metsmarathon

Delgado 3.7 Perez 2.6 Heilman 1.0 Reyes 1.1 Beltran 1.0 Wagner 0.6

Perez 4.8 Wright 1.3 Smith 1.2 Wagner 1.2 LoDuca 1.0 Easley 0.5

whew! there it is... [busy formulating votes]

ugh... i've got a lot of work to do in the morning! hope i can catch up before yancy can... i left my formulae at work tonight... dangit...

crud.

good god, i can't even get through a minute of that thing.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/05/24/hancock.lawsuit.ap/index.html?cnn=yes what a fucking ass. hancock's father is suing the restaurant that liquored him up, which i can somewhat understand, but also the towtruck operator whose tow truck the drunken, cell-phone-yapping, seatbelt-not-wearing, marijuana possessing pitcher slammed into, and the driver of the car which the tow truck had stopped to help. un-fucking real.

why you ungrateful little robot! so i took credit for your outlier tables - that's not even really part of the voting! do you thank me for creating you? for dutifully winding you up so you can vote? for secreting you into work so that you can use my computer there, and so you can expand your horizons outside of home? i go away for one weekend to a friend's wedding in ohio, and, fine, i forgot to wind you up yesterday - this is the thanks i get!? the nerve of some robots...

Wright 4.2 Glavine 1.8 Chavez 1.6 Beltran 1.0 Delgado 0.7 Heilman 0.7

Wright 2.8 Easley 2.3 Heilman 1.7 LoDuca 1.1 Schoeneweis 1.1 Feliciano 1.0

Perez 4.6 Chavez 2.0 Wagner 1.3 LoDuca 0.9 Smith 0.7 Delgado 0.5

i'll have to think about how best to explain it, but i agree with the answer. it makes sense. the best i can do on short notice is suggest you consider a figure skater spinning out on the ice. the closer they bring in their arms, the more quickly they spin. to slow their rotation at the end of their spin, they again spread their arms out wide. the reason we thing that a longer arm is going to yield a faster exit velocity is because we assume that both the short arm and the long arm will have the same rotational velocity. in that case, the velocity of the ball on exit would be, for the most part, w x r, or rotational velocity times radius, and the difference in the radius would correspond directly to an increased velocity. what mike marshall is telling us is that the shorter armed guy will, for the same amount of force, have a higher radial velocity, and i take it that the difference in radial velocity is enough to overcome the advantage the longer pitcher has in radius. not knowing and not being presented with the moments of inertia, radial distances, and rotational velocities, i can't check the math. but it can make sense to me.

and to repeat the exercise for a less controversial tally... the 8-1 win against the cubbies: player Beltran Delgado Easley Gomez Gotay LoDuca Reyes Smith Sosa Wagner Wright 1 0.25 0.5 1.75 1 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.3 4 0.3 1 2 0.5 0.5 2 1 1 0.5 0.25 4.8 0.25 1 3 0.25 2 1 1 0.4 5 1.3 4 0.4 2 1.5 1 0.75 5 1.5 5 1 2 0.8 0.3 2 1 6 1 1 1 4 1 7 1.5 1 1 4.5 1 8 1.75 1 1 4.5 1 9 2 1 0.5 4.75 1 10 2 1 0.5 5 1 11 2 1 0.25 5 1 12 2 1.25 0.75 5 1.25 13 2.05 1.5 1 5 1.25 14 2.5 1.5 5 1.5 15 2.5 2 5 2 old total points 0.75 2.65 29.05 17.55 0.5 9.9 2.15 0.55 68.55 0.55 17.8 old schaefer 0.05 0.18 1.94 1.17 0.03 0.66 0.14 0.04 4.57 0.04 1.19 outhigh 0.5 1 2.5 2 0.5 1 0.75 0.3 5 0.3 2 oullow 0 0 1 0.8 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 new total points 0.25 1.65 25.55 14.75 0 8.9 1.4 0.25 61.55 0.25 14.8 new schaefer 0.02 0.13 1.97 1.13 - 0.68 0.11 0.02 4.73 0.02 1.14 again, the total points awarded drops from an even 10 to 9.95, and poor mr gotay gets screwed out of a three-hundredth of a point.

so we would then toss out a zero vote for a player who was not listed, then? well, assuming that to be the correct interpretation of the outlier rule, we've got the following situation for the "infamous" newhan game. hopefully, the table below will be self-explanatory... player Newhan Beltran Green Loduca Chavez Sele Feliciano 1 5.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2 2.00 0.50 2.00 0.50 0.25 0.75 0.20 3 4.00 0.50 0.80 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 4 2.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 0.75 5 2.00 1.00 1.25 0.60 0.25 6 2.25 0.80 1.00 0.75 7 6.00 2.00 0.50 8 3.00 1.50 1.34 9 2.50 1.00 10 2.50 1.00 11 2.00 1.00 12 4.00 0.75 13 2.00 0.75 14 2.00 0.70 15 3.60 0.34 16 3.66 old total points 48.51 4.30 16.09 2.00 2.85 2.25 5.79 old schaefer 3.03 0.27 1.01 0.13 0.18 0.14 0.36 outhigh 6.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.34 oullow 2.00 - - - - - - new total points 40.51 3.30 14.09 1.00 1.85 1.25 4.45 new schaefer 2.89 0.24 1.01 0.07 0.13 0.09 0.32 every player who is not david newhan had a 0 vote removed from his total. the total points awarded for this game dropped from 5.11 to 4.75

="Yancy Street Gang"]I don't recall that you ever participated in these, but maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, I think that eliminating the outliers would have little effect on the totals, but would simply require more effort on my part. Anyone who wants to experiment can compare the actual results for a game or two with the results we'd have gotten with outlying votes eliminated. I'm curious to see what the impact would be, but not curious enough to try it myself. hmm... we just did a whole outlier thing here at work not too long ago... to begin, though, i'd suggest that you define "outlier" if you intend to toss out any vote that is not considered to be part of an expected population of votes, then its going to be difficult to toss any out. tho that newhan game might be a good test for it... otherwise, you're left with either arbitrarily tossing a vote that appears wonky, or automatically tossing the highest and/or lowest votes for a given player in a given game.

Reyes 0.4 Delgado 1.0 Green 3.6 Easley 0.5 Newhan 0.3 Burgos 1.6

Wright 3.9 Delgado 2.3 Reyes 1.2 Heilman 1.0 Smith 0.8 Feliciano 0.8

Perez 4.0 Easley 2.1 Beltran 1.2 Reyes 1.1 Gomez 1.0 Wright 0.6

Newhan 3.6 Wright 1.0 Beltran 0.8 Green 0.7 Chavez 0.6 Sele 0.5 Feliciano 0.5

Sosa 3.9 Easley 1.6 Delgado 1.5 Wright 1.4 Wagner 1.0 Feliciano 0.6

count me in.

we're voting after each game to award the schaefer player of the game we are not voting for the schaefer player's contribution to the whole year as evinced by this one game. as such, the contributions of a player should be viewed in the context of that game, and not so much in the context of how that vote will play for the whole season. if we vote for the individual games based on how a specific vote will affect the season totals, then we might as well throw out the game-by-game voting, and just put together our tally at the end of the season. if we did this whole exercise not by a point system but by a single player of the game vote, then we'd also have the problem wherein we'd be deciding was newhan's home run worth as much as perez' outing yesterday, and isnt it unfair to beltran that his homer doesnt count for anything. as long as we go game-by-game with a relativistic system, then we will have a "problem" wherein one guy will get points he doesnt "deserve" while another guy in another game will not get points that he does. but that's the way it should be. otherwise, we're just going to do our usual end of season ranking project based on the total contribution over the whole season.

as long as we are true unto ourselves, then the integrity of our schaefer voting is maintained. if only one among us believes that newhan deserved a five, and the remainder of us consider his contributions to be worthy of a mere two, then the aggregate vote will be more reflective of a two than five.

Glavine 4.2 Wright 1.3 Reyes 1.2 LoDuca 1.2 Wagner 1.1 Feliciano 1.0

Maine 2.9 Delgado 1.6 Wright 1.5 Gotay 1.5 Wagner 1.4 Heilman 1.1