LOON ALERT LEVEL INFINITY! (UPDATED) »« Bike Shop Hijinks!

Fuck The Rotisserification Of Baseball

I am watching my first Baseball Tonight of the season, and Peter Gammons–a decent analyst and smooth speaker–analyzes Minnesota’s chances, stating that so-and-so and such-and-so need to up their “OPS” by fifty points. Motherfucking rotisserie stats dweebs are a fucking cancer at the heart of Baseball Tonight. Baseball fans do not want to hear about motherfucking OPS, okay? On the other hand, Dave Winfield is a great player and coach, and a great addition to their team.

Oh, one more thing: What the fucking fuck is up with those spindly wacked-out garden stools they’re perched on top of? Dave Winfield is a big dude, and John Kruk is threatening his stool’s structural integrity.

Comments

  1. says

    The first time I saw Dave Winfield on that set he looked like the Jolly Green Giant next to the others. I knew he was tall, but are the others 5′ 4″? His SHOULDERS were taller than the rest of the crew. It just look awkward.

  2. says

    Dude, you’re totally wrong. OPS in essence has nothing to do with rotisserie bb. OPS correlates strongly with a player’s intrinsic run production, much better than RBI or runs scored does. As such, it’s probably the best predictor of what a lineup’s run scoring potential is. That’s why analysts pay attention to it, not because some fantasy geeks out there give it points.

  3. says

    Oh, two more things: Dave Winfield is awesome. Coulda been a multisport pro before the world ever had to ensure the idiotic musings of Deion Sanders.

    Next, fuck fantasy baseball. Fantasy football yes, fantasy baseball no.

  4. says

    OPS, or On-base Plus Slugging, is a pretty good statistic. It’s analogous to ERA, which I don’t see many people calling a “fucking rotisserie statistic”.

  5. says

    Dude, Nate Silver is my geeky U of Chicago undergrad brother in arms. Minus the huge website and media coverage and deep knowledge of statistics and…and..and

    But that dude can’t patch clamp for shit! HAHAHAHAHA!

  6. Lindsay says

    Hasn’t keeping track of esoteric statistics long been one of baseball’s fine traditions, along with the peanuts, crackerjacks and $8 Bud Lights?

  7. GodIsMyCoPilot says

    Hey Comrade! Your facist friend Isis now censors inoffensive posts that simply disagree with her views! The following was removed from her “10 things” thread. Bitch.

    “John H. -

    Fuck you. Don’t care that you don’t want to date the clinically depressed – that’s not how you put it.”

    “Many of the rest of the replies to John H. seem to be gratuitous piling on for the hell of it. Instead of adding to the conversation.

    IMHO of course.

    Whatever.

    …tom…”

    Tom,

    You seem like a normal, reasonable person. However, you don’t seem to understand that THIS IS HOW THESE PEOPLE OPERATE! It’s the science blogs mob mentality.

    You Know Who

    ps. As I’ve pointed out on Comrade Physioprofs blog, they are all hypocrites as well. They attack John H., but if it’s a group of people they don’t care for, they’re merciless, and seem to really get off on it.

  8. says

    Uhhh … is this a reply to me? I don’t go to Isis’ blog, so that post wasn’t made by me (though I can attest that there does seem to be a mob mentality on many a blog, including Science Blogs). If this wasn’t a reply to me … pay no mind, my ego gets overinflated sometimes. ;)

  9. GodIsMyCoPilot says

    No, I think it was a different Tom, sorry. Yes I shouldn’t have such high expectations, just because these are supposedly scientists – I just hate to see these jokers wishing other people dead,etc., just because these “others” aren’t sensitive enough for their taste….and they threaten to sic the irony police on ME. The irony of THAT situation is lost on the losers. They also make racist remarks about people they have decreed to be “racists” ?! Weird!

  10. says

    Oh, you linguistic master.

    Here are the top ten in OPS all time with 3,000 plate appearances.

    Babe Ruth, 1.1638
    Ted Williams, 1.1155
    Lou Gehrig, 1.0798
    Barry Bonds, 1.0512
    Albert Pujols, 1.0489
    Jimmie Foxx, 1.0376
    Hank Greenberg, 1.0169
    Rogers Hornsby, 1.0103
    Manny Ramírez, 1.0044
    Todd Helton, 1.0020

    What a useless stat. It’s not like it indicates the top offensive players each and every year.

    And no, Peter Gammons is not a smooth talker. He’s one step up on the current Dick Clark.

  11. says

    I never said OPS is not a useful stat, for stat dweebs looking to assess players. When I’m watching Baseball Tonight after a hard day’s work sipping a motherfucking Jameson, I don’t want to fucking hear about it.

    Why doesn’t it surprise me that you’re a motherfucking pedantic stat dweeb, Hawkins?

  12. says

    I never said OPS is not a useful stat, for stat dweebs looking to assess players.

    What’s the point of baseball if not for the numbers? I mean, who the hell goes to the game to look at the pretty green field?

    Besides, Peter Fucking Gammons has been touting OPS for years now, you been living underneath a rock?

  13. says

    I’m with TomJoe on this. If you’re not there for the stats, you might as well just turn the goddamn teevee off and stare because that is about as entertaining as baseball.

  14. says

    You’re surprisingly dumb about a surprising number of things, CPP. But you keep saying “fuck”, so I guess that makes you edgy.

    Baseball is all about stats. That’s largely how good teams are built. If you like the sport because you like to see the men hit that ball real far, that’s up to you, but you’re ignoring an entire aspect of the game.

  15. says

    You’re surprisingly dumb about a surprising number of things, CPP. But you keep saying “fuck”, so I guess that makes you edgy.

    Yup. Dumb and edgy. That’s my MASTER PLAN for INTERNET DOMINAYSHUN!!11!!!1!!!.

  16. says

    I’m honestly asking you this: Are you looking for people to agree with you or do you want actual discussion? The former appears to be true, which makes this blog a large waste of time.

  17. says

    Dude, you have a–shall we say–extremely cramped idea of what an “actual discussion” must entail. You are ranting and raving and bitching and moaning because very few people here are interested in the particular kind of discussion that you seem to obsessively crave.

    There are eleventeen bajillion fucktillion blogs out there, and if this one doesn’t float your boat, then it is surely a waste of *your* time to hang out here. It seems to be a symptom of your particular species of bizarre obsessive wackaloonery, however, that you cannot wrap your mind around the fact that it might not be a waste of *other people’s* time.

    Different people have different purposes and goals, and you are going to continue to have a really difficult time socializing rewardingly if you don’t wrap your mind around that fact.

  18. says

    My definition of “actual discussion” does not entail blatant, embraced trolling joined by linguistic vapidity that glosses points in favor of pettiness and insults. Maybe that’s just too loony for you.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>