Got a Question?

by royalsreview on Jan 14, 2009 12:43 AM EST Comment 77 comments

During my illustrious teaching career I habitually asked "does anyone have any questions?" I'm sure, along with various other verbal tics, my students hated it. They certainly almost never had any, other than ones about their grades and how tests/papers would be graded. We could be halfway through the semester, in the middle of class, and just finished with a poem, and I could get a question about the format of the final...

Although I'm working on a new radio affiliate profile and still have about five "Remembering ... " posts, I'm sorta in a rut post-wise. So, to mix things up a bit, I'm offering to do a mailbag entry. The idea isn't that I'm some wise, all-knowing master of the Royals (I'm not) or that I'm interesting in all ways. Mainly, it just may be, stress may be, a nice way to change pace a little bit and talk about some new things. It's still January and other than Fan Fest, we're still a loong way from the good stuff.

We'll see anyway.

So, you can shoot me your question in an email (royalsnightly at yahoo) or post it below. When I feel like I have enough that I can answer, I'll do so.

0 recs | Comment 77 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Perhaps too tough to set up

But pointed Q&A’s with the various Royals-internet heads (other than yourself of course) would be awesome – e.g. Rany, Mellinger, Dutton, JoePos, Kaegel, (yikes…there’s probably some sort of PR/liability wall that would prevent that from happening) etc.

No idea how feasible this is but I’d be interested in seeing how their thought processes differ on particular questions.

Waiting for April.

by DC Royal on Jan 14, 2009 12:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Mellinger would probably be game as long as it was at a non-hectic time

I have no guesses as to the others. I emailed DK once, asking if I could interview him. This was probably two years ago at least. I’m still waiting to hear back.

by royalsreview on Jan 14, 2009 12:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Remember Garth Sears?

He was like the #1 Royals fan at Baseball Think Factory. He set up a Royals Roundtable of bloggers and even wrangled Joe Posnanski, Sam Mellinger and Baseball Prospectus writer Dan Fox.

I would think Royals Review has even more cache!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 14, 2009 8:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh

And what happened to Garth? He hasn’t been heard from in a long time.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 14, 2009 8:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I had totally forgotten about that

I think I was even in one of those.

by royalsreview on Jan 14, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Your email is floating around his mailbag

by marbotty on Jan 14, 2009 9:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kaegel would be awesome

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Q: How do you feel about the Bloomquist signing

I think we really need to get into this subject more.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 14, 2009 1:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

which team reminds you the most of the royals

I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me

by LeoBloom on Jan 14, 2009 1:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

You need a question like they use on the MLB.com online chats

Q: Do you prefer puppies or kitties?

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Jan 14, 2009 1:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Mr. Burns

Your campaign has all the momentum of a runaway freight train. To what do you owe your success to?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 14, 2009 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs

Can I get your autograph?

Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.

by doublestix on Jan 14, 2009 1:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

If you had too...

Who would you rather part with.. Joakim Soria or Zack Greinke?

Bloomquist. God? Or just an illusion? You be the judge.

by focs on Jan 14, 2009 1:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Do you want real questions

or Kaegel questions?

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Jan 14, 2009 1:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I was curious about what color shoes the team will be wearing next year

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 14, 2009 8:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

anything is fine

by royalsreview on Jan 14, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Um...remember that time when you were on BlogRadio?

Remember that?

That was awesome!!!

We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan

by Royal Kingdom on Jan 14, 2009 8:54 AM EST reply actions 2 recs

he's LIVING IN A VAN DOWN BY THE RIVER!!!!!!

by Steve Hovley on Jan 14, 2009 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What are the minor league rosters looking like ...

… with some estimated time to majors?

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Jan 14, 2009 10:17 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

What is Ken Harvey up to these days?

by Warden11 on Jan 14, 2009 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

What's up with those necklaces all the players wear?

(Just getting them out there)

Should Soria move to the rotation?

Mark Teahen: Starter, Super Utility Man, or Trade Bait?

How much does Kyle Farnsworth Sucks on a Scale from Gload to Lima?

Why don’t they ever show Pam wearing a “hot” outfit?

If you saw John Krasinski in the strett, would you kick him in the fellas, or is that just the writers’ fault?

Better DH Platoon: Babe Ruth/Manny Ramirez, or Matt Stairs/JustinHuber?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 11:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Whats your favorite literary movement and why?

I was always found of the transcendentalists, but maybe that’s just me…

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 11:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Question for YOU, Zep

When you have time, can you run over to the CHONE projections thread and look at the charts, then Sky Kalkman’s question about why my chart line doesn’t flow the way it should? Maybe it does or doesn’t (I don’t know for sure, but Sky has a good point) Any insight you can give on what I might be doing wrong in Excel would be helpful…

And I realize the win% and BINOMDIST thing probably isn’t the super-duper greatest way to do things, but it sure looks cool!

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

can you link the thread in question

also, binomial distribution is probably a great way to look at things. I haven’t seen why that one would make more sense than some other type, but it intuitively makes sense to me. I just wish more people would realize those types of distributions apply to virtually all this stuff. Baseball just isn’t a linear world.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 11:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

this one

I don’t know if you lookied at my spreadsheets there at all, but it from Beyond the Box Score, and I filled in CHONE’s projections for wOBA, etc. Then some guys started taking the win% with Binomial distribution to generate probabiltiies of winning a certain number of games and Sky incorporated that… Other guys used that to generate cool-lookin’ charts, which isn’t as important, but, well, I like cool looking things

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cool looking charts are awesome.

I don’t even care about the numbers.

This chart:

Awesome.

by Warden11 on Jan 14, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs

excellent

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

heh

I liked that one too, posted it in the “Guilty Pleasures” thread a while back. Originally from BtBS

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

thank you

for making me laugh.

by Royal from Queens on Jan 14, 2009 9:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

oh shit,

so this took me a while, but i think its as simple as you x-axis isn’t consistent. did you graph points like 60,70,75,77,78,79,80,…?

Its going to crunch an otherwise smooth curve. Your data is completely correct, you just added emphasis on the 75-85 win area which distorted the look. Its just a visual thing.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

thanks

I’m sorry I took so much time. I thought that might be it, it’s just a pain in the ass and hard to see when I graph over 1 to 162 wins

Also, I couldn’t get the x-axis number to be what I wanted…

but thanks, anyway, and I’m really sorry I had to waste your time with my idiocy

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

its not a waste of time at all

as with most ppl who work with numbers for a living, graphical analysis is one of my favorite things to do (but of course, only from my mom’s basement). so please, the more the better.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

just graph it from 60-100 wins

it will look fine.

i would also consider doing it non-cumulative, i.e. a 0 in the last entry instead of a one, to see probabilities of individual outcomes.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sorry

i don’t get it — if I put the zero in, then the chart either gets distorted again… I guess I could go 0, 10, 20, 30….

I redid the graphs from 69 to 96 going by threes for now, with all four series on it, because thought it came the closest to “significant” numbers:

69: shitty season
75: close to last year’s total
78: close to Chone 50th percentile projection
81: .500
87: (some argue that 86 is about hte border where marginal wins become considerably tougher to buy/develop, and also that this is where teams are most likelly to see a sig. revenue bump)
90 and so on — def. in contention in the central

should I go again f(for at leat myself) from 0 to 100 or 110, going by tens?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

no, i see ur updated graph

and it looks great, i would hold on to that as your projection.

What i am saying is now make another graph with the cumulative variable as false. the output will be a traditional bell curve shape that will tell you there is a 7% chance of 79 wins, 6% chance of 78 or 80 wins, etc.

the c.d.f. (cumulative distribution function, what your current graph is called) is more useful for analysis, but the p.m.f (probability mass function, the bell curve) will allow another set of questions to be answered visually. The two have the same data just displayed differently.

If you want to put it on the same graph as your cdf, you will want to put the pmf on a secondary axis (the right side axis), in excel right click the line > format data series > series options > secondary axis for XL2007, XL2003 should be similar.

if this is just complicating things, just ignore this. like I said, i have fun with graphs and have to do all sorts of ‘extra’ things to mine.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

no, that is super-duper cool, I just feel bad that it takes so long for people to explain them to me

philosophy is my wife

baseball is my mistress

statistics and economics are that prostitute I got drunk and had sex with one time and gave me VD

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

but you had fun and can't stop

besides, you already have the VD, what’s the point stopping now?

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

and that means

you’ll never forget her.

by Warden11 on Jan 14, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

d_f

any comment with VD in it is an automatic rec

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Jan 14, 2009 3:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

should look like this

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

like?

by Warden11 on Jan 14, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

F-- yea

did one on my revised version of CHONE’s projection (that might start a whole new war, but wahtever)

now, um, what does it mean?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

it tells you the probablity of each individual outcome

i.e. how likely is it that the royals will win EXACTLY x number of games.

the other graph tells the probability that the royals will win AT LEAST x number of games.

Obviously, the first one (the one you have in your post) is more useful, but this other graph does answer some cool questions as well.

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll post one later

It’s bitchen’

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

for example

using 79 projected wins:

there is a 2.3% chance of winning exactly 70 games, but a 90.9% chance of winning at least 70

there is a 6.2% chance of winning exactly 80 games, but a 40.6% chance of winning at least 80

there is a 1.4% chance of winning exactly 90 games, but a 3.5% chance of winning at least 90

by ZeppelinDZ on Jan 14, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

oh yeah, I got it

My revised CHONE projections (pre-RR community vetting) projects 78 wins (damn you, Jacobs/Gload/TPJ/Farnsworth/Guillen /HoRam —seriously, they’re taking PAs/IPs away from better players)…

Something like this…

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 3:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

you get the diea

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

not to get too snarky, but

I hope you are more careful when you type in the numbers into your spreadsheets than you are with your letters – get the diea?;-)

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Jan 14, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

eyah

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I just...

…embedded some questions in my 18-point response to your radio interview. – TL

by timlacy on Jan 14, 2009 11:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

D'oh!

I’m even more idiotic…

I thought that post was in reponse to this thread…

Many, many apologies

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Jan 14, 2009 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If Dayton Moore is an "average" GM

who are the 14 or 15 other GMs who are worse?

Bonus: Which of SE Hinton’s Oklahoma Greaser Trilogy in Four Parts is the greater literary triumph? How about the movie adaptions? And if the characters from The Office (US version) had to put on a stage presentation of The Outsiders, who would play whom?

by Gopherballs on Jan 14, 2009 12:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Just because he is average

doesn’t mean 14 are below him. By average, i think people are reffering to mean average, not median. And there are a lot of GM’s just like Dayton, meaning the mean is very similar also.

Not that you can really quantify it.

The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.

by kcbottom9th on Jan 14, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs