Okay, I like statistics as much (and probably a lot more) than the next person, but this might be too much. Sometimes, perhaps especially in sports, statistics seem to based on supply rather than demand. In other words, we get them because the writer has them, not because anyone would be interested. Consider this snippet from somewhere on ESPN.com about why last night's game was "historic."
"Jacoby Ellsbury's Tuesday night was a historic occasion. Only twice since divisional play began has a Red Sox player hit two triples in a 4-hit performance."
Forgive me for not being overwhelmed....
"Jacoby Ellsbury's Tuesday night was a historic occasion. Only twice since divisional play began has a Red Sox player hit two triples in a 4-hit performance."
Forgive me for not being overwhelmed....
3 comments:
True, baseball stats get ridiculous, but the story also reminds us of what an odd thing triples are. Even as a kid, I was intrigued that the frequencies of hits (single, double, triple, homer) was non-linear because of the their rarity.
That's true... you'd think that triples are more common that home runs.
I heard a program on this on NPR a year or so ago, about how ridiculous the stats can get. I think someone read a poem or something mocking the statisticians, describing the historic game where a team, for the first time ever, lost a game by 2 points while making 6 strikeouts, 2 homeruns, with exactly four 33-year olds on the field (one of whom wore blue socks), and whose catcher had exactly 48 hours earlier recovered from a cold. Plus, the coach sneezed exactly 12 times during the game. A remarkable event.
Post a Comment