I mentioned the doubling because I didn't realize at first that the article was in June. Since that time, Bobby Valentine has probably taken the lead, especially throwing Youkilis under the bus the way he did. Ozzie at least stuck up for his players.

 

Why would your respect for someone change just because of a hot month? By the time the article was written, we were already sliding downwards.

 

Not saying anything about a conspiracy, nor is it a desperate attempt to discredit a poll. I feel 100 out of 750 is a small amount. And, again, in June, so things may have changed.

 

I'm also not saying Ozzie is a respected person, nor does he deserve it. Just saying, 100 out of 750, even if it does remove the "Margin of Error," is still small in the big picture. They could have asked 100 Cuban players for all we know, who would have a definitely skewed opinion of him due to his comments 2 months previously.

 

Meh. Not worth arguing anymore.

 

 

1. Well do you have any evidence to support that? Even If Bobby V somehow took the lead in a new poll, which I doubt (because opinions of a large base don't change so rapidly and substantially in a short amount of time), what's your point? It would still remain that Ozzie is not respected by a large portion of the player base, which has been my thesis all along. And in your earlier post, you yourself said not much would change."That was back in June, man. Sure, it wouldn't be much different now, I'm sure, but still." But now apparently Bobby V is making up ground by 22% in this hypothetical, nonexistent poll? That there's a contradiction.

 

2. I said that it might have influenced the prevailing opinion of him on a superficial level based on the results he was getting. The point is that the timing of the poll doesn't really help your argument. Also, the poll was obviously conducted before the article was written. They are two separate things.

 

3. The problem there is that you feel. Mathematically, it is not a small amount for the purposes of the hypothesis I presented. The MoE actually projects that he would still be near top in a maximum negative error encompassing the entire population. And again, it is entirely possible that it goes the other way. That is why I said you shouldn't be trying to poke holes based on your gut.

 

4. Again, empirical statistical projection would disagree about the sample size. I hope I don't have to state how absurd the Cuban thing is, considering its a random poll. And the fact that there aren't 100 Cuban players. This goes back to what I can only logically conclude to be an insinuation of deceit or conspiracy (by those shady conniving bastards over at Men's Journal lol) on your part, because there's no other explanation.

 

If you don't want to wait until your Stat class, this could help you understand some of the concepts: http://en.wikipedia....Margin_of_error

I took one stat class. But clearly, noting that has been the purpose of all my posts.

 

I was originally responding to your claim that he was a player's manager and that the sample size was misleading. When it wasn't.

 

"Its pretty reasonable to extrapolate that he would be considered among, and more likely, the least respected manager by all the players."

 

"In other words, it's exceedingly likely that the sample is indicative of the fact that, as a whole, the players think he sucks (and more likely he's the king of the suck)."

 

Why it matters is a separate issue, because ultimately I don't think it does.

I mentioned the doubling because I didn't realize at first that the article was in June. Since that time, Bobby Valentine has probably taken the lead, especially throwing Youkilis under the bus the way he did. Ozzie at least stuck up for his players.

 

Why would your respect for someone change just because of a hot month? By the time the article was written, we were already sliding downwards.

 

Not saying anything about a conspiracy, nor is it a desperate attempt to discredit a poll. I feel 100 out of 750 is a small amount. And, again, in June, so things may have changed.

 

I'm also not saying Ozzie is a respected person, nor does he deserve it. Just saying, 100 out of 750, even if it does remove the "Margin of Error," is still small in the big picture. They could have asked 100 Cuban players for all we know, who would have a definitely skewed opinion of him due to his comments 2 months previously.

 

Meh. Not worth arguing anymore.

 

 

1. Well do you have any evidence to support that? Even If Bobby V somehow took the lead in a new poll, which I doubt (because opinions of a large base don't change so rapidly and substantially in a short amount of time), what's your point? It would still remain that Ozzie is not respected by a large portion of the player base, which has been my thesis all along. And in your earlier post, you yourself said not much would change."That was back in June, man. Sure, it wouldn't be much different now, I'm sure, but still." But now apparently Bobby V is making up ground by 22% in this hypothetical, nonexistent poll? That there's a contradiction.

 

2. I said that it might have influenced the prevailing opinion of him on a superficial level based on the results he was getting. The point is that the timing of the poll doesn't really help your argument. Also, the poll was obviously conducted before the article was written. They are two separate things.

 

3. The problem there is that you feel. Mathematically, it is not a small amount for the purposes of the hypothesis I presented. The MoE actually projects that he would still be near top in a maximum negative error encompassing the entire population. And again, it is entirely possible that it goes the other way. That is why I said you shouldn't be trying to poke holes based on your gut.

 

4. Again, empirical statistical projection would disagree about the sample size. I hope I don't have to state how absurd the Cuban thing is, considering its a random poll. And the fact that there aren't 100 Cuban players. This goes back to what I can only logically conclude to be an insinuation of deceit or conspiracy (by those shady conniving bastards over at Men's Journal lol) on your part, because there's no other explanation.

 

If you don't want to wait until your Stat class, this could help you understand some of the concepts: http://en.wikipedia....Margin_of_error

 

You make a long drawn out post on his inaccuracies, yet you ignored mine. Obviously you feel I am a threat to whatever ill-conceived credibility your attempting to give a "Men's Journal" article.

 

I want to be a dick, but your just coming across as a pompus ass.

 

That's right, I left out the don't in the last sentence.

 

No matter the statistical analysis, a subject who is interviewed should always have the qualifications to be interviewed. The fact that we don't know if these 100 players ever had prior contact with Ozzie or their beliefs are based strictly on hearsay is in debate. Without that information, this poll that you are trying desperately to protect is worthless.

 

Once again, without the proper polling subjects, or the explanations of how these subjects are related to Ozzie it amounts to lying with statistics.

Here's some highlights from the Mens Journal Article- per the sun sentinel. How can one assume the articles value should be taken at face value when the White Sox lead most of these.

 

Given the information provided, I feel it's safe to assume the players interviewed are from the AL. Not only that but they more then likely are the Cleveland Indians, Detroit Tigers, Kansas City Royals and Twins.

 

The survey is worthless. So is any attempt to give it credibility.

 

Some highlights of the survey:

Who is the most hated player?

1. A.J. Pierzynski (White Sox), 34 percent 2. Alex Rodriguez (Yankees), 10 percent 3. Nick Swisher (Yankees), 9 percent

Which city has the best groupies?

1. Chicago, 27 percent 2. Scottsdale, Ariz. (spring training), 13 percent 3. Toronto, 9 percent

Who is the least respected manager?

1. Ozzie Guillen (Marlins), 36 percent 2. Bobby Valentine (Red Sox), 14 percent 3. Manny Acta (Indians), 5 percent

Which team would you least like to play for?

1. Athletics, 19 percent 2. Blue Jays, 10 percent 3. Royals, 9 percent

Who is the biggest trash talker?

1. Orlando Hudson (White Sox), 31 percent 2. Nyjer Morgan, (Brewers), 17 percent 3. Chris Carpenter (Cardinals), 14 percent

Which city has the most obnoxious fans?

1. Philadelphia, 36 percent 2. San Francisco, 22 percent 3. New York, 12 percent

Permalink | ShareThis

Why do you guys argue so logically? It's a forum. Call the other one a fat dick and stop wasting time on the internet.

You keep bringing up margin of error, well, with the sample size of 100 [96 as per example in that link], there's a 10% margin of error.

So, sample more players.

what the hell is going on here?

Why do you guys argue so logically? It's a forum. Call the other one a fat dick and stop wasting time on the internet.

 

 

I did.

what the hell is going on here?

 

 

We are making our High School Math Teachers proud. I'm just stuck overanalyzing more sh*t on my day off.

 

Where's "Some sh*t" when you need them.

If hiring a board member to manage the team is the cheapest solution possible, I hope someone on this board gets hired to manage the team.

If hiring a board member to manage the team is the cheapest solution possible, I hope someone on this board gets hired to manage the team.

 

 

I'll do it for free, and the bullpen phone would be replaced with a message board.

If hiring a board member to manage the team is the cheapest solution possible, I hope someone on this board gets hired to manage the team.

 

 

I'll do it for free, and the bullpen phone would be replaced with a message board.

THIS message board!

If hiring a board member to manage the team is the cheapest solution possible, I hope someone on this board gets hired to manage the team.

 

 

I'll do it for free, and the bullpen phone would be replaced with a message board.

THIS message board!

 

A secret forum of this message board. It shall be named "GAME THREADS!" and someone will forget to post in it every day.

"There’s a “very strong chance� Guillen returns, Frisaro reports."

PACHANGA

I just wanna know what the hell Loria has planned...Hurry up

fun fact on Bell:

 

"One veteran said he couldn't remember a more despised player in any clubhouse he'd been in."

I'd guess that Guillen stays and the Marlins will do whatever is in their power to get rid of Bell. They'll probably eat some of the contract to do it.

Or have Heath do it by hiding it in a cake.

I wish they would hide Heath in a cake, and we never heard from him again. His performance sucked, his attitude about it was even worse.

Source tells me that no one likes heath bell.

 

 

Your sources are amazing!

fun fact on Bell:

 

"One veteran said he couldn't remember a more despised player in any clubhouse he'd been in."

 

 

Source?

fun fact on Bell:

 

"One veteran said he couldn't remember a more despised player in any clubhouse he'd been in."

 

 

Source?

 

Found this:

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-10-10/sports/fl-miami-marlins-1010-20121010_1_reyes-and-mark-buehrle-heath-bell-steve-cishek

Bell's performance wasn't that bad the second half of the season. If we were going based simply on performance, he actually would've gone into next season with a chance to reclaim his closer role (although I think Cishek still holds that role down for now).

 

However, he hasn't shut up. Thus, the Marlins will do whatever they can to get rid of him. I agree that it'll eventually lead to us being forced to eat a ton of that contract.

fun fact on Bell:

 

"One veteran said he couldn't remember a more despised player in any clubhouse he'd been in."

 

 

Source?

 

Found this:

http://articles.sun-...ll-steve-cishek

 

Yup. That's my source!