Tonight the Sox will mark their high water mark for the '06 season. After that it will be regression to the mean.......
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
REgression...Typical "hope" from a Cubbies' fan.
Cubs will be out of the race by July 1st; and, Baker and his toothpick will be gone.
Sox should finish 132-30 this year.
Cubs will be out of the race by July 1st; and, Baker and his toothpick will be gone.
Sox should finish 132-30 this year.
Beenthere
Dont go crazy with the White Sox bit-- a lot of people do not see them winning it this year---very difficult to go back to back
As for the Cubbies without Prior and Wood they "dead" getting out of the gate
By the way is 132-30 a typo or have you and Soxnole been out celebrating opening night?
Dont go crazy with the White Sox bit-- a lot of people do not see them winning it this year---very difficult to go back to back
As for the Cubbies without Prior and Wood they "dead" getting out of the gate
By the way is 132-30 a typo or have you and Soxnole been out celebrating opening night?
I don't know about the Cubs, but the Sox will fall back to the pack where they belong. At least the WS Championship afterglow should last until the end of July.
Regression
What exactly are you basing your opinion on ?
Good teams with deep pitching win a lot of baseball games .
What exactly are you basing your opinion on ?
Good teams with deep pitching win a lot of baseball games .
Being a tribe fan, I'd love nothing more than for the Indians to overtake them. With their pitching and team overall, I don't see it happening. If they stay healthy, they should be the favorites to repeat.
No one will be happier than me if the Indians should over take them however
No one will be happier than me if the Indians should over take them however
Predicted 132-30 although I was hoping for 147-15.
Unique situation on the South side of town.
----
While on the North side of town...they'll talk about 3 million plus fans but won't talk about 90% of them being from out-of-town, wanting to see the "Cubbies"...the "lovable" Cubbies lose again.
Murton will ask to be traded to the Devil Rays. Dusty gone by July 1st. Only solid players in center and right (?), third base and 1st base. Walker to start at 2nd base although the Cubs have been trying to trade him for years. What does that say about Hairston?
Unique situation on the South side of town.
----
While on the North side of town...they'll talk about 3 million plus fans but won't talk about 90% of them being from out-of-town, wanting to see the "Cubbies"...the "lovable" Cubbies lose again.
Murton will ask to be traded to the Devil Rays. Dusty gone by July 1st. Only solid players in center and right (?), third base and 1st base. Walker to start at 2nd base although the Cubs have been trying to trade him for years. What does that say about Hairston?
The Sox are off to a wire to wire championship season, again. Undefeated and looking stronger than ever. I predict 161-1 but only because nobody is perfect.
cub fans in general...and HSDad in particular:
Give it up! You'll soon have another sub .500 year to deal with in tommy tunney's female impersonator neighborhood!
Give it up! You'll soon have another sub .500 year to deal with in tommy tunney's female impersonator neighborhood!
Now Soxnole, be nice. It wasn't that long ago when the Sox were suffering. Things change fast and if the Sox become the big thing here in Chicago, Sox fans will come in all shades of the rainbow as well.
Cubs: .500 in April, .600 in May, .650 The rest of the season, 1.000 in October including a sweep of the Yankees.
FastballDad,
Cubs .500 in April, .550 in May, .400 in June and finally asked by MLB to become a AAA team by July.
Cubs .500 in April, .550 in May, .400 in June and finally asked by MLB to become a AAA team by July.
The Red Line heading north from Jackson St. last night after the game was stuffed full with riders wearing Sox caps!
I wonder what neighborhoods they were going back to?
I wonder what neighborhoods they were going back to?
RTTM:
Despite all of the rain that came down in sheets last night...the high water mark quickly went down the drain...and the game was on! Impressive design and engineering!
quote:Originally posted by RegressionToTheMean:
... high water mark for the '06 season.
Despite all of the rain that came down in sheets last night...the high water mark quickly went down the drain...and the game was on! Impressive design and engineering!
Fastball Dad...if there is 1 single attribute that Tom Tunney and his crowd maintains....it is that they are nice...maybe SWEET would be more to the point.
And...Mr. Tunney is staunchly supporting those female impersonator's as we speak.
The rumor is that rosy and some Evanston dude's got a little rough during a pre-season visit last week!...just because the poor guy couldn't hit the high notes!...heh heh, lol.
And...Mr. Tunney is staunchly supporting those female impersonator's as we speak.
The rumor is that rosy and some Evanston dude's got a little rough during a pre-season visit last week!...just because the poor guy couldn't hit the high notes!...heh heh, lol.
Yuk, yuk, yuk. Just don't tell my wife. LOL.
such a nice guy, Rosy.
It was as one coach said, "Rather a high water mark, then a skid mark."
Go Sox
Go Sox
2005: Sox in first from opening day on
2006: Sox spent one day in first
2005: Sox win one run games all the time
2006: Cleveland wins one run games vs, Sox
2005: Sox dominate central division
2006: Sox lose two of three to central team
2005: Bobby Jenks is a big man
2006: Bobby Jenks is a fat guy
2005: Hermanson back to back to back scoreless
2006: Hermanson has no back.
2005: Konerko is an average player making 6 mil
2006: Konerko is an average player making 12 mil
2005: Sox fans were hard to find in April
2006: Sox fans will be hard to find in October
2005: Ozzie reinvents baseball
2006: Ozzie might shut up
2005: Sox deviate from the mean
2006: Sox regress to the mean
2005: Magic in the air
2006: Will turn into a Thome watch as the Sox fall out of the race. Sort of like the Sosa watch on the North Side for a few years there.
2006: Sox spent one day in first
2005: Sox win one run games all the time
2006: Cleveland wins one run games vs, Sox
2005: Sox dominate central division
2006: Sox lose two of three to central team
2005: Bobby Jenks is a big man
2006: Bobby Jenks is a fat guy
2005: Hermanson back to back to back scoreless
2006: Hermanson has no back.
2005: Konerko is an average player making 6 mil
2006: Konerko is an average player making 12 mil
2005: Sox fans were hard to find in April
2006: Sox fans will be hard to find in October
2005: Ozzie reinvents baseball
2006: Ozzie might shut up
2005: Sox deviate from the mean
2006: Sox regress to the mean
2005: Magic in the air
2006: Will turn into a Thome watch as the Sox fall out of the race. Sort of like the Sosa watch on the North Side for a few years there.
1908: Cubs are World Series Champs
2005: White Sox are World Series Champs
2005: White Sox are World Series Champs
what do the cubs have to do with it?
Regression...Nice presentation.
It is OBVIOUS that you are a Cubs fan. How are Prior and Woods doing? Because it is patently obvious that the next comment from you is going to be about attendance, Sox fans are ready to react...and have done so.
Lots of Sox fans on this site. Take it in stride.
It is OBVIOUS that you are a Cubs fan. How are Prior and Woods doing? Because it is patently obvious that the next comment from you is going to be about attendance, Sox fans are ready to react...and have done so.
Lots of Sox fans on this site. Take it in stride.
Regression is a fan of numbers. Baseball has lots of numbers. How is this for a number: 27. That number is the amount of times above norm the Sox won last year randomly (read luck) it won't happen this year.
Do the Cubs have a player named Woods? And everything is Just Ducky with Prior, Too.
Do the Cubs have a player named Woods? And everything is Just Ducky with Prior, Too.
Nice one CentralIL...gotwood4sale is a fan of nice ones. 
Hey Regression your jealousy is showing……
You can have regression up or down.
If your sample consists of below-MLB-mean winners (or loses), like the Cubbies the regression to the mean will make it appear that they move up in number of wins. But if your sample consists of high winners, like our World Champion Chicago White Sox, their mean will appear to move down relative to the number of wins. However, this all depends on the “r” or the correlation measuring how well one team plays baseball vs. another team or vs. the rest of MLB.
You can estimate exactly the percent of regression to the mean in any given situation. The formula is:
Prm = 100(1 - r)
where:
Prm = the percent of regression to the mean
r = the correlation measuring how well one team plays vs. another or to MLB
Given this formula the World Champion Chicago White Sox's “r” equals 1 (or maybe .9 because no one is perfect), and the Cubbies’ “r” equals 0 (or maybe .2 because no team can stink up the field that bad, maybe…except the Cubbies). Just do the math. This proves that the World Series Chicago White Sox have a small propensity to regress to the mean (r = 1 would be 0%) and that the Cubbies have a greater statistical correlation to regress to the mean (this is a good thing for Cubbie Blue fans, r = 0 would be 100%, it give you hope!!!).
Regression, thank for bring this up…. Don’t you just love numbers?
“Statistics are used like a drunk uses a lamppost…. For support, not illumination.” ~ Vin Scully
“Fans come to Comiskey Park to watch the game. They appreciate good baseball, and when you don’t play good baseball, they’ll let you know about that, too. But most people go to Wrigley Field to see how many bars they can hit before and after the game. Wrigley Field is more of a tourist attraction than anything else” ~ Paul Konerko, 2001
You can have regression up or down.
If your sample consists of below-MLB-mean winners (or loses), like the Cubbies the regression to the mean will make it appear that they move up in number of wins. But if your sample consists of high winners, like our World Champion Chicago White Sox, their mean will appear to move down relative to the number of wins. However, this all depends on the “r” or the correlation measuring how well one team plays baseball vs. another team or vs. the rest of MLB.
You can estimate exactly the percent of regression to the mean in any given situation. The formula is:
Prm = 100(1 - r)
where:
Prm = the percent of regression to the mean
r = the correlation measuring how well one team plays vs. another or to MLB
Given this formula the World Champion Chicago White Sox's “r” equals 1 (or maybe .9 because no one is perfect), and the Cubbies’ “r” equals 0 (or maybe .2 because no team can stink up the field that bad, maybe…except the Cubbies). Just do the math. This proves that the World Series Chicago White Sox have a small propensity to regress to the mean (r = 1 would be 0%) and that the Cubbies have a greater statistical correlation to regress to the mean (this is a good thing for Cubbie Blue fans, r = 0 would be 100%, it give you hope!!!).
Regression, thank for bring this up…. Don’t you just love numbers?
“Statistics are used like a drunk uses a lamppost…. For support, not illumination.” ~ Vin Scully
“Fans come to Comiskey Park to watch the game. They appreciate good baseball, and when you don’t play good baseball, they’ll let you know about that, too. But most people go to Wrigley Field to see how many bars they can hit before and after the game. Wrigley Field is more of a tourist attraction than anything else” ~ Paul Konerko, 2001
Nicely put Smokey.
The bottom line is the cubs stink,their ballpark smells (literally), their fans are aloof,the neighborhood is swishy,they kill each other right on the premises and they have no pitching!
The bottom line is the cubs stink,their ballpark smells (literally), their fans are aloof,the neighborhood is swishy,they kill each other right on the premises and they have no pitching!
Smokey
Fun response, but of course you know as I do very flawed. Starts with your given of the Sox' as having an r=1, or even as you quite humurously put it .9 which of course as any baseball guy would know that it should be .6. And since you brought the Cubs into it, their r=.475 or so. Even a regression of a very small amount will put the Sox out of it.
So as you can see, barring another statistical abberation, the Sox should end up closer to say, your example of the Cubs, than where they were last year.
A deeper analysis shows that the Sox randomly won more games during the regular season than any other team, given their overall numbers.
Like they say, even a blind dog finds a bone now and then and for the Sox it was last year.
Fun response, but of course you know as I do very flawed. Starts with your given of the Sox' as having an r=1, or even as you quite humurously put it .9 which of course as any baseball guy would know that it should be .6. And since you brought the Cubs into it, their r=.475 or so. Even a regression of a very small amount will put the Sox out of it.
So as you can see, barring another statistical abberation, the Sox should end up closer to say, your example of the Cubs, than where they were last year.
A deeper analysis shows that the Sox randomly won more games during the regular season than any other team, given their overall numbers.
Like they say, even a blind dog finds a bone now and then and for the Sox it was last year.
It's all about numbers, not the name on the uniform. Math applies to all teams, Sox Cubs, all of them.
I'm a fan of numbers......no jealously in numbers.
I'm a fan of numbers......no jealously in numbers.
The Sox played in the World Series. The Sox WON in a sweep. It can't be taken away. If they don't win this year, it is OK. I lived to see my team be dominant and win it all. I don't need a dynasty. Wouldn't the Cubs take just one win?
Leave the Cubs out of this. Numbers or no numbers, how the Sox do has nothing to do with how the Cubs do.
I tried to run numbers on the Cubs and my computer froze. There are some things that can't be explained.
Soxnole,
I've been called a lot of things, but never "aloof".
I've been called a lot of things, but never "aloof".
Reg....Yes, the Cubs have a player named
"Woods"...He's the injured pitcher who had the game of his life years ago and ruined his arm striking out 457 Astros in a meaningless game.
First name is Kerry. From Texas. Disabled again.
This is the second time I've called him "Woods" because that is where his fastball winds up, i.e., in the woods.
Go White Sox.
"Woods"...He's the injured pitcher who had the game of his life years ago and ruined his arm striking out 457 Astros in a meaningless game.
First name is Kerry. From Texas. Disabled again.
This is the second time I've called him "Woods" because that is where his fastball winds up, i.e., in the woods.
Go White Sox.
rosy....OK so you and a small percentage are real baseball fans...@ Comiskey it's 95%!
Aloof is for:
The neighborhood local's.(15%)
The halter top crowd (15%)
The sightseeing crowd/Tourist's(25%)
Corporate type's(15%)
drunk's(15%)
criminal's, including murderer's(5%)
Aloof is for:
The neighborhood local's.(15%)
The halter top crowd (15%)
The sightseeing crowd/Tourist's(25%)
Corporate type's(15%)
drunk's(15%)
criminal's, including murderer's(5%)
SOXNOLES, CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR TEAM'S SUCCESS THIS PAST SEASON. I'm sure you enjoyed the ride. NOW, MLB has a bunch of teams drawing bullseyes on their back and we're off to another season. BOY I LOVE BASEBALL!
RTTM:
...but when that dog is a bloodhound...a bone every time!
quote:Originally posted by RegressionToTheMean:
Like they say, even a blind dog finds a bone now and then.
...but when that dog is a bloodhound...a bone every time!
I understand the CTA is going have extra buses and trains going to The Cell Block from places like Lakeview, etc. (Boystown) due to the numbers of new fans from those areas.
I don't think they are new fans, they just came out of the closet.
I don't think they are new fans, they just came out of the closet.
FBD, Hahaha. Imagine when those new fans meet up with the local gals with the big hair.
Regression
The correlation measuring how well one team plays vs. another or “r” is not an average. That is like stating a person with an IQ of 150 will regress to the mean average of test scores, average IQ being 100. An individual with a high IQ will have a high “r” value. Therefore, this individual with a high IQ, with a high “r” value, will have a small statistical correlation to “regress to the mean” of test scores. The World Champion Chicago White Sox have a high MLB IQ or high “r” value thus having a small propensity to regress to the mean. The Cubs…. Never mind….
“Statistics are used like a drunk uses a lamppost…. For support, not illumination.” ~ Vin Scully
The correlation measuring how well one team plays vs. another or “r” is not an average. That is like stating a person with an IQ of 150 will regress to the mean average of test scores, average IQ being 100. An individual with a high IQ will have a high “r” value. Therefore, this individual with a high IQ, with a high “r” value, will have a small statistical correlation to “regress to the mean” of test scores. The World Champion Chicago White Sox have a high MLB IQ or high “r” value thus having a small propensity to regress to the mean. The Cubs…. Never mind….
“Statistics are used like a drunk uses a lamppost…. For support, not illumination.” ~ Vin Scully
Wrong Smokey. Your IQ is based upon how you perform on your own. Teams' winning and losing percentages are relative because they are determined by how they perform against each other in very direct competition. Your comparison of the Sox to the 150 IQ is not only meaningless, but also funny. You as an apparent Sox fan are clouded in your thinking. As for me, I'm a fan of numbers.
We'll see.
We'll see.