here - but suffice it to say, none of them seem to have reasoning skills; they just seem to say whatever is on their mind at a given time without thought for consistency of argument or logical progression, and quickly resort to sarcastic insults when someone disagrees with their (mostly) whining. They're idiots, OK? (Or, at least, play them for the audience. Not sure which is worse.) * Examples include things like complaining that Atkins (RHH) is playing over Hughes (LHH) against Sabathia (LHP). Or not seeming to understand that a team can have played better than their win-loss record, and complaining about the latter without seeming to acknowledge the former. Notice a trend? Last time we argued I asked for evidence of a claim - that the organization deserved to lose because they lied a lot - and was told I'd get an email of it. Still waiting on that. And seeing as how my general policy is (sadly):I've argued with some people from radio station WNST before via Twitter. I won't go through everything again* - I did that once
What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!That means when I see them say stupid things I tend not to just let them go (an unfollow was the correct course of action, I found.) That earned me a nomination for their Orioles Apologist of the Month award, seeing as how I don't complain loudly and constantly at every loss:
"Daniel Moroz aka @CamdenCrazies (who actually developed a math formula that has the Orioles in 1st place in the AL East currently)"I assume they mean the Orioles Beyond W-L page, which still has the team in last place in the AL East and with one of the worse records in the majors. See the lack of intellectual honesty or good faith discussion? So I called them morons* (admittedly not the highest of roads), which they felt warranted a sarcastic comment calling me a funny dude for suggesting that the talent level displayed by the team is possibly that of an 11-14 club (based on expected runs scored and allowed, and then adjusted for strength of schedule). * In response to someone congratulating me on the nomination: "Why thank you. I also dreamed of having morons misrepresent things I say because of their own idiocy and biases." Look; I understand that the years of losing are tough. My job as an analyst - as far as I envision it - is call things as I see them without letting things that don't actually matter (like the team's past records) affect my work. It doesn't always work out, but I try to look at things on a case by case basis. Being an apologist of the team apparently means understanding things like underlying performance, sample sizes, regression to the mean, etc. When I criticize many of the team's off-season moves (most of them, in fact), that doesn't count. But when I defend a player or the team using actual evidence, that's apparently my bias. It's a little frustrating, though as they say; there's no such thing as bad (free) press. Sorry for the interlude - back to actual baseball stuff shortly.