You know you've scratched something truthful and hurtful when people get this defensive about your statements. I'm convinced you two are incorrectly thinking that I'm blaming the Yankees though somewhere and you need to defend them against some (mis)perceived blame.
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-26-2008 9:17 PM]
Posted by 4949:
Posted by GKFv2:
Calling Steinbrenner's ownership a failure is a joke. Most teams can't even win 1 title in 85 years(Red Sox) or 1 in 100(Cubs). Yankees won 6 in his 32 years. Unless you think he should have won every year he was owner, I'd say that's a pretty damn good number of titles for an owner.
Good one G! Hey BONN, how do you explain the scrubs????????? Did we do that too? How do you explain the white sux? Did we do them wrong to??? And how bout those red sux??? Don't tell me that we robbed them too of more w.s. than us, by taking the Babe away. The guy they themselves wanted to give to us? You think I feel sorry for any of those losers?
I'm not sure what you're asking me to explain or why you're asking me to explain it. Can you re-ask your question? There are plenty of bad, poorly run teams in this sport and any other sport. Is that all you were asking about?
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-26-2008 10:27 PM]
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
Tell that to Cubs fans.
I know a couple of bookies that would love you as a client.
Posted by Bonn1997:
You know you've scratched something truthful and hurtful when people get this defensive about your statements. I'm convinced you two are incorrectly thinking that I'm blaming the Yankees though somewhere and you need to defend them against some (mis)perceived blame.
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-26-2008 9:17 PM]
No, not the Yankees, just Cashman and the moves he's made on behalf of the Yankees.
How often do you think the Yankees should win championships? How often in a decade? Maybe that would clear up the perception that you have ridiculous expectations. Actually the fact that you expect championships is the problem. I, for one, just expect them to be very competitive with their financial advantage and I celebrate and appreciate division titles, AL Pennants and World Series Championships because I know that they're earned on the field and not bought.
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
how isn't it a gambler's fallacy? a roulette wheel has 38 numbers... under your logic here, spinning the wheel 38 times should result in each number coming up at least once... that's not how it works in reality... each independent spin gives u an equal chance of each number coming up during that spin, but in reality you can spin the wheel 38 times & get the same # 38 times... 1 spin has no correlation to the next in increasing the chances of any single # coming up for you.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-27-2008 12:34 AM]
Posted by islesfan:
Posted by Bonn1997:
You know you've scratched something truthful and hurtful when people get this defensive about your statements. I'm convinced you two are incorrectly thinking that I'm blaming the Yankees though somewhere and you need to defend them against some (mis)perceived blame.
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-26-2008 9:17 PM]
No, not the Yankees, just Cashman and the moves he's made on behalf of the Yankees.
Yes, they're two entirely separate topics. I don't blame Cashman *for spending money* but rather for *how* he's spent money.
How often do I expect championships? I don't even expect them. I just expect a team that will be competitive in both the regular season and the playoffs and it's been a long time since we had the latter.
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
how isn't it a gambler's fallacy? a roulette wheel has 38 numbers... under your logic here, spinning the wheel 38 times should result in each number coming up at least once...
Expecting any one team to win a championship once every 30 years is NOT the same as expecting each team to win the championship once every 30 years. The former statement indicates that if you have no other info. about the team, let's say all your told is this is team "X" and are asked, "if we have 30 teams playing on a level playing field, then in a 30 year span, how many championships do you expect the team to win," the best answer to give is "one." If any of the conditions I built into the statement (30 teams, 30 years, or as in the case of baseball, a level playing field) are not met, then the statement would not apply.
Posted by islesfan:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
Tell that to Cubs fans.
I know a couple of bookies that would love you as a client.
Right; the point is that it's NOT a level playing field and the one cchampionship in thirty statement does not apply. I don't think you read the entire discussion between me and 4949. It looks like you (and TMS) joined in at the point where you quoted me and are misunderstanding the (bolded) premise of my statement. All I'd tell Cubs' fans is that the premise of my conditional statement is not met. Are you disagreeing with that? If not, then what's your point?
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-27-2008 09:01 AM]
I wonder if there's anymore room to bring back Andy? Just read the Giants signed Randy Johnson to a one-year, $8 mil. dollar deal. Look for Andy to jump on the $10 million now - if it's even still on the table.
Posted by Finestrg:
I wonder if there's anymore room to bring back Andy? Just read the Giants signed Randy Johnson to a one-year, $8 mil. dollar deal. Look for Andy to jump on the $10 million now - if it's even still on the table.
There should be plenty of room. We have a new, money-making stadium and we're about $25 mil below last year's payroll. If they could afford last year's payroll, they should be able to afford Manny AND Andy this year with the new stadium and a team that's likely to make and go deep in the playoffs.
Bonn, kindly tell us the differences in the U.S. Ecomony from last year to this year.
Fair enough. We don't know whether the downturn in the economy outweighs the money they'd get from the new stadium and making it farther in the playoffs. They have spent $423 mil so far but I suppose it's possible that they put a spending cap of around $423 rather than around $500 (after adding Manny).
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-27-2008 5:32 PM]
Posted by islesfan:
Bonn, kindly tell us the differences in the U.S. Ecomony from last year to this year.
Oh, did I speak kindly enough for you in the last reply? What kindness level did you have in mind? Will this help you? I can try to find some more pictures to cheer you up.
Posted by 4949:
I wonder how BONN would explain how we won the first 20 world series also?
Ever hear of Arnold Johnson? That should explain the 2 WS titles in the 60s.
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by islesfan:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
Tell that to Cubs fans.
I know a couple of bookies that would love you as a client.
Right; the point is that it's NOT a level playing field and the one cchampionship in thirty statement does not apply. I don't think you read the entire discussion between me and 4949. It looks like you (and TMS) joined in at the point where you quoted me and are misunderstanding the (bolded) premise of my statement. All I'd tell Cubs' fans is that the premise of my conditional statement is not met. Are you disagreeing with that? If not, then what's your point?
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-27-2008 09:01 AM]
so the Boston Red Sox had been playing on an uneven playing field for 86 years before they finally won a championship? they play in probably the second largest sports market in baseball... what's their excuse? the Yankees didn't win every single WS ring during those years... why haven't the LA Dodgers or Angels won more WS championships when they play in huge sports markets? what's the Mets' excuse for not winning more than 2 championships since their franchise's inception, they play in the same market as the Yankees too, shouldn't they have won at the same rate as the Yankees have over that same time span according to your logic?
you're making excuses for teams that don't win other than the Yankees because of an uneven playing field, & yet whenever the discussion shifts over to the Yankees side you blame their inept management for not winning one the past few years... how about giving a little credit to the Yankees for a change for their unprecedented success over the history of their franchise? my guess is you've never experienced any of the lean years following the Yankees during other decades when making the playoffs was not necessarily a given... all you're used to watching are the dynasty teams of the mid-late 90s... those types of dynasty teams are few & far between... u can't expect to have that type of run of success every few years... the last time we had a team that could repeat as WS champions & progress far into the playoffs was in the mid 70s-early 80s... we had a run of 13 consecutive seasons without even making the playoffs in the 80s before this team finally got into postseason play in '95, & here you are complaining when the Yankees fail to progress past the 1st round in the playoffs for 4 years... you woulda probably had a heart attack by now had you been a fan of this team during those lean years... winning has been cyclical during the Yankees' history & that's how it will continue to be.
right now this team is poised to get back to its winning ways w/a stacked lineup & a stacked pitching rotation... we have a new generation of young talent that is poised to come into their own in the coming years... the Yankees ownership & management deserve a ton of credit for building that pipeline of young talent & for putting this current team together as they do for their incredible run of success they've been able to sustain over their franchise's history, i don't care how much money they have to spend in comparison to other teams... just spending money won't bring you success necessarily, go ask how many championships the Orioles won when they spent all those big bucks to put together their teams of the 90s... the Cubs, Mets, Dodgers & Giants spent huge bucks putting their teams together for a while now & have nothing to show for it either... as a self proclaimed Yankee fan i would expect you to realize that disappointing years will happen but you can be sure this franchise won't rest until they're back on top with that championship trophy instead of complaining about inept management every year they're not.
It's funny because there is an article on RealGM about how the league was not fair for a very long time and that only big market teams had a chance because of their spending and that small market teams had less than a 5% chance. Supposedly something was done about this in 2000.
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by islesfan:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
In a league with 30 teams on a completely level playing field, you'd expect any one team to win a championship once every 30 years or 3% of the time.
that's like the classic gambler's fallacy logic at work there.
[Edited by - TMS on 12-26-2008 2:34 PM]
Except it isn't
Tell that to Cubs fans.
I know a couple of bookies that would love you as a client.
Right; the point is that it's NOT a level playing field and the one cchampionship in thirty statement does not apply. I don't think you read the entire discussion between me and 4949. It looks like you (and TMS) joined in at the point where you quoted me and are misunderstanding the (bolded) premise of my statement. All I'd tell Cubs' fans is that the premise of my conditional statement is not met. Are you disagreeing with that? If not, then what's your point?
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 12-27-2008 09:01 AM]
so the Boston Red Sox had been playing on an uneven playing field for 86 years before they finally won a championship? they play in probably the second largest sports market in baseball... what's their excuse? the Yankees didn't win every single WS ring during those years... why haven't the LA Dodgers or Angels won more WS championships when they play in huge sports markets? what's the Mets' excuse for not winning more than 2 championships since their franchise's inception, they play in the same market as the Yankees too, shouldn't they have won at the same rate as the Yankees have over that same time span according to your logic?
you're making excuses for teams that don't win other than the Yankees because of an uneven playing field, & yet whenever the discussion shifts over to the Yankees side you blame their inept management for not winning one the past few years... how about giving a little credit to the Yankees for a change for their unprecedented success over the history of their franchise? my guess is you've never experienced any of the lean years following the Yankees during other decades when making the playoffs was not necessarily a given... all you're used to watching are the dynasty teams of the mid-late 90s... those types of dynasty teams are few & far between... u can't expect to have that type of run of success every few years... the last time we had a team that could repeat as WS champions & progress far into the playoffs was in the mid 70s-early 80s... we had a run of 13 consecutive seasons without even making the playoffs in the 80s before this team finally got into postseason play in '95, & here you are complaining when the Yankees fail to progress past the 1st round in the playoffs for 4 years... you woulda probably had a heart attack by now had you been a fan of this team during those lean years... winning has been cyclical during the Yankees' history & that's how it will continue to be.
right now this team is poised to get back to its winning ways w/a stacked lineup & a stacked pitching rotation... we have a new generation of young talent that is poised to come into their own in the coming years... the Yankees ownership & management deserve a ton of credit for building that pipeline of young talent & for putting this current team together as they do for their incredible run of success they've been able to sustain over their franchise's history, i don't care how much money they have to spend in comparison to other teams... just spending money won't bring you success necessarily, go ask how many championships the Orioles won when they spent all those big bucks to put together their teams of the 90s... the Cubs, Mets, Dodgers & Giants spent huge bucks putting their teams together for a while now & have nothing to show for it either... as a self proclaimed Yankee fan i would expect you to realize that disappointing years will happen but you can be sure this franchise won't rest until they're back on top with that championship trophy instead of complaining about inept management every year they're not.
All those "counter"-examples can be explained by the fact that money spent is merely one of MANY factors that determine how many games a team wins. Why is it that you always come up with counter examples that don't counter anything I've ever said?
