Minor League Discussion & Boxes 7-25-10

[Guest]

This is a silly argument, though. You're fully aware that you could have said what you did in such a way that wouldn't have been provoking the people you have already acknowledged you were trying to get a rise out of.

It's a silly argument predicated on your confusing knowing with trying.

 

I wasn't trying to get a rise out of folks, but I knew my opinion would be unpopular with the saber-savvy set.

This will be my final comment on the matter.

 

Your opinion is fine and a point worth remembering. However, it's not that your opinion would get a rise out of people. It's the way you phrased it that was purposefully written with no other reason but to get a rise out of the "saber-savvy set". If you simply express the opinion that line drive percentages are sketchy at best in the minors and that BABIP adjustments at that level may not be as meaningful as they are in the majors, then there's no issue with anyone and a meaningful discussion may ensue.

 

However, by phrasing your opinion in the manner most likely to piss people off, you were not only expressing your thoughts but also intentionally trying to "get a rise" out of your target audience.

 

That's trolling. Now, I'll give you credit - it's intelligent trolling, trolling with a point to be made, etc. But to me, you're trolling anytime you are purposefully saying something on a forum such as this with the intention of eliciting an angry response. By calling it "hocus-pocus", you were doing exactly such a thing.

[Outshined_One]

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/9886/bravery6nirz7.jpg

[Rob]

The real irony in all this is that he didn't actually upset me. I was just practicing my imb impression.

[SouthSideRyan]

This is multiple times I've seen it brought up here that minor league LD% is unreliable. Why are these people arguing this point assuming that it's lower than what's being reported? Is there a reason to think minor league LD% are higher than they should be rather than lower?

[davearm2]

This is a silly argument, though. You're fully aware that you could have said what you did in such a way that wouldn't have been provoking the people you have already acknowledged you were trying to get a rise out of.

It's a silly argument predicated on your confusing knowing with trying.

 

I wasn't trying to get a rise out of folks, but I knew my opinion would be unpopular with the saber-savvy set.

This will be my final comment on the matter.

 

Your opinion is fine and a point worth remembering. However, it's not that your opinion would get a rise out of people. It's the way you phrased it that was purposefully written with no other reason but to get a rise out of the "saber-savvy set". If you simply express the opinion that line drive percentages are sketchy at best in the minors and that BABIP adjustments at that level may not be as meaningful as they are in the majors, then there's no issue with anyone and a meaningful discussion may ensue.

 

However, by phrasing your opinion in the manner most likely to piss people off, you were not only expressing your thoughts but also intentionally trying to "get a rise" out of your target audience.

 

That's trolling. Now, I'll give you credit - it's intelligent trolling, trolling with a point to be made, etc. But to me, you're trolling anytime you are purposefully saying something on a forum such as this with the intention of eliciting an angry response. By calling it "hocus-pocus", you were doing exactly such a thing.

As I have already explained, that was not my intention. The bolded is your inference, which is incorrect.

 

I refer you again to the distinction between knowing and trying.

[Guest]

This is multiple times I've seen it brought up here that minor league LD% is unreliable. Why are these people arguing this point assuming that it's lower than what's being reported? Is there a reason to think minor league LD% are higher than they should be rather than lower?

 

Nate just said the other day that once you get to AA, the line drive information at MiLB.com is pretty accurate but before that, it can be a bit questionable.