Hahn was on Phillies interview list

[ptatc]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

How is data false? 

That is a graph of payrolls and wins. There is nothing nebulous about that data.

"Try thinking on your own" literally just means ignore evidence, believe what you want. I came to my conclusions based on my thoughts, plus substantiated evidence. That's how positions are justified in my world. I can't just have opinions without areas of support.

This a case of misleading data. As any statistician knows, you can make the data says what you want in many cases. As stated previously using averages can be very misleading. but the issue I have with our statement is that it is fundamental to winning. That is not the same as gives you a better chance over a long period of time. 4 out of the top 10 payrolls last year had under .500 records red sox, astros, mets, phillies, nationals, and giants the 2 world series teams ranked 2 and 28. Of course the big payroll helps but it not fundamental to winning.

[chitownsportsfan]

1 hour ago, NCsoxfan said:

Dang it. Would’ve paid for his flight to interview!

Rick Hahn is the only thing standing between the White Sox and a Bulls under GarPax like stretch.  Be careful what you wish for.

And of fucking course I see Ray explaining Gaussian distributions and power laws like he just read Nassim Taleb or some shit in a thread about Hahn possibly interviewing in Philly.  Dude, what the fuck goes through your head before you post sometimes?  You're lucky the mods allow you to pollute every thread with your off topic screeching.  

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 minutes ago, ptatc said:

This a case of misleading data. As any statistician knows, you can make the data says what you want in many cases. As stated previously using averages can be very misleading. but the issue I have with our statement is that it is fundamental to winning. That is not the same as gives you a better chance over a long period of time. 4 out of the top 10 payrolls last year had under .500 records red sox, astros, mets, phillies, nationals, and giants the 2 world series teams ranked 2 and 28. Of course the big payroll helps but it not fundamental to winning.

No data has been manipulated; I have no idea what you're talking about. Have a nice night, I'm out.

These aren't averages; they are countless data points that show a curve which clearly indicates that more money spent is directly correlated to more winning. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[ptatc]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

How is it misleading to present information that very much shows that the more money you spend, the more wins you are likely to have. 

The low payroll teams that do well are the exception to the rule, they are not the rule in itself. They are lauded because they "overcome" the deficit they are put in at the beginning of the year.

The fact is, in baseball, if you spend more money, you are more likely to win. There's really no refuting that. 

Outliers exist in all walks of life; in every statistical set that exists. Just because Mike Trout was drafted with the 25th pick in the draft doesn't mean teams should trade the #1 overall pick every year for the 25th pick. Spending money puts you in a better position to succeed; just as drafting #1 puts you in a better position than drafting #25. 

It is misleading because it doesn't show you how the teams did in the individual years. I the other post I just made it shows a team the made the WS with a payroll of 28th and top payroll teams with winning percentages under .500. You don't have to have a big payroll to win, that is what fundamental means. It gives you a better chance especially over time but it is not fundamental to winning. 

[WBWSF]

If Hahn would have gone to the Phillies I might of  finally got that interview for the White Sox GM job.

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

No data has been manipulated; I have no idea what you're talking about. Have a nice night, I'm out.

These aren't averages; they are countless data points that show a curve which clearly indicates that more money spent is directly correlated to more winning. 

They are averages over time. 

[chetkincaid]

2 hours ago, Briro2021 said:

Rich people ARE cheaper than poor people.  Because they are smarter.  You can hate JR all you want but he is rich for a reason.

Rich people are like hoarders, only they hoard money. 

[kwill]

I don't get why people rip Hahn. Look at the future of the White Sox. Not every GM could hit on all of the trades he has made. Not every GM can convince players to sign long term extensions. His largest criticism is that he has not signed a major free agent but is that really his fault. 

The White Sox are set up to be World Series contenders for the next 5/6 years because of his work. 

 

[bmags]

6 minutes ago, kwill said:

I don't get why people rip Hahn. Look at the future of the White Sox. Not every GM could hit on all of the trades he has made. Not every GM can convince players to sign long term extensions. His largest criticism is that he has not signed a major free agent but is that really his fault. 

The White Sox are set up to be World Series contenders for the next 5/6 years because of his work. 

 

If this is what you believe I have to imagine you haven’t read any criticism of Hahn 

[Texsox]

30 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Agreed. While I'm sure they would love to win the WS. It is their job and there are many other factors that apply.

And I probably downplayed winning a WS a little too much. That has to be a dream for anyone in sports. But reality is only one team wins it all. If that's the only thing getting you out of bed in the morning you'll be unhappy. You have to enjoy the process. 

[Texsox]

25 minutes ago, WBWSF said:

If Hahn would have gone to the Phillies I might of  finally got that interview for the White Sox GM job.

Then we would think you're an idiot and we could do a better job. ? Here we can agree with you. 

[kwill]

12 minutes ago, bmags said:

If this is what you believe I have to imagine you haven’t read any criticism of Hahn 

The only valid other criticism is the Fernando Tatis trade. 

[fathom]

6 minutes ago, kwill said:

The only valid other criticism is the Fernando Tatis trade. 

I would say a very poor record with free agency prior to last year.

[tray]

How many guys did Hahn try to plug the third base hole before Moncada was repurposed for the position? Jeff Keppinger, Youklis, Beckham, Gillaspie...

I would tell Hahn to skiddadle and would talk Theo out of temporary retirement to put the finishing pieces on this roster.

Hahn is a half asser for whatever reason.

 

[kwill]

38 minutes ago, tray said:

How many guys did Hahn try to plug the third base hole before Moncada was repurposed for the position? Jeff Keppinger, Youklis, Beckham, Gillaspie...

I would tell Hahn to skiddadle and would talk Theo out of temporary retirement to put the finishing pieces on this roster.

Hahn is a half asser for whatever reason.

 

Yes, critique Hahn on free agent signings and then tell me to hire Theo Epstein. I didn't realize Theo totally forgot about his grand slam free agent signings like Carl Crawford, Jason Heyward, and Tyler Chatwood. 

And you are going to hold the bad signings of Jeff Keppinger and Kevin Youkilis against Hahn. Please. 

The purpose of any general manager is to build a sustainable winner. By any means, he has done that quite well considering at times he has one arm tied behind his back. Everyone can point to the James Shields trade but Theo could of had Chapman for Schwarber. Every GM throughout their career is going to have mistakes but it all goes back to can you build a winner. Hahn did. 

[bmags]

22 minutes ago, kwill said:

Yes, critique Hahn on free agent signings and then tell me to hire Theo Epstein. I didn't realize Theo totally forgot about his grand slam free agent signings like Carl Crawford, Jason Heyward, and Tyler Chatwood. 

And you are going to hold the bad signings of Jeff Keppinger and Kevin Youkilis against Hahn. Please. 

The purpose of any general manager is to build a sustainable winner. By any means, he has done that quite well considering at times he has one arm tied behind his back. Everyone can point to the James Shields trade but Theo could of had Chapman for Schwarber. Every GM throughout their career is going to have mistakes but it all goes back to can you build a winner. Hahn did. 

took 7 years to get a wild card spot. 

[kwill]

3 minutes ago, bmags said:

took 7 years to get a wild card spot. 

You are too smart of a pollster not to acknowledge that if you want to do a complete rebuild you are talking about at least 3 years of really bad years.

Yes, Wild Card spot last year but they are set up to win the division for the next five. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

5 minutes ago, kwill said:

You are too smart of a pollster not to acknowledge that if you want to do a complete rebuild you are talking about at least 3 years of really bad years.

Yes, Wild Card spot last year but they are set up to win the division for the next five. 

Lets relax on the sustained success stuff until we actually sustain success for at least two years. You're getting a little ahead of yourself.

[tray]

Hahn mismanaged the team during the Ventura  tenure and when  LaRoach, Eaton and  and Sale were acting up.

Hahn  left problems for KW to clean it up. Hahn knows how to talk the talk but he is kind of a pussy.

.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

3 hours ago, Briro2021 said:

Yikes is right if you dont know this lol

Good to see you haven't changed at all. 

[kwill]

11 minutes ago, tray said:

13 minutes ago, tray said:

Hahn mismanaged the team during the Ventura  tenure and when  LaRoach, Eaton and  and Sale were acting up.

Hahn  left problems for KW to clean it up. Hahn knows how to talk the talk but he is kind of a pussy.

.

 

 

 

And by you mean "talk the talk" get team-friendly extensions done to accelerate the rebuild and/or keep a prolonged window of winning. 

Additionally, What did Kenny do when they were "acting up"? 

22 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Lets relax on the sustained success stuff until we actually sustain success for at least two years. You're getting a little ahead of yourself.

There is no reason for this team not to have a prolonged window of winning due to the ability of Hahn being without question the best at getting extensions done with young talent. Honestly, What else would you want from your general manager. 

The largest question I had was with the TLR signing which from all indications was out of his hands. 

Also, let's be a little optimistic. 

[ron883]

53 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Good to see you haven't changed at all. 

Marty??

[tray]

Additionally, What did Kenny do when they were "acting up"?

 

Kenny Williams confronted LaRoach when  Ventura and Hahn didn't and wouldn't.   LaRoach claimed that he had an agreement with Sox Management (certainly not KW) to have his son in the clubhouse, on the practice field, and according to LaRoach, to be part of the team. Who made that ridiculous agreement when LaRoach signed?  It wasn't Jerry or KW, so who?   Then Sale hangs LaRoach Sr and Jr jerseys on his locker and cuts up retro jerseys....and calls out KW, not  Rick Hahn. No Hahn was complicit with all of it, as was Ventura who basically was asleep at the wheel for most of his time as Manager during Hahn's tenure.

Hahn is supposed to be the General Manager, not simply part of the owner/management group  that approves draft picks and trade deals.   He is supposed to know what is going on in the clubhouse, on the field, in practice, and with the Manager and players.

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by tray

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

6 hours ago, ptatc said:

It is misleading because it doesn't show you how the teams did in the individual years. I the other post I just made it shows a team the made the WS with a payroll of 28th and top payroll teams with winning percentages under .500. You don't have to have a big payroll to win, that is what fundamental means. It gives you a better chance especially over time but it is not fundamental to winning. 

It literally shows how every team did in every year. Every dot on that chart is one team, their payroll and their results from a single year. There are no averages there. Not sure why you continue to say otherwise.

[ptatc]

6 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It literally shows how every team did in every year. Every dot on that chart is one team, their payroll and their results from a single year. There are no averages there. Not sure why you continue to say otherwise.

If You are looking at individual data point then yes its every team. And you'll notice that there are many that are far from the line which is essentially the average. So the scatter-plot which this is shows that the trend is that the more you spend the better chance you have to win. However with the scattered data plots it also shows that many teams with lower payrolls also win.

So as stated before spending more gives you a better chance to win but it is not fundamental to winning. 

If you want to show its fundamental to winning, run the correlation numbers then run a regression analysis to show the predictive value of payroll and winning.

Edited December 18, 2020 by ptatc