Rogers +/-

[CP_414]

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/clarification-.html

 

I know it is Phil Rogers, and we should expect stupidity, but this is even worse than normal. I know it's a blog, but how does this get printed? Does he have a Hall of Fame vote? Sad.

[imb]

So if you traded, say, Johan Santana, for Ryan Theriot, Jason Kendall and Jacque Jones, you would be plus-2? Great system, moron.

[David]

FJM mentioned this, I think. It was mentioned in the Rants thread.

 

[expletive] would be an understatement.

[Illini Iceman]

Since you have a 25 man roster every year wouldn't you always be +/- 0? Or is the assumption that adding a crappy FA is always better then giving a quality prospect a shot at the starting job? The Cubs get a -1 for letting Kendall walk and giving Soto the C position? This makes my brain hurt.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

My gosh, Phil Rogers has a mental handicap. For some reason, I don't think they will post my comment...

[Chocolate Milk]

This is all kinds of dumb. Why would he defend this? I was hoping that that original comlumn was just for fun.

[Anomalied]

Last time I checked, subtracting a negative is a positive. Even when you factor in his adjustment to American baseball, Fukudome will most certainly outproduce Jones and Floyd's 2007. And while he may be a rookie, it won't take much for Soto to contribute more than the Barrett/Blanco/Bowen/Hill/Kendall five-headed monster that played last season.

 

If this is all that it takes to become a sportswriter then I'm glad I'm pursuing a degree in journalism. I'll be making bank :-k

[Butterscup1679666578]

If this is all that it takes to become a sportswriter then I'm glad I'm pursuing a degree in journalism. I'll be making bank :-k

 

I'm just the opposite. Reading things like this make me glad I decided to change majors from Journalism.

[TruffleShuffle]

For the purpose of identifying the most on-the-surface improvement around the major leagues, consider the core players—hitters projected to be regulars and pitchers who either start or work the last two innings of games—who have come and gone. In this simple accounting, the Sox rate a plus-two, having added Swisher, Orlando Cabrera and Scott Linebrink while losing only Jon Garland. That puts them alongside Detroit (plus-three), Tampa Bay (plus-two), Toronto (plus-one) and Houston (plus-one) as the most improved teams in the majors.

 

Okay. Let's review the system.

 

If you add a "core" player -- meaning anyone who projects to be regular, or a starting pitcher, or (for some reason) a pitcher who is either an 8th inning guy or a closer, you get one Point. If you lose one such player, you lose one Point.

 

Thus, if the St. Louis Cardinals traded Albert Pujols and their eleven best minor league prospects to the Texas Rangers for Vincente Padilla and Ben Broussard, the Cardinals would be "Plus-One," and would have improved.

 

It's an excellent system.

[sweetpeteman]

Congratulations Phil Rogers, you have made a system that, get this, can tell us if a team has let people go or gained people through free agency and trades. Yes, thats right, you made a system that tells us stuff we already know. For a system like this to be of use, it needs two important things: A need and a way of predicting things. The first one, a need, does not exist as you have used the ability to add and subtract (yes, I know, major milestones for you) to tell us that the Cubs have traded or let walk more players than they brought in. Bravo. The second part, a predictive power, does not exist, as it will tell us very little, if anything at all, about how a team could do this season. All this is predicting is that the teams that have added will eventually clear roster space and the teams that have subtracted will add players, probably prospects/backups in both cases.

 

 

 

So, to sum up, Phil Rogers has created a system that does nothing and predicts nothing. I have also made a system, except its even less complicated. All you have to know is how to count to 10. Just say a number 1-10 and act like it means something. For example:

 

Red Sox: 4. This means that the Red Sox scored a 4, which is mediocre. They need to make changes to get it higher, otherwise they will not make the playoffs.

San Francisco: 9. They are a virtual lock to contend.

 

 

Does this make sense? Hell no. Does it accomplish anything? Hell no. Is it a "system" like Phil Rogers? Sure.

Edited January 23, 2008 by sweetpeteman

[Banedon]

When I saw the subject, I thought maybe he was trying to use the +/- system that they use in hockey and that Yahoo is now reporting the NBA box scores. That might have been just as amusing.

[Roast]

That's the most absolutely ridiculous nonsense I have ever seen.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

This one is making me laugh rather loudly:

I am personally embarrassed for you, Phil Rogers. I'm guessing that the person that allowed your "formula" to go public probably has it out for you. You should be careful.

People will be talking about your ridiculous "formula" for years to come. Stupidity like this doesn't come around very often. Congratulations. You just cemented your place in the Hall of Fame for Idiotic Sportwriting. The fate of Harold Baines does not await you, Phil Rogers, because no one will forget to put you on their ballot.

[DenverCubs]

http://www.firejoemorgan.com/search/label/phil%20rogers

 

This was a pretty good FJM...Phil Rogers has been repeatedly stupid.

[Soul]

Mind boggling.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

That was just glorious ownage..nothing but responses pointing out his foolishness...so great. :D

[cheapseats]

Just another example of why the BBWWA should not be voting on the HOF.

[Proven Veteran]

Just another example of why the BBWWA should not be voting on the HOF.

They shouldn't get to vote for president either.

[seanimal]

Any room left to pile on in here?

[Guest]

One of the best responses was the first one.

 

If you were a GM, would you seriously use this system? You should stop writing about it and pretend you never did. I'm embarrassed for you.

[Guest]

If this is all that it takes to become a sportswriter then I'm glad I'm pursuing a degree in journalism. I'll be making bank :-k

 

I'm just the opposite. Reading things like this make me glad I decided to change majors from Journalism.

 

And by the same token, reading things like this make me believe that I can become a writer for a big time paper someday. I mean, I may not have the biggest vocabulary in the world but at least I'm not a complete moran. I really should start printing this like this out and save them. Then, when I go in for a job interview and I get asked the question "Why should we hire you?", I can present things like this and say that I will never, EVER, write stupid crap like this.

[Jon]

If this is all that it takes to become a sportswriter then I'm glad I'm pursuing a degree in journalism. I'll be making bank :-k

 

I'm just the opposite. Reading things like this make me glad I decided to change majors from Journalism.

 

And by the same token, reading things like this make me believe that I can become a writer for a big time paper someday. I mean, I may not have the biggest vocabulary in the world but at least I'm not a complete moran. I really should start printing this like this out and save them. Then, when I go in for a job interview and I get asked the question "Why should we hire you?", I can present things like this and say that I will never, EVER, write stupid crap like this.

I'm not a sports journalist, but in the next interview I have, I'm going to pull out the +/- stat. What could be better at convincing someone to hire me than to inform them by doing so, they'd be +1?