but so does poor decision making and poor execution.

[Soriano12]

Not only is this season over, but I'm pretty sure 2008 is tanked too.

 

I was gonna with the rest of the decade actually.

 

Might wanna just add in 2010-2019 too...

 

hey so are we going to start reusing the decade number's naming thing..

 

like the 1920's are just called the 20's...etc? just curious...this question keeps me awake at night, sometimes.

[David]

On top of that, wasn't he also pitching from the stretch while Lee was on, and the windup when Aramis jacked it?

 

Yes, and we all know that pitching from the stretch is so much more effective than pitching from the windup. While, I bet you he would have just blown it past Aramis had he been in the stretch. Or better yet, if Lee is safe a butterfly would have landed on a dandelion and distracted Jenkins just enough that Aramis would have been able to hit an inside the park HR on liner.

 

You're kidding me, right? It's not about it being more effective (that probably depends on the pitcher, anyway). It's about it being a COMPLETELY different pitch.

 

Hitting a home run is a fairly unlikely outcome for a hitter which requires a confluence of several variables going the right way, any ONE of which could completely change the outcome if it were removed or changed. Is this so hard to comprehend?

Edited April 24, 2007 by David