|
|
|
1) There is a Print This Post feature at the end 
of every post, which allows you to print each post.
2) Player names are now hyperlinked to their stats page on SNY.tv, as will be other keywords in time.
3) The Standings have been added to the sidebar and a) adhere to losses back, and b) will be updated every morning.
…why losses back…because you can always win more games, but you cannot get less losses…
Follow me on
MetsBlog.com is owned and operated by Matthew Cerrone.
MetsBlog.com publishes both rumor and opinion, as well as accurately reported information from other sources. Information on MetsBlog.com may contain errors or inaccuracies - links to content and the quotation of material from other news sources are not the responsibility of
MetsBlog.com.
MetsBlog.com and Matthew Cerrone are not responsible for what is written by non-MetsBlog.com writers within the site's comment's section.
Can somebody explain to me why “in the loss column” is any more meaningful than in the win column. I like to think of myself as intelligent, but it is a distinction I’ve never understood.
it usually means that the team with fewer wins just has fewer games and can make up the distance. you can’t make up for losses.
look at the standings. the mets are tied in the loss column, but are behind by one win. they are a half game back, but it’s in their hands. loss column= it’s in their hands
I tried three times and couldn’t put it into the right words…”loss column= it’s in their hands” nicely done
Games back in the loss column are games that can’t be made up on your own. If you’re tied or ahead in the loss column, your fate is in your own hands (because while theoretically you can win the rest of your games, you can never un-lose any). Hope this helps.
The thing that’s always tripped me up about it is this: you still have to win your games, and if you don’t you still have to hope the team you are chasing or that is chasing you loses. I don’t think loss column tells us anything different. It’s always in your hands until it is mathematically out of your hands. That last day of the season last year, after we lost we were one behind in the loss column, but when it was all said and done, we were one loss behind in the win column too.
Right. When the teams being compared have played the same number of games, then games behind in the win column = games behind in the loss column, and thus GB = WB = LB. It’s more for comparing teams that have played unequal number of games.
EXACTLY. a win in the hand is worth two in the bush. the emphasis on the loss column is one of these aphorisms that writers and broadcasters love to toss around but really isn’t true.
if anything i’d rather get games out of the way now rather than have them pile up in september like they did last year when they hit the bullpen like a tsunami. having to play that makeup against the cardinals certainly didn’t work out in our benefit last year.
no.
the mets are a half game back of the marlins.
marlins 9-6
mets 8-6
mets win that extra game they’re tied. slight advantage marlins
if it was
marlins 10-6
mets 10-7
the marlins have the big advantage
slight advantage Marlins unless the Mets lose the “one less” game. Right?
this really isn’t that big of a deal, some people like to use the “losses back” because a lot of the time, the teams haven’t played the same number of games, so its a good way to equalize that out, considering “half games” don’t really exist. It’s either wins or losses. The point is, you can’t take away less losses, but you can add more wins. You’re trying to argue that you can lose that extra game, which is obvious, and that would give you an extra loss in the loss column, meaning you’d be further back. It’s really not that big of a deal. People have harped on Matt for this for over a year now and I don’t understand it. It’s very easy to understand. It’s an equalizer until the teams have played the same number of games, and its a way of looking at it where you can make up wins but not losses.
right, tidewater. the first scenario let’s the mets determine their fate not the marlins.
logically the losses back concept falls apart if you take it to extremes. if the mets are 92-70 and the marlins are still 0-0 (crazy weather down there!) it’s silly to say the mets are 70 losses back.
another less absurd example: what if the mets are 92-70 and finished and the phils are 90-69 with 3 games to play? even though the phils would control their own destiny i would rather be the mets in this situation.
(not arguing with the usage here, just the attention paid to “the loss column” in general)
the theory of gravity falls apart if you take it to extremes also, just sayin’….
new slogan for Metsblog: “because you can always win more games, but you cannot get less losses…”
Where’s the Willie poll? At least give us an explanation why it was pulled. I don’t want to see it back now that we swept the Nats and it hits 60% again. As a Mets fan, we live through the good and bad…so if the bad indicates that it might be time for a change, why sugar coat it or pretend it doesn’t exist.
I think it’s probably pulled because you’d have people voting 45 times, venting anger, etc. It wouldn’t be productive.
Matt’s opinion is that GB is a contrived stat, the only thing that matters is who has lost the fewest number of games. I disagree with this stat, as do others, because GB basically say that an unplayed game is worth 1/2 game. The 1/2 game basically means you have a 50/50 of winning, really would be better if there was a statistical way to say the expected probability of winning percentage over the remaining games, but that seems needlessly completed…. personally I hate the LB stat Matt uses, but its his blog and his rules, and I can go to any other website to get GB or just look at it and figure it out.
Also, Matt thank you for the print feature, it will make it much easier for me to print out your fine reporting to read in privacy in “my office”
Yeah. I was getting tired of having to tote my laptop into the stall with me. The company wasn’t too thrilled with it either…
realistically the difference between GB and LB is meaningless until the last few weeks of a tight race. and by then the magic number is really what we care about and it takes the number of games remaining into account.
nice upgrades, Matt…gettin all fancy over here at metsblog
Great additions. I’ve had these features on my blog for years and am glad to see a more popular blog use them. Printing is important for any blog and player stat links and standings are imperitive to sports blogs. Hoping the trend catches on. Next step it to ad an email link (not the one in Share This that is not obvious to the casual browser).
By the way, you’ll want to add the print link to the single post template. Right now it looks like it’s just on the index page.
Is there anyway to be able to click on your name to bring up other posts that you made? I like to look back later in the day to see if anyone responded to my post but alot of times its hard to find.
That would be great.
Sometimes I find myself googling “Steal Home Jose” and “Metsblog” to try to find something. It usually doesn’t work.
i just tried googling site:metsblog.com “red high tops” and learned that i say “o lawd” on this site far too frequently
yea, I definitely agree with this. ESPN.com has this feature, where you can see what articles you’ve left comments on. Also, the Giants blog I visit most frequently (bigblueview dot com) has a feature where you can actually see where you’ve posted and also who has replied to your post. Would be cool to see that addition.
ctrl-F works wonders if you’re looking for your comments on a given post.
yea, I do that now, but it would be nice to go back and find posts that might not be on the front page anymore. Sometimes I’ll make a comment on a topic in the morning, then get busy at work or school, and by the time I am able to get back to Metsblog the topic is off the front page, and it would be nice to have a quick way to get to it, to see if anyone replied to my post.
If you know what post you posted to. Sometimes it will be a week later, and I will be like “Oh yeah, I remember I made that super funny post awhile back, I wonder if anybody responded to it”
Then I take 30 minutes to find it only to find out that it had no replies.
That makes Steal Home Jose! not want to do handshakes anymore…
I agree, during the free agent frenzy articles were posted every 5 minutes and I would have to search back pages to look for a post and after it goes to page 2 no one ever looks at it again. Plus I’ve posted in multiple places the same morning and its hard to remember where you posted. I think if you could go back and read what people say about your post it would keep dialogue going on a certain topic. There are plenty of times that I make a comment about someones post hoping they will right back agreeing or disagreeing with me to try and get some back and forth dialogue going but once the article moves to the second page its never looked at again. I love this site for the articles and opinions of the writers and am totally hooked, I check this site 4-5 times during the day at work and it helps me get through the day but I miss the back and forth dialogue.
“why losses back” is a good question…
i can just subtract one team’s losses from another to get that number. you don’t need to list it. 8 minus 6 is 2. not rocket science, and i can figure that out with a quick glimpse at the standings.
games back is used normally because it involves 3 calculations instead of 1 ( (win difference + loss difference ) / 2 ). you can’t just look at the standings and get that right away, unless you are a former “long island challenge” winner.
Cactus hit it right on the head. Discussing games back in the loss column is one thing. Listing it alongside W-L in the standings is just silly. I like the traditional GB when I look at standings.