Quote:
|
In either case, if I were a GM looking to make a deal I would look at BABIP only at the very end of a much longer assessment trail.
|
Same here.
Quote:
|
Instead, I suggest designing an experiment that studies a topic, gathering enough data to make the experiment hold its weight, and let it fly. I also suggest presenting the data in a format that makes a case. Given Knock's professional status, I assume he knows all this, but it's not evident from what he's doing here...maybe it's just me...I don't know
|
I am familiar with that method. You kind of get familiar with that with physics and philosophy, etc. It's how Schrodinger's cat has made Einstein (at least for now) look wrong when he said, "God doesn't play with dice!" It's the scientific method that is utilized in philosophical arguments (such as testing Determinism against Free Will, the nature of language, etc.). Testing the hypothesis is game-time in the Scientific Method.
Not so much from work. We examine and evaluate studies dealing with broadcasting, advertising, marketing, ratings, etc. But, scientific studies don't originate here.
I'm still trying to get a handle on keeping all things consistent in these studies. I was aware of the adjusted BABIP issue. I'd worried about that several pages back, but I simply haven't found a page that lays that out for more than a single pitcher at a time. I'm looking for at least Team pages so I don't have to mouse click thousands of times to get what I want. I'm guessing you're looking, too?
I'm also musing over various OOTP settings to give the game its fairest opportunity, whether fictional, or historical.
So, a night largely made up of insomnia left me with a few hours. Did some looking at BABIP... to follow shortly.