Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

jad

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,556

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jad

  1. jad
    Just remember, as we were told in another thread "intelligent" RS fans support all the moves Bloom/Henry made. So now we just need to have them explain to us how we are supposed to appreciate the nuances of this team. (I think I am simply insufficiently conversant with dWAR and fanGraphs to really understand what we have here.)
  2. jad
    Bullpen will save it.
  3. jad
    Ha ha! I understand now. If all the players Bloom signs end up to be Hall of Famers, then he did a great job. ERGO, "intelligent" fans support him. (Of course, they will have no reason to buy tickets or purchase gear, but that's up to the marketing department, right?). At least the pitching is great, no?
  4. jad
    Damn, this Bloomian team is hard to watch; but so were all the off-season moves these past two years. Oh well. You get what you pay for, I guess.
  5. jad
    RS Bloomian defense flashing the leather.
  6. jad
    whose
  7. jad
    Absolutely! I definitely expect them to average over 1 run a game. Take it to the BANK!
  8. jad
    I know RS stats geeks did not want to PAY Mookie, but I don't think you'll find a single fan who says "I don't want Betts on this team!"
  9. jad
    It already is.
  10. jad
    Yeah, if only they had dumped JD a couple of days ago, they'd have a shutout going today, and would have had a damn good chance of a no-hitter yesterday.
  11. jad
    I missed yesterday. Was there a grand pre-game ceremony about getting under the cap? And why aren't all the players wearing "Reset!" patches on their unis?
  12. jad
    The fact that the RS are mediocre doesn't bother me--I've cheered for lots of mediocre RS teams over the past half century or so. Rooting for players you know is what fandom is, no? What bothers me about this situation (and this is everywhere in pro sports today), is that it took so much wheeling and dealing to GET to this level of mediocrity.
  13. jad
    I guess I am failing to see exactly where the strength of this team is.
  14. jad
    There have been no questions raised about Bloom's dealings???? what else has anyone talked about for six months?
  15. jad
    THAT'S what all RS fans wanted.
  16. jad
    EVERY team should win if they hold their opponents to three or fewer runs. But hey. RS got as many hits as Mookie did on opening day, so all's good.
  17. jad
    Hey! We're a half-game ahead of the Yanks!
  18. jad
    Did they fix the new Yankee stadium? Wasn't there an entire section where part of the field was obscured? (Hard to see how that could happen with a modern stadium.). I remember years ago, my friends in theatre design would work on scale models, and one of the things they did diligently was check the sight-lines of every seat in the (imagined) place.
  19. jad
    Clean living. Healthy diet. ...
  20. jad
    But don't worry, Covid-supporters: Texas (which presently has one of the worst infection rates in the country) will have a full stadium for opening day.
  21. jad
    Whew. I didn't think the RS undefeated season would last this long.
  22. jad
    It's all about practice.
  23. jad
    48 hours to make asses of ourselves on topics no one either (1) understands (2) gives a crap about (3) believes related to baseball.
  24. jad
    Not so. Because the % of infected and non-infected subjects is not the same, the confidence in positive/negative results is also NOT the same. That's the point of this math/probability exercise: it depends on the percentage of the general population carrying the infection, as you yourself state above. If you get a negative result, you can be fairly confident that result is accurate (90-95% or so). If you get a positive result, you only have a 1 in 3 chance of that being accurate (this is using your own figures ). (If there were no one carrying infections, for example, you could have 100% confidence in a negative result, 0% confidence in a positive one). To evaluate the results in a meaningful way, you need to know (or assume) what percentage of the gen. pop. is infected.
  25. jad
    Ha! nice. (Although in my defense, I did say "roughly".) What is interesting about this problem is (1) you can have more confidence in a negative result being accurate [iF, that is, your original premise of 10% 'real' infections is correct, which itself is based in part on the assumption of accuracy of testing!], and (2) it's not strictly a probability problem, since you cannot know WHY you are getting a false positive, and the existence of false positive may not be purely random. If it were random, then re-testing would solve things. But apparently, no one is willing to assume that. It's nice that we are now applying these models to the efficacy of vaccination rather than testing!
×
×
  • Create New...