10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Is FSNPlus on a more expensive tier, or does your provider simply not offer it? I get it but I'm quite sure I'm not paying more for it....

I did acknowledge your charges of hypocrisy and inconsistent execution, at least in the case of my interaction with Fro that you mentioned. In regards to inconsistency, I discussed why my post might have been let to slide while his wasn't. Maybe I'm wrong about why it was handled that way, but I did attempt to address the aspects of it that involved me. I also addressed hypocrisy with my speculation regarding the reason an admin might have Liked my post. So, my condescending post did acknowledge at least some of your concerns. Dont know why you would pretend I didn't, unless you were trying to over simplify my point--something which you clearly disapprove of doing. Also, I don't think I oversimplified your post at all. If anything, one could argue that I gave it more consideration than it possibly deserved based on the somewhat absurd nature of somebody being SO FRUSTRATED by an entirely voluntary message board. I do appreciate that you care about how your fellow posters are treated. Well, you seem to care about how some of them are treated, at least. Condescending and belittling? I'll admit to condescension in my "generalized comments", but that was the point--to illustrate how to avoid attacking somebody directly. I think I succeeded, based on you getting the message despite the fact that in no way did I criticize you directly. As far as belittling you, I apologize that you felt offended. The intention was to illuminate the point while at the same time needling you for being so frustrated about something that I'm sure even you would admit is a bit silly. I thought it was funny and that you would probably think the same and dish it back out the same way you got it. Instead you seemed to get sensitive and cried foul, an approach that some people in this thread have recently spoken out against.

Not surprised about your run-ins with kenny williams. I've heard he's a jerk, and he just seems plain old crazy. I did hear once that his doctors told him that he needs to work out while watching or listening to games so that his insane blood pressure spikes aren't happening while he is otherwise sedentary (apparently its more dangerous, idk...). I actually have tried it myself. I must admit, I get pretty worked up about our Twins. Seems like your Mom gave good advice. Supervisors in corporate settings often find themselves needing to set a pleasant, yet still firm tone in order to let everybody know that they mean business. The urge to be the nice or fun boss can sometimes lead to a staff of employees who just can't take their superior seriously enough as a disciplinarian. Once everybody has been familiarized with the fact that the boss isn't screwing around when it comes to expectations, then they can start to lighten up a bit. Read any recent restaurant reviews out of the Twin Cities? You're missing out on so many great places starting up around here recently!!

Awesome, I'm excited to see how he looks at the plate. The only video I've ever really seen of him is stuff from Pelotero and shaky cams from Beloit.

To be fair, I said I went after him pretty hard, not that I did the same thing as him. If Fro was banned for something he said to me it was probably because he attacked my argument with borderline non-sequitur sarcasm. I on the other hand, posted a satirical sarcastic statement as a way to illustrate how he was coming across to me. Semantics, maybe.... but if Fro took two seconds to rephrase some of his comments as being generalized he probably would have gotten away with them. And I assume that the like I got from an admin had to do with my comments on general attitudes regarding SABR minded thinkers and SABR adherents. And honestly Leviathan, I would say that generalizing comments is a useful tool for you to use as well. It helps in scenarios where you would like to say something a bit rude, but don't want to be outright mean and inviting of a ban or warning. Say for instance that you think somebody is acting like a bit of a cry baby because they're being told they can't say whatever their sound judgement deems appropriate on a message board. You could perhaps comment that you understand the moderators caring less about that person having their way with all of the really fun and brilliant insulting sarcasm they come up with, and care more about growing and fostering an environment that is both good for civil discourse and good for business.

Now..... Could you teach me how to put a photograph in here correctly...

It's pretty simple. He values SPEED, SCRAPPINESS, BATTLING TAILS OFF... And let's not forget REALLY GETTING AFTER IT. And he perceives the players on his roster that best fit those descriptions to have been middle infielders. So he bats them second. When he's had other players that he's perceived to fit that description, he's batted them second as well. And a discussion regarding the not-yet-quantified aspects of the game would take those qualities more seriously than many people participating in this thread are willing to take them. And if, one day, those ideas and quantifications become sophisticated enough to reliably project future performance, those people will have some reconsidering to do... Won't they doctor? http://twinsdaily.com/attachments/minnesota-twins-talk/3538d1363832333-opening-day-lineup-image.jpg All in good fun, and many of your criticisms are valid.... But I think everybody is guilty of sometimes taking for granted that we are NOW, OFFICIALLY living in the times when we've FINALLY GOT IT ALL FIGURED OUT.

I totally understood the gist of your post. I was just being silly, as if I was with you and laughing but then suddenly realized that it was directed toward me... And let's be honest, you took a couple of shots that could easily be interpreted as being in reference to my SPEED argument. But let's also be honest.... Your post was funny. Intentionally, and unintentionally. Intentionally in respect to the punching yourself in the face bit, etc.... Unintentionally? Imagine the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons saying all of what you've said. And think of how seriously he would be taking himself as he says it. "Heh, schooled those newbs..." It's a Baseball Blog and you are talking about etiquette which, if used properly, will spare posters from being "corrected". What is abundantly clear is that you really feel like you've reached a deeper understanding. If you wanted to dig a bit deeper, though, you could reflect on what Socrates thought true wisdom entailed. Elitism was not part of his philosophy. Neither was focusing on what one knows. Realizing what one doesn't know was much more important. I tried to bring up the point that maybe we don't know everything about the effects of SPEED on the game, and if posters were being honest I think they'd admit that they created straw-man arguments out of what I said. Somebody (might have even been you smerf) even felt it was their job to inform me of how difficult it was to read my posts and actually questioned/accused me of forcing complex vocabulary. Quite an assumption, despite any evidence, background, video footage, or stats to support the contention that this isn't just the way that I think, speak, and write. What's really funny to me is that you have a deep understanding of baseball now, but didn't even think quantifying SPEED was possible, and then didn't think the stats proved anything, and then admitted that they did but questioned whether or not they could be used to project future performance. And if they can, you'll have.... reached a deeper understanding, I suppose. I really like this site, and I really like all the different posters. Even Fro.... I think that many of you take yourselves much more seriously than you need to, and that you take for granted that NOW YOU KNOW HOW IT WORKS. Before you didn't, BUT NOW YOU DO. And you'll realize, just like those who used to rely on batting average and RBI as the major quantifiable stats, that you didn't know as much as you thought you did. Conventional wisdom is refined and filtered and changed until it is quite different than it was previously. As far as wanting your innocence back: Your avatar is a smoking smurf. I think your childlike nature is safely established. Just thought that should be noted. I love Seth's positivity. Even just his tone of voice on his podcasts has always struck me as him being a dude who's so confident in his understanding of stats and the roster machinations that he's able to transcend the 'Baseball Nerd" attitude that so many other hardcore observers and writers are guilty of. It seems he still just enjoys the pure, simple aspects of the game. His excitement about each prospect he's hot on always makes me laugh a little bit at his optimism, while at the same time I can't help but get all pumped up and excited as well. I really did get a kick out of the punching yourself in the face business. Nice work.

I read nothing in the statement about "Best Starter, Next Best Starter", etc... I haven't read the original jorgenswest post, but it seems like BradSwan is just saying he likes the idea of "screw labels, just get good pitchers". I might be totally wrong though, in which case I will no doubt be informed repeatedly.

Hahahaha. Wait, what?

...agree that this blog post that I provided a link to is awesome...? Soon to be World Champions recognize Deduno SPECIAL - Blogs - Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum The earnestness is just so enjoyable for me.

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I really don't understand the intended meaning of your last post. Would you care to clarify?

Correct. It's kind of funny because I might have actually said this a dozen times by now. Yes, that is what I'm saying and I appreciate your approach to this most recent part of the conversation. I'm not really onto something, it's been known by managers and observers for years. I think people fall in love with quantifiable stats like OBP and OPS, and sometimes ignore contributing factors that aren't as easily quantified. I really wish WilliHammer would expand and tweak his analysis, and also comment on how his numbers sit within the context of this conversation.

Samuel, is that you?

I hope it doesn't change his approach too much.

God, I love the earnestness of this post.

I appreciate the reasonable attempt to visualize my perspective. No, my view isn't even as " on the side of SPEED" as your assessment of my place on the average line would be. My argument hasn't even at all been to try to say that SPEED is in any way a more "contributing factor" to runs being scored on average, in general, or on balance. Somebody said that they were ever told why SPEED needs to be a consideration of a potential number 2 hitter's skill-set. I was just saying, simply, that some players posses SPEED that is enough of a contributing factor that it makes up for their deservedness to bat in a more advantageous place order than another player who has a higher OBP. This was a contrasting view to the idea that OBP trumps all, and that the tops of lineups should be constructed strictly based on OBP as the determining factor. People have responded and said things along the lines of, "of course speed is a factor, but only a tiny bit at the margins. Only in the case of an OBP tie. Only as a thrown in additional bonus. Only in comparisons such as billy hamilton to Matthew LeCroy". And my response, and my argument at its core has simply been, "I don't know guys, I bet it's a decent bit more important than statistics have been able to accurately quantify yet." The substance hitting the proverbial fan that ensued contained so many ridiculous characterizations of my viewpoint (see Fro's responses, etc.) that nobody but a select few people kept track of the initial gist of my perspective. Even now, you present a bar graph that is in assumption of a perspective I do not have. I guess that's my fault for not communicating my respective well enough, though I feel I ave stated my perspective very clearly many times over. I wonder if everything I have written, which I admit is a lot, has been read by everybody who has participated in the conversation. Regarding your graph. Your bar graph assumes that all increase in SPEED is necessarily a decrease in OBP and vice versa. It isn't necessarily a 1:1 ratio, and in fact there is not likely a constant ratio that would apply effectively. I think Willihammer started to approach a relevant analysis, but he hasn't been back around to characterize what he feels his numbers imply. I wish he would, and I would encourage him to continue to refine the type of approach he is taking toward illuminating a statistical grey area.

Yes, SPEED. I just like it to look more like OBP looks in the threads, and I was amused by putting it in all caps. I wondered how long it would be before the caps drove somebody crazy. Careful now, don't get too mad...

Maybe I'm assuming too much, and Fro's ban had nothing to do with the argument he and I got into. But if it was because of our argument, I am puzzled. I went after him pretty hard too but didn't get so much as a warning. I didn't feel either of us deserved so much as a warning either, as I was happy to trade comments with him, and was confident that it was all in good fun (with a bit of tension, but far from too much). Then again, im new here and despite reading the comment standards thread, I'm still not sure how everything works around here. My posts are all still there to read. Maybe he got way nastier and I never saw it because it was taken down quickly, but my God I could have probably handled it and I certainly don't want to see people that the forum values leaving because of a silly argument between one overly sarcastic dude (Fro) and one overly stubborn and argumentative dude (Me). Plus, now I am incredibly curious about what he might have said, and (deservedly or not) feel bad about the whole thing.

You seem to be taking offense to this statement: "I don't feel that people pretending that I think speed ALWAYS or MORE OFTEN or USUALLY trumps OBP is part of an effor to employ intellectual honesty and social goodwill." Unless you count yourself amongst those who have misrepresented my statements in the manner I described, I don't understand why you would take the comments as offensive. Would you not agree that my characterization of people who create a strawman argument out of my perspective aren't displaying the type of intellectual honesty and social goodwill that you always strive for? I clearly stated that I do not think SPEED is MORE IMPORTANT than making outs. You, seemingly simulteanously ignoring and responding to that statement at the same time, chimed in with "You are absolutely making that claim." It seems to me pretty obvious that you were directly accusing me of making an argument that I didn't make. I apologize if I misinterpreted what you were truly trying to say, but it would seem that I accurately received your communication. I understand hat I made a generalized comment about intellectual dishonesty in a post that directly quoted and addressed you. I did count you among those building strawman arguments. I then was careful to be very general in my comments criticizing it. I'm assuming you DO indeed count yourself amongst people who have handled the argument in that manner, otherwise you would not have flat the criticism was directed toward you. Overall, I did not intend to be insulting in any way beyond general message board banter. Since you are claiming that I was, I will take that in good faith and offer my apology. This thread is really silly at this point, and I'm doubting whether all the attention this thread has gotten is good for business on this site. It is just semantic arguments about the argument at this point, and I am probably more guilty than anybody for continually responding and perpetuating it. I will really try hard to only respond to non-semantic conversations at this point, or to directly answer questions that are asked of me.

No. Making that claim would be for me to say that SPEED always trumps OBP. I never said anything close to that. In case anybody was ever confused about the point I was trying to make, I repeatedly explained with caveats that I believe OBP and not making outs is more important than SPEED overall. To say that because SPEED equals more actual runs sometimes despite a somewhat lower OBP IS NOT to say "SPEED is preferable to not making outs". To just ignore the many times I have clearly stated my view that OBP is ultimately a larger contributing factor than SPEED is strange, and seems to suggest you are just trying to make me "seem wrong" instead of approaching the subject in a good faith effort to interact regarding this subject. Intellectual honesty is a quality that people who might disagree on a subject rely on in order to operate by fair standards in the arena of ideas. I don't feel that people pretending that I think speed ALWAYS or MORE OFTEN or USUALLY trumps OBP is part of an effor to employ intellectual honesty and social goodwill.

Don't tell me Fro got banned for being an overly sarcastic smarty-pants in my OPENING DAY LINEUP thread that turned into an argument about SPEED versus OBP. Because even though I was pretty frustrated with his style of interjection, I certainly didn't feel anything he said even remotely approached deserving of being banned. Unless he posted something I never saw because it was moderated out, I felt I was just equally as smarty-pantsed. I never even got so much as a "heads up, here's a warning".

Completely incorrect characterization. I don't think I should keep responding to these posts, because it us a constant process of tearing down straw man arguments. I am not at all challenging the assumption that not making outs behind a runner and in general OBP are much more contributing factors. I have said as much many times over. If I have done a poor job of illustrating that the effect of SPEED on runs scored, is under-represented in statistical analysis, so be it. The arguments agai my contention continually involve representations of me claiming that I think SPEED is more important than not making outs. I have never made such a claim. I have clearly stated the opposite of such a claim. I feel like I should stop responding to posts that include these types of misrepresentations, despite how fun it may be to marvel at their obliviousness to their transgression.

Now what's this about the world not being flat? Loud whisper* I'M JUST KIDDING....