Jump to content
North Side Baseball
Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

wins and losses do not a good pitcher make

 

True but he has had an average career (ERA+ of 102).

Is that bad?

  • Replies 439
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

you're right, looking at win-loss is THE BEST way to judge where a pitcher ranks on a range from best-average-worst scale. you got it solved.

Maybe I should have said "average" pitcher. I'm talking about the quality of his pitching, which was way better than usual last year, and is now much worse.

Guest
Guests
Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

wins and losses do not a good pitcher make

 

True but he has had an average career (ERA+ of 102).

Is that bad?

 

I thought Garage Party was saying Lilly was average, not bad. My bad if I misinterpreted him.

Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

you're right, looking at win-loss is THE BEST way to judge where a pitcher ranks on a range from best-average-worst scale. you got it solved.

Maybe I should have said "average" pitcher. I'm talking about the quality of his pitching, which was way better than usual last year, and is now much worse.

 

This is... no. Wrong.

Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

you're right, looking at win-loss is THE BEST way to judge where a pitcher ranks on a range from best-average-worst scale. you got it solved.

Maybe I should have said "average" pitcher. I'm talking about the quality of his pitching, which was way better than usual last year, and is now much worse.

It's still only three starts.

Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

wins and losses do not a good pitcher make

 

True but he has had an average career (ERA+ of 102), even if he has had to face stiffer competition in the past in the AL East.

 

he has looked bad, but i'd give him a little more time. everyone is starting to sound like lou around here.

Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

wins and losses do not a good pitcher make

 

True but he has had an average career (ERA+ of 102), even if he has had to face stiffer competition in the past in the AL East.

 

he has looked bad, but i'd give him a little more time. everyone is starting to sound like lou around here.

I am not worried the team we have to worry about is 1 game ahead of us right now. Eventually the Cardinals will play some big league teams.

Guest
Guests
Posted
This is regression to the mean, folks.

What are you talking about?

He's a .500 pitcher. He had an outstanding year last year, now he's making up for it with terrible play.

 

wins and losses do not a good pitcher make

 

True but he has had an average career (ERA+ of 102), even if he has had to face stiffer competition in the past in the AL East.

 

he has looked bad, but i'd give him a little more time. everyone is starting to sound like lou around here.

 

No doubt, I agree it's too soon.

Posted
This is... no. Wrong.

Okay, correct me.

 

If a player outperforms his capability, it's far more likely he'll return to his average than suddenly become terrible to even it out. And seriously, it's three starts.

Posted

Hamels is at 86 pitches. He's got two solid innings in him if the cubs work him a lil bit.

 

Which means he has about 5 innings left.

Posted
This is... no. Wrong.

Okay, correct me.

 

If a player outperforms his capability, it's far more likely he'll return to his average than suddenly become terrible to even it out. And seriously, it's three starts.

 

So that must be why JH was in such a hurry to replace DeRosa.

Posted
Gahhh jeeesuusss

 

I don't like losing.

 

You should be used to it, being a Cubs fan.

I'm used to walking down the street and seeing hot women wearing clothes. Doesn't mean I like it.

Posted (edited)
This is... no. Wrong.

Okay, correct me.

 

If a player outperforms his capability, it's far more likely he'll return to his average than suddenly become terrible to even it out. And seriously, it's three starts.

Well, this is an unlikely parade of crap, then. I don't care if it's only been three starts. If you're the #2 pitcher for a presumed division champion, it's unacceptable to fail to complete five innings in three successive starts. At least that's what I think. I might be wrong. Maybe if he failed to complete six innings, that'd be one thing, but to not yet escape the fifth?

Edited by Garage Party!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...