Jump to content
North Side Baseball

CubinNY

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    27,689

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by CubinNY

  1. CubinNY
    Debunking the point was enough. No need for this. Noted. I will attempt more civilitiy, but "don't spoil it for him" kind of got to me.
  2. CubinNY
    Thank you. And it is worse if you want to say Hendry started in 2003. The key point which all of you are forgetting here is the correlation. For that data, the R^2 value is 0.0249 and the R value is -0.1578. Those low values show there is a very little linear relationship for the data provided. Don't spoil this for him. We are not talking about corelations. The data are for years and wins. That is the data set. The reason why their isn't a linear relationship is because the Cubs didn't win more games every year. As the years go up the wins must go up to have a linear relationship. Analyzing trends has nothing to do with corelations though. Correlations have to do with things like runs scored and wins or runs allowed and wins. Time is not an independent variable unless one is talking about human development over the life span. RichHillisaBeast you never have a clue. Not even a hint of one any time you post in a thread.
  3. CubinNY
    This is the type of thing you do every freaking time you try to defend Hendry and the Cubs. Anyone can play the "if" game. It doesn't change history.
  4. CubinNY
    Good analysis. I agree. I have long had differences with those who argue that the manager is a huge influence on won/loss record. While there are some exceptions (Bobby Cox comes immediately to mind) the fact is that rarely does a manager really have a huge "positive" impact on a team that can't be explained any other way. Baker came in and got outstanding seasons out of Wood, Prior. A rejuvenated season out of Karros, Grudzielanek, Lofton, Borowski. An .800 OPS from AGonz...In short lots of things broke right for him and he was hailed as a genious. He was the same Dusty in 04-06 and gained VERY different results. Similar things happened with Leyland in DET. We'll see how good he is over the next couple of years. I agree as well. I am hoping the Lou will be a results oriented manager. Dusty seemed to a philosophical oriented manager.
  5. CubinNY
    a .333 average is only good in baseball. He completely minimizes Hendry's mistakes and takes every opportunity to makes excuses for what otherwise has been mediocre management. The Cubs are right where they were 10 years ago.
  6. CubinNY
    I don't know if this has been mentioned or not but I assume Jocque Jones will not be with the team by the start of the season. [speculation] I believe that Hendry & Co. are banking on Pie filling either CF or RF and using some sort of platoon with Floyd and Murton. If Pie struggles the Cubs will probably use Pagen in CF and move Soriano to RF (if he is not there already). [/speculation] I don't have a clue as to whom they would trade Jocque for, probably a mid-level AA pitcher of some sort and PTBL. Pennies on the dollar.
  7. CubinNY
    So the Cubs were 4 games over .500 when Lee got hurt and Ramirez was horrible along with Jones and Pierre. Lee got hurt on April 19th. On May 1st, they were still 4 games over .500. With your logic (and small sample size), I suppose we can assume that if Ramirez, Jones and Pierre continued sucking and Lee never came back, they should have finished the season 4 games over .500 since they were able to maintain a 4 game advantage after the Lee injury. The Cubs have had their share of fluke injures (Lee, Prior x2) but good teams overcome injuries all the time becuase they are built to do it. End of the story. I am hoping that is what Floyd is, an injury insurance policy. My bet is he is the starting LFer becuase the Cubs want a left handed HR threat in the order. Floyd is a steaky hitter and when he is hot he is smoking. When he's cold he's Neifi like without the contact. I don't want to see Murton platooned, but we'll have to wait and see what happens.
  8. CubinNY
    Thank you. And it is worse if you want to say Hendry started in 2003.
  9. CubinNY
    I didn't bother to do a linear regression (most primitive form of trend line), but it's not a straight line with 0 slope. You don't just draw a horizontal line at the average value and call it a trend line. Once again you have no idea what you are talking about. Four data points make a trend. Any four. Obviously, the more data one has the better one can make predictions. However, when looking at any set of data it is possible to look at the trend. One method is called a split-middle trend line. Leaner regression has nothing to do with it. Regression is a measure of central tendency. A trend shows the overall path of any data set and has very little to do with the mean. I discussed the mean in the four years prior to Hendry and the four years since Hendry took over as just more evidence that this team has gone nowhere. http://www.specialconnections.ku.edu/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/specconn/main.php?cat=assessment&section=main&subsection=cbm/usingdata Here is one of the dozens of studies that detail the use of a split middle trend line. http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ450911&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=eric_accno&objectId=0900000b80032c69 Edit: Admittedly using a split-middle trend line is a bit of a rough estimate. So I just graphed the years since 1998 and using a least squared method the slope of the trend is -.02 (FLAT). From 1998 to 2002 the trend was -2.5. From 2003 to 2006 the trend was -7.6. Anyway you cut it the Cubs are going in the wrong direction
  10. CubinNY
    But what if you dont believe that this happened, much less is possible? It always bothers me when people say something like this. It doesnt matter if you dont believe it, it offends the people that do believe it, which there are 2 billion of. Oh, but it does. I'm going to guess that there are a lot of things you do on a day-to-day basis that would offend a follower of Islam, which has almost 2 billion members as well. Are you going to cut out all of that? Why not? Excuse me for being late to the party, but would someone mind explaining to me what this has to do with the Floyd signing? Someone had the balls to write Jesus in this thread. I think it was Rocketsause but I am blaming it on CT.
  11. CubinNY
    The status que of pre and post Hendry is as much an indictment of Hendry's tenure as any I can think of. In four years the team has gone nowhere. The overall trend is flat. peaking and then dipping into a valley is "flat?" Yes. If you plot the number of wins the Cubs have achieved since Hendry took over and draw a line down the middle (known in science as a trend line) the line would be flat. The team has averaged 78 wins per season. In four years the Cubs have a losing record. In the four years before Hendry took over the Cubs average 77.5 wins. That is a flat trend 89 88 79 ------------------------ 67 66 Hendry wins/year 66/2006 79/2005 89/2004 88/2003 67/2002 Pre Hendry wins/year 88/2001 65/2000 67/1999 90/1998 That's not how you draw a trend line. :wink: Yes that is how you draw a trend line. Peaks and Valley don't matter when you are looking a long(er) term data. What is the wink for?
  12. CubinNY
    The status que of pre and post Hendry is as much an indictment of Hendry's tenure as any I can think of. In four years the team has gone nowhere. The overall trend is flat. peaking and then dipping into a valley is "flat?" Yes. If you plot the number of wins the Cubs have achieved since Hendry took over and draw a line down the middle (known in science as a trend line) the line would be flat. The team has averaged 78 wins per season. In four years the Cubs have a losing record. In the four years before Hendry took over the Cubs average 77.5 wins. That is a flat trend 89 88 79 ------------------------ 67 66 Hendry wins/year 66/2006 79/2005 89/2004 88/2003 67/2002 Pre Hendry wins/year 88/2001 65/2000 67/1999 90/1998
  13. CubinNY
    The status que of pre and post Hendry is as much an indictment of Hendry's tenure as any I can think of. In four years the team has gone nowhere. The overall trend is flat.
  14. CubinNY
    it's not that hilarious. seriously, it's what 3rd graders do, changing someone's name to make fun of them. it's not offensive, but it's really stupid and childish. It was hilarious. The absolute hypocracy of it is astounding. I'm not offended, but there would be a good many human beings who would be by your remark. On the other hand, Carrie Muskat doesn't have that many followers. At least, the Carrie cult seems to be very low key, so who really knows. "All I said was that piece of Hallibut was good enough for Jehova" "Stop it, you're only making it worse for yourself" "Worse? How could I be making it worse? "jehova, jehova, jehova, jehova!" Now that is funny!
  15. CubinNY
    Can someone say I told you so again when Floyd goes 2 for 3 with a double? Even in this worst case scenario, Floyd's not a scrub. No, just a broken down has been.
  16. CubinNY
    I think it is more likely that Jones is traded and Hendry is going to rely on both Floyd and Murton in the OF. It would be nice if Hendry really did intend to use him as the 4th OF. Who is going to play RF? Not Floyd and not Murton.
  17. CubinNY
    Don't worry what Muskat has to say, she is worthless! can we stop calling her Muskat? jesus. Is it really that big of deal? No, but that's because it really reflects more upon the childishness of the person calling names than it does upon Carrie. I have no problem with refraining from calling her Muskat, I just find it hard to believe that it is a bigger deal than openly taking the Lords name in vain. Call me childish, that is cool, but to continue to let people use language on this board that IS OFFENSIVE and not call them out is a pathetic lack of control in my opinion! Just my humble opinion, but my sense is that the Lord would view calling another human being "worthless" as being much worse than taking his name in vain. Somehow I have a feeling that if someone called Niefi worthless, there would not be an uproar. Niefi = Worthless player Muskat = Worthless reporter From a board that allows nicknames like "Slappy", and "Jock Strap".....it is hard to believe that people have such a big problem with "Muskat". Seems like some people are being a little oversensitive. She's just doing her job. She works for MLB. If you expepect cutting edge commentary and scoups from someone whose job it is to be a spokes person, I don't know what to tell you.
  18. CubinNY
    When Murton is sitting on the bench opening day becasue the Cubs are facing a "tough" righty that Flloyd is 13 for 31 against let me be the first to say, I told you so.
  19. CubinNY
    IMO, this is one of the first steps in the evolution of Pay-Per-Veiw sports. I am absolutely conviced that in 5-10 years all NFL games will be on the NFL Network on a pay-per-view basis. Baseball will follow suit. I only got Sunday ticket to watch Kansas City Chiefs games. I'd rather pay $5 per game that I normally wouldn't see, than pay to get every game in the league and waste about 10. If this happens I'd expect that you will pay significanlty more than $5 dollars to watch the games you want. It's not a wholy bad idea. It will be a change though. I bought XM soley because they carry MLB. If Serious gets MLB I will be switching. I guess that makes me a "bottom feeder".
  20. CubinNY
    I don't understand what that means. It looks like one paragraph contradicts the other? :scratch: How do they contradict one another? The first paragraph says he wants to "acquire a share of the company." The second says he "has no plans to acquire [the company] outright." Seems pretty straight forward to me. He wants to become a partner in the Tribune Company but not own it all by himself. I guess I don't understand the difference between part ownership and ownership. I understand it better now. He will have an interest, but not a controlling insterest.
  21. CubinNY
    IMO, this is one of the first steps in the evolution of Pay-Per-Veiw sports. I am absolutely conviced that in 5-10 years all NFL games will be on the NFL Network on a pay-per-view basis. Baseball will follow suit.
  22. CubinNY
    I don't understand what that means. It looks like one paragraph contradicts the other? :scratch:
  23. CubinNY
    Me either, but drinking heavily would probably be involved.
  24. CubinNY
    As well as Newsday and the Baltimore Sun. I think one interesting thing will be what happens to the NY Post. Murdock's long coveted Newsday and federal rules prohibits him from owning both. The question becomes who buys the Post, I don't know if Gannett and McClatchy (the two most likely newspaper companies to buy a major market paper) or any other buyer is willing to jump into the New York media bloodbath, I mean market. Paul Sullivan would go from smearing and writing gossip about the Cubs to the Editor's office. He's just the kind of journalist Murdock loves. You have to write a catchy headline.
  25. CubinNY
    I look forward to Bill O'Reilly taking over as the Cub President! I'm curious on how MLB is going to take this. Is it a possible conflict of interest? What sort of conflict? This is the sort of thing people were talking about when they warned that simply getting new ownership would not guarantee better ownership. Murdock owning part of the Dodgers and Cubs. Yep....be careful for what you wish for. I don't think Murdock owns part of the Dodgers any longer. But Murdock is all about what he calls "synergy". Owning the network, owning the ballclub, owning the distribution, and on and on. The biggest change would be at the Tribune though. They'd likely become as well respected as the NY Post. It would mark a sea change at the newspaper. Not good.
×
×
  • Create New...