Home s*** Home

[iamshack]

I'm not quite sure how you did either, because I never said that.

So we have established that players' performance may be impacted by negative treatment from fans.

 

The statistical evidence in our sample size (this season) doesn't show much of a correlation.

 

Statistical evidence is much more representative of what actually occurs during baseball games than Ptatc's anecdotal evidence.

 

All we need now is Robert Stack and we can have our own episode of "Unsolved Mysteries."

[TitoMB345]

If a player is going to let some fans booing them (because they suck) make them suck even worse, I don't want them on my team. Sorry.

 

Players get booed on the road, 100% of the time. Why doesn't it effect them there?

[iamshack]

another factor you may be missing is the press. Fans aren't the only ones telling them how bad they are. It's in every paper, it's on the news, it's on the colbert report. Do you think that magically the player forgets everything when they are on the road. Geography makes them forget how they were treated yesterday. This is only about home and road. Human behaviour is not tied to timeframes either. I never said that is was only home or only away just that players talk about it and are effected by it.

 

I know you don't agree but people are influenced by the reaction of others around them.

I do agree.

 

I'm just saying you're trying to extend this to a place that just isn't backed up by the statistics. And you may not want to believe the statistics, but the statistics are the record of what actually took place in the games...

[Milkman delivers]

No. What the hell does that even mean? Did ptac talk to each player individually and interview them? What are the quantifiable results of these interviews? Why are the pitchers performing worse when they aren't being booed? Carlos isn't being booed so why are his numbers worse? Why is Rios playing better at home even though he's getting booed? Why is AJ playing better at home while getting booed on the road? Explain the s***ty home record before June when no one was getting booed.

 

This argument is so one-sided it's hilarious.

[Milkman delivers]

What the hell else could one get out of them?

 

In one post, Sqwert asserts that it is your premise that the disparity in records is due to the booing from the fans. In the next post, your own, you then say the following:

 

 

 

Hmm, that sure seems like someone who is defending their own premise to me...

 

You then go on to debate this with Sqwert over the course of the next several posts...

 

Now tell me, if this was not your premise, why the hell did you make such an effort to defend it?

 

Work on your reading comprehension!

[southsider2k5]

So we have established that players' performance may be impacted by negative treatment from fans.

 

The statistical evidence in our sample size (this season) doesn't show much of a correlation.

 

Statistical evidence is much more representative of what actually occurs during baseball games than Ptatc's anecdotal evidence.

 

All we need now is Robert Stack and we can have our own episode of "Unsolved Mysteries."

 

The statistical evidence shows that as a team they are worst at home. They are worse in hitting, pitching, and in W/L. Picking out individual exceptions ignores that. Big picture, this team is worst at home.

[ptatc]

Everything sounded extremely anecdotal as far as I gathered. he didn't say how many or who he actually talked to and what specifically was discussed. How you turned that into "fans booing is the reason we suck at home" is beyond me.

 

If you really want to know it's the Milwaukee Brewers from 1987-1989 and the Florida Marlins minor league system from 1994-1996. There are too many players to list but if you look up the rosters you can put the names in. As to what was specifically discussed it was everyday during the season while I was working with them, the injured ones more than the healthy ones but usually everyone on the team at least once a day during the season. However, I'm sure there are numbers somewhere that'll say that I just can't figure out how a person feels when he is talking to you.

 

I know you don't feel (sorry I can't tell how you feel by a discussion) I know you don't think that how people treats others effects them or how they go about their daily lives but it does.

 

I don't know why I feel the need to defend this but the players are people and their performance is effected on how they are treated. It of course is not an entire team as everyone is different and reacts differently. But to deny that the players are effected by how they are treated is wrong.

 

I've said all I can, take it for what it's worth.

 

[Steve9347]

Dude, I have tried to be polite with you here, but you are just being incredibly f***ing obtuse.

 

MANY people in this thread have conceded that some players may be affected by the increased pressure to perform at home and the obvious human preference to not receive negative treatment.

 

NOT ONE other than yourself has made the argument that this is a material or significant cause for the large disparity in record between home and road games.

 

Your premise is f***ing stupid. Get over it already.

damn it feels good to be a gangster

[iamshack]

The statistical evidence shows that as a team they are worst at home. They are worse in hitting, pitching, and in W/L. Picking out individual exceptions ignores that. Big picture, this team is worst at home.

But your premise is based on the fans booing certain players, and not even those players show some sort of statistical deviation that might lead one to believe that this negative treatment is affecting their performance.

 

So are we really to believe the booing of Dunn actually does rub off on Quentin? That he is trying so hard to pick up Adam Dunn that he is pressing and failing more himself?

 

I understand the concept that the team wants to impress the home crowd, and therefore, might be pressing, but there is absolutely nothing to suggest we should make the mental leap required to reach your conclusion.

 

For about the 5th time now...Carlos Quentin, the second best hitter in our lineup hits terribly at home this year. For what reason, I don't have a damned clue. Maybe he hates being around his wife.

 

If there is any legitimate reason for our record at home, the only argument I could possibly feel any confidence making is because Carlos is a driver of this offense, and when you take him away, our chances of winning ballgames decrease significantly.

[ptatc]

So we have established that players' performance may be impacted by negative treatment from fans.

 

The statistical evidence in our sample size (this season) doesn't show much of a correlation.

 

Statistical evidence is much more representative of what actually occurs during baseball games than Ptatc's anecdotal evidence.

 

All we need now is Robert Stack and we can have our own episode of "Unsolved Mysteries."

 

don't go there unless you've run a power analysis to determine what sample size you need. If you are truly going to run stats that is the first step. Nothing else matters until you've done that. Any statistical analysis is invalid until you know what sample size is needed. Afterall who ever heard of looking at a person's behaviour with a qualitaive study as opposed to a quantitative study? Everyone. How do you know that a players performance wouldn't have improve if they weren't booed. How do you know that a players performance wouldn't have decreased if they weren't cheered and given more confidence? Your numbers will not tell you any of those factors. Qualitative information will tell you more about a person than the qualitaitve analysis.

[southsider2k5]

But your premise is based on the fans booing certain players, and not even those players show some sort of statistical deviation that might lead one to believe that this negative treatment is affecting their performance.

 

So are we really to believe the booing of Dunn actually does rub off on Quentin? That he is trying so hard to pick up Adam Dunn that he is pressing and failing more himself?

 

I understand the concept that the team wants to impress the home crowd, and therefore, might be pressing, but there is absolutely nothing to suggest we should make the mental leap required to reach your conclusion.

 

For about the 5th time now...Carlos Quentin, the second best hitter in our lineup hits terribly at home this year. For what reason, I don't have a damned clue. Maybe he hates being around his wife.

 

If there is any legitimate reason for our record at home, the only argument I could possibly feel any confidence making is because Carlos is a driver of this offense, and when you take him away, our chances of winning ballgames decrease significantly.

 

I have the statistical evidence, so none of that matters. Well at least that is what you were saying before it turned out your statistical evidence wasn't that good.

 

Honestly I have no other idea how to try to explain this to you, so that you will understand the premise, so this time I am going to type this really slowly to try to help.

 

Players are affected by their environment. If you think that idea is as stupid as you think, quit f***ing arguing it, because that make you just as dumb as you say the premise is.

[BigSqwert]

Sheesh, iamshack....what more evidence do you need to show you that the reason we suck at home is because of the fans? Talk about conclusive evidence.

[Milkman delivers]

I have the statistical evidence, so none of that matters. Well at least that is what you were saying before it turned out your statistical evidence wasn't that good.

 

Honestly I have no other idea how to try to explain this to you, so that you will understand the premise, so this time I am going to type this really slowly to try to help.

 

Players are affected by their environment. If you think that idea is as stupid as you think, quit f***ing arguing it, because that make you just as dumb as you say the premise is.

 

 

Man, you and ptatc might be the only two people on Earth who think that's correct.

[Balta1701]

Players are affected by their environment. If you think that idea is as stupid as you think, quit f***ing arguing it, because that make you just as dumb as you say the premise is.

My question is...if you're booing Adam dunn, can you also precisely determine his velocity?

[BigSqwert]

 

Man, you and ptatc might be the only two people on Earth who think that's correct.

 

Don't forget the 1989 Brewers.

[Milkman delivers]

If you think that idea is as stupid as you think, quit f***ing arguing it, because that make you just as dumb as you say the premise is.

 

When added to the idea that you should stop watching the team if you don't like what you see, the translation seems to be that you shouldn't argue with or have a differing viewpoint from SS2k5 or he won't admit when he's wrong and suggest you give up the conversation since he's losing in it in everyone else's eyes

[iamshack]

I have the statistical evidence, so none of that matters. Well at least that is what you were saying before it turned out your statistical evidence wasn't that good.

 

Honestly I have no other idea how to try to explain this to you, so that you will understand the premise, so this time I am going to type this really slowly to try to help.

 

Players are affected by their environment. If you think that idea is as stupid as you think, quit f***ing arguing it, because that make you just as dumb as you say the premise is.

No, you don't have the statistical evidence.

 

What you have is an end result and some observations.

 

Now you are telling us all that those observations are causing the end result and expecting us all to believe you.

 

You should work product liability claims - you would have those major corporations shaking in their boots!

 

I've conceded to more than several times that players are human and are affected by their environment. Unfortunately, that does not equal our struggles at home are therefore caused by our home environment.

 

That is a ridiculous f***ing conclusion.

[southsider2k5]

When added to the idea that you should stop watching the team if you don't like what you see, the translation seems to be that you shouldn't argue with or have a differing viewpoint from SS2k5 or he won't admit when he's wrong and suggest you give up the conversation since he's losing in it in everyone else's eyes

 

I'm not suggesting he give up the conversation if he could actually add something to it besides calling it stupid, and yet still participating in it. Just like thinking the Sox are still the worst thing going and still hanging on every pitch.

 

If you don't have anything better to do than to hang up on things you think are stupid or torturous, well that doesn't say much for you. That is the point of both of those responses.

[Milkman delivers]

I'm not suggesting he give up the conversation if he could actually add something to it besides calling it stupid, and yet still participating in it. Just like thinking the Sox are still the worst thing going and still hanging on every pitch.

 

If you don't have anything better to do than to hang up on things you think are stupid or torturous, well that doesn't say much for you. That is the point of both of those responses.

 

You're still losing both arguments

[iamshack]

When added to the idea that you should stop watching the team if you don't like what you see, the translation seems to be that you shouldn't argue with or have a differing viewpoint from SS2k5 or he won't admit when he's wrong and suggest you give up the conversation since he's losing in it in everyone else's eyes

I'm glad you could translate that sentence for me, because I had absolutely no idea what he was trying to say there.

 

[BigSqwert]

I added a poll on the main page!

[lostfan]

The whole causation ≠ correlation thing.

[southsider2k5]

No, you don't have the statistical evidence.

 

What you have is an end result and some observations.

 

Now you are telling us all that those observations are causing the end result and expecting us all to believe you.

 

You should work product liability claims - you would have those major corporations shaking in their boots!

 

I've conceded to more than several times that players are human and are affected by their environment. Unfortunately, that does not equal our struggles at home are therefore caused by our home environment.

 

That is a ridiculous f***ing conclusion.

 

Because the sum of all of our pitching and hitting isn't statistical evidence, but the individual data points which make up those totals is, but only when they prove your own side. Genius.

 

And yes I am telling that a team struggling at home statistically is going to produce the end result of the team struggling at home to win. I'm not sure what other conclusion you would gather from those statistics.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

I'm glad you could translate that sentence for me, because I had absolutely no idea what he was trying to say there.

 

That has pretty much been the whole thread's theme, so I am really not surprised.

[southsider2k5]

You're still losing both arguments

 

So you think!