I dunno. I kind of liked the piece.
I think it played into the mysticism of the numbers a little bit - there was sort of a "cat that swallowed the canary" overtone that perhaps there is some merit to all the wonkdom.
I think it also put a perspective on things that we, as a community full of wonks, perhaps lose the proverbial forest for the trees. Mathematics is merely a tool to help us understand the universe, but the mathematics don't really exist.
Now to get back to my quest to separate the active and passive components of run-scoring events, and get my OOTP team roster exports in for tonight's sim ...
Conversely, I think this is what they wanted to do, but to me, utterly failed through cheap tricks in bad writing.
The culmination was the exchange where they said something to the effect of because of the human element in baseball, on any given day, a player can defy the numbers
I understand what they were getting at, but that is a completely disingenuous way of characterizing the numbers end of the game. Everyone who understands the strengths and weaknesses of numbers understands that they are aggregate averages. Neither great success not great failure on any given day defies the numbers because the numbers are not dispositive predictions of fact but rather probabilistic tendencies.
And yes, again, I understand the point, but I thought the they wee really feeding into the straw man argument of, "See? Numbers don't tell you everything!" whenever someone does something that was predictred as unlikely; just because someone does a thing doesn't mean it wasn't unlikely. To think an event disproves a probability is just to nut understand use of statistics in the first place. During the exchanges, it seemed pretty clear to me that James knew this, but hey, that's the segment and so he went with it. Funny look on his face though...
No. I'm pretty sure it'll be the final segment -- right before that corpse Andy Rooney wastes 3 minutes of our calendar with his pathetic observations on everyday life.
After that well articulated argument that in a truly free market there would be no profanity on the airwaves, I'm sure you must be revising your letter of apology to Sir Rooney as we speak.