By this logic deGrom should have about 20 straight bad outings. When you flip a coin 10 times and it comes up heads every time it's not due to come up tails - it's probably a two-headed coin.
Actually, that’s not the logic at all. The logic would be DeGrom is due for one bad outing at some point. Not sure how you could reasonably argue DeGrom will not have one. I knew you’d bring up flipping a coin. Problem is the “comes up heads every time” is the situation you are defending. I’m saying the opposite. You get 9 heads in a row that tails is likely coming. You just defended my argument.
It is complete nonsense that if you get 9 heads in a row that tails is coming. And no, no one would ever bet that deGrom is going to have a bad outing, because he rarely has them you bet that Diaz will because he often does. Maybe Stroman will have a good game todY, but the gamblers fallacy has nothing to do with it.
Your first coin example is the opposite of what you just argued. Keep up with your own arguments. If getting 10 heads in a row is so abnormal that it means you likely have a double head coin, that example inherently means you would expect a tails to come up on a normal coin if flipped 10 times. Have you been drinking this morning?
Stop being an insulting jackass. What you're saying is utter nonsense. If an ordinary coin is flipped 9 times, and comes up heads 9 times, the chance that the next flip is tails is .5, exactly the same as it always is. That is the definition of independence. Unless you think that the coin somehow remembers that it has come up heads 9 times in a row it makes no sense to think that the chance of coming tails on the next flip has changed based on the results of a previous flips. This is the definition of the gambler's fallacy, and casinos have made lots of money through the years taking advantage of people who believe it. What I actually said was nothing like that. What I said is effectively that if someone gave me a coin I knew nothing about, and I flipped it 9 times and got heads every time, the one thing I would NOT do is think that the next flip would be tails. Either it's an ordinary coin, and the run of heads has occurred by random chance, in which case it's still 50/50, or it's an unfair coin, and the chances of heads coming up are much higher than 50%, so I would guess heads. Anyway, it turns out that Stroman is pitching his best game as a Met, which is the only thing about this idiotic conversation I care about.
No, that’s not what you said it’s what you are backtracking to to try and save face. The only thing idiotic of this convo is trying to compare an inanimate object, like a coin, which has no inherent tendency to “perform” either way on a flip and a human being with a tangible record of performance. And that tangible record indicates likely future performance, not a generic 50/50 principal. And when his performances over a stretch differs from his historical performance the only conclusions are he has completely lost it or the poor performance is an anomaly and he will regain his previous performance. You dove into this conversation with the sole purpose to dispute me, and made dumbfuck and irrelevant arguments that you’ve been called on, so you don’t get to be all righteous now just because you failed at whatever your agenda was. Today, you were the Diamondbacks.
I see Ramos is catching Thor tonite and the Mets are losing. I wonder what the real point is here.... We all know who Syndergaard wants to pitch to, but the team seems to want to do things their way.
I get that, but it's hard to justify taking out a hot hitter against a team like the Dodgers when the season is on the line. Granted, it probably wouldn't have mattered yesterday.
The way I see it, if they get 1 win against the Dodgers it is good enough. The schedule gets much easier after that, the only good team left is the Braves, and they might be resting their best players since it's the final 3 games and they have the division pretty much locked.
Need to win tonight and tomorrow. 2 of 3 in every series left they make the playoffs. It is sickening to think that if they just cut their blown saves in half they would be leading the WC.
True, but I see a different angle. The trade that bought both him and Cano here hasn't been exactly a boon for the mets and BVW has taken relatively little heat for it especially with the two prospects doing well. You have to wonder if Callaway has any choice here but to pair up Ramos and Syndergaard unless he risks showing up BVW.
