Banker: Tis' That Time of Year Again

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

#1 - Red Sox
#3 - Dodgers
#4 - Cubs
#6 - Yankees
#9 - Astros
#13 - Rockies
#14 - Indians
#18 - Braves
#22 - Brewers
#28 - Athletics

Broken down by league:

AL: out of 15

#1 Red Sox
#2 Yankees
#4 Astros
#7 Indians
#13 Athletics

NL: out of 15

#2 - Dodgers
#3 - Cubs
#7 - Rockies
#9 - Braves
#10 - Brewers

Now, my argument all along has been that payroll isn't nearly as much of an impact on playoff chances as you (and others) have said. I have argued of an exception for a team(s) with a deviation from the norm in payroll slots. This year, only one team had such a deviation, that team being the Red Sox. The Sox had a payroll $23 million more than the next closest team. The next four teams were only separated by about the same gap, so clearly, the Sox's deviation was an outlier. If you look at teams that buried contracts - usually those teams that are out of playoff contention and want to get rid of dead weight and give young players chances to be evaluated - the diversity of playoff teams and payrolls becomes even more pronounced. That is important to look at because those teams that bury contracts drop how their payroll is ranked which automatically knocks them lower on the payroll sheet even though they are only dropping because they didn't perform well with a higher payroll.

So remove the Red Sox and check out the numbers. Like usual, payroll doesn't show to have a major impact on playoff opportunities when taking out any outliers.

 

[Chris McLaughlin]

You forgot the Nats!

Oh, wait...

Shit.

 

[murox]

The word ‘tis is a contraction of “it is,” and the apostrophe goes before the “t,” not after the “s.”

 

[i am herdman]

The word ‘tis is a contraction of “it is,” and the apostrophe goes before the “t,” not after the “s.”

That's more exciting than the MLB season.

 

[big_country90]

What’s rifle saying? Tisk that time of year? Tish that time of year?

 

[ThunderCat98]

Where are the Mets?

 

[Dreh_Nagi_HC_IM]

I just spent the last 20 minutes, attempting to find anything that would support YAGs incorrect usage of the apostrophe. This is a really big deal folks. I even attempted to give him the benefit of the doubt, meaning, perhaps since this word is rarely used, as well as being one of those words that are commonly misspelled, but as of right now I cannot find any supporting documentation that could potentially bail Ms. Bee out.

I'm guessing it has to have something to do with the smart phone. Perhaps a temporary glitch occurred with spell check.

There has to be something, as YAGs is way too smart to create a glaring error on his own free will.

I'm going to continue to research this, with hopes of finding YAGs an out. I ask that others do so as well, so we can keep this man perfect.

Lastly, there's likely several glaring grammar issues, perhaps multiple spelling mistakes in what I've typed out, but unlike some, I honestly don't give a fvck.

 

[herdfan429]

I just spent the last 20 minutes, attempting to find anything that would support YAGs incorrect usage of the apostrophe. This is a really big deal folks. I even attempted to give him the benefit of the doubt, meaning, perhaps since this word is rarely used, as well as being one of those words that are commonly misspelled, but as of right now I cannot find any supporting documentation that could potentially bail Ms. Bee out.

I'm guessing it has to have something to do with the smart phone. Perhaps a temporary glitch occurred with spell check.

There has to be something, as YAGs is way too smart to create a glaring error on his own free will.

I'm going to continue to research this, with hopes of finding YAGs an out. I ask that others do so as well, so we can keep this man perfect.

Lastly, there's likely several glaring grammar issues, perhaps multiple spelling mistakes in what I've typed out, but unlike some, I honestly don't give a fvck.

It was just a slip of the finger typo. Come on we know rifle can never be wrong

 

[murox]

I just spent the last 20 minutes, attempting to find anything that would support YAGs incorrect usage of the apostrophe. This is a really big deal folks. I even attempted to give him the benefit of the doubt, meaning, perhaps since this word is rarely used, as well as being one of those words that are commonly misspelled, but as of right now I cannot find any supporting documentation that could potentially bail Ms. Bee out.

I'm guessing it has to have something to do with the smart phone. Perhaps a temporary glitch occurred with spell check.

There has to be something, as YAGs is way too smart to create a glaring error on his own free will.

I'm going to continue to research this, with hopes of finding YAGs an out. I ask that others do so as well, so we can keep this man perfect.

Lastly, there's likely several glaring grammar issues, perhaps multiple spelling mistakes in what I've typed out, but unlike some, I honestly don't give a fvck.

You must have missed his “correction” and attempt to mock me yesterday for spelling G-Wagen correctly. Everyone knows wagon is spelled with an O! He’s flustered. His mom won’t let him use the car today.

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

You must have missed his “correction” and attempt to mock me yesterday for spelling G-Wagen correctly. Everyone knows wagon is spelled with an O! He’s flustered. His mom won’t let him use the car today.

In that case, he would have missed my correction of your incorrect spelling of "signaling." You are American, not British. Based on all of the spelling and grammar errors I have had to corrects of yours recently, it isn't a stretch to think that you didn't know how to spell "wagon."

The word ‘tis is a contraction of “it is,” and the apostrophe goes before the “t,” not after the “s.”

When putting a single letter or number in quotations, the end quotation mark goes inside the punctuation. You made that error twice in one sentence, which shows it is far from a "brain-fart" of mental gaffe. It's simply not knowing the correct way of doing things.

The worst part about this is that 1) I was the one, over ten years ago, who corrected you on the appropriate places to put quotations regarding end punctuation - I believe the attorney/runner who used to post here was also corrected in the same thread about that, but he used an excuse that he was using a different (rare) style guide. 2) Then, years later, I also corrected you on what I just corrected you on above, yet here you are making the same error again.

 

[ThunderCat98]

He doesn't know how to spell "moniker" either.

 

[Bankerreturns]

So what you're saying is that the odds of a team making the playoffs is 33.3% (10 of 30), but if your payroll is in the top 10 then 50% of the teams made it, which equates to a 50% higher chance. If you are in the top 5 60% made it, so nearly a 100% increase.

It's really simpler than you try and make it. Half the teams come from the top 10, half come from the bottom 20. If you spend more money your chances of making the playoffs are significantly higher and it is proven yet again this year.

Thanks for putting this together in support of my claim.

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

So what you're saying is that the odds of a team making the playoffs is 33.3% (10 of 30), but if your payroll is in the top 10 then 50% of the teams made it, which equates to a 50% higher chance.
.

I absolutely love when the banker attempts to do math!

Read what you just wrote. You said that a team has a 1/3 chance (33.3%) to make the playoffs since 10 out of 30 teams make it. You then say that if you have a top 10 payroll, you have a 50% higher chance of making the playoffs (due to 5 out of the top 10 making it).

You're entirely wrong. If you have a 33.3% chance and then a 50% chance, it is a 16.7% higher chance. You should have said it is a 50% increase in the likelihood that you will get a playoff spot, but it is still just a 16.7% higher chance.

My god. Math fun never gets old with you!

And that's just the first blunder in your attempt.

 

[Bankerreturns]

Poor rifle.

50% - 33% = 17%

17% / 33% = .515151, or 51.5% expressed as a percentage.

A person that has a 50% chance of winning a raffle has a 51.51% better chance than a person that has a 33% chance of winning a raffle. Maybe the use of a percent sign is confusing you. Let's say it this was, if you have a 50% chance of winning, if you play 100 times you should win 50 times. If you have a 33% chance of winning and play 100 times you should win 33 times. Fifty is what percentage larger than 33?

See, now you have it. Good job!

 

[big_country90]

It gets better, banker. Ask rifle about the swing vote in Texas. Even before his recent stroke, 5th grade math has always been rifle's enemy.

 

[HerdBuckeye]

50% - 33% = 17%

16.5%

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

Poor rifle.

50% - 33% = 17%

17% / 33% = .515151, or 51.5% expressed as a percentage.

A person that has a 50% chance of winning a raffle has a 51.51% better chance than a person that has a 33% chance of winning a raffle. Maybe the use of a percent sign is confusing you. Let's say it this was, if you have a 50% chance of winning, if you play 100 times you should win 50 times. If you have a 33% chance of winning and play 100 times you should win 33 times. Fifty is what percentage larger than 33?

See, now you have it. Good job!

I explained exactly what you intended to say and also explained how you said it was wrong. It wasn't an issue of me not understanding what you wanted to say - I explained that. It was an issue of you wording it wrong.

The chance of making the playoffs increased by 17%. The likelihood of making the playoffs increased by 50% COMPARED to what it was as one of thirty teams. However, in the general sense that you stated it, there was only a 17% increase.

It gets better, banker. Ask rifle about the swing vote in Texas. Even before his recent stroke, 5th grade math has always been rifle's enemy.

Why, after the pounding you took in that thread, would you bring it up again? I posted exact wording from a legitimate source stating exactly what I did and exactly what you claimed was wrong. Your excuse for that was that other countries determine the math differently.

 

[big_country90]

Rifle...everybody on this board knows you lost that argument miserably. That's why I brought it up.

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

Rifle...everybody on this board knows you lost that argument miserably. That's why I brought it up.

Now, you're just trying too hard to get a reaction from me.

What was the single worst part of your argument?

1) When you had to admit that you made a "minor" (which was a wildly major) error by forgetting to deduct numbers?
2) When you claimed that "swing" pertaining to votes can mean a few different things?
3) When you claimed that different countries do their math differently?
4) When your own source, in just two sentences, completely buried your argument?

 

[ThunderCat98]

Rifle...everybody on this board knows you lost that argument miserably. That's why I brought it up.

Pfffffft. Haven't you learned by now? In his mind he wins every argument convincingly. I don't think it's just bluster either. His ego is so great that he actually believes he comes out on top, even when he clearly doesn't.

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

Pfffffft. Haven't you learned by now? In his mind he wins every argument convincingly. I don't think it's just bluster either. His ego is so great that he actually believes he comes out on top, even when he clearly doesn't.

You should take the time to actually read that thread. It's worse than the one where you asked for something to be shown, had exactly what you requested shown, then argued you meant something else and worse than your other two recent bombs.

 

[ThunderCat98]

See^^^

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

See^^^

You just aren't a very bright person. Look at your comment about my bubble statement. You claimed it was false because there is no such thing as a "bubble between tier 2 and tier 3." Well, no shit. "Bubble" refers to an imaginary ranking/position of something that could easily fall on either side. In college basketball's March Madness tournament, there is no "bubble" spot - you're either going to get in or not get in. But people rank/position teams on the "bubble" showing that they are very close to being put in either spot.

A law school on the bubble of two tiers is one that is very close to being ranked in either of them.

Truly, that was your argument that my claim was false. It wasn't that "No way, that school is one of the highest ranked tier 2 schools so it isn't close to being tier 3." Your argument was that my comment was false, because there is no such thing as being on a bubble in law school rankings.

You probably are the guy who worked hard in school and studied a lot. That's admirable. However, you just aren't a very logical or bright guy. And your ability to identify that and succeed, even after going to a tier 3 school, reflects positively on your work ethic and determination.

 

[big_country90]

I'm beginning to think rifle has a serious mental disorder. Seriously.

 

[Bankerreturns]

I'm beginning to think rifle has a serious mental disorder. Seriously.

Yeah, figured that out a while back. It's a narcissistic vortex that keeps drawing him deeper and deeper down. The fact that he starts a thread showing that 50% of the top 10 payroll teams make the playoffs as support for his argument that payroll is not important just shows how convoluted his thought process has become.

He's always been this way to an extent, but I'm worried about the degeneration. He's getting much worse.

 

[ThunderCat98]

You just aren't a very bright person. Look at your comment about my bubble statement. You claimed it was false because there is no such thing as a "bubble between tier 2 and tier 3." Well, no shit. "Bubble" refers to an imaginary ranking/position of something that could easily fall on either side. In college basketball's March Madness tournament, there is no "bubble" spot - you're either going to get in or not get in. But people rank/position teams on the "bubble" showing that they are very close to being put in either spot.

A law school on the bubble of two tiers is one that is very close to being ranked in either of them.

Truly, that was your argument that my claim was false. It wasn't that "No way, that school is one of the highest ranked tier 2 schools so it isn't close to being tier 3." Your argument was that my comment was false, because there is no such thing as being on a bubble in law school rankings.

You probably are the guy who worked hard in school and studied a lot. That's admirable. However, you just aren't a very logical or bright guy. And your ability to identify that and succeed, even after going to a tier 3 school, reflects positively on your work ethic and determination.

Thanks?

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

I'm beginning to think rifle has a serious mental disorder. Seriously.

Not nearly as bad as your basketball disorder.

Thanks?

No problem.

Yeah, figured that out a while back. It's a narcissistic vortex that keeps drawing him deeper and deeper down. The fact that he starts a thread showing that 50% of the top 10 payroll teams make the playoffs as support for his argument that payroll is not important just shows how convoluted his thought process has become.

He's always been this way to an extent, but I'm worried about the degeneration. He's getting much worse.

I only pointed out your first error in that discussion. Want me to go back and point out more?

 

[ThunderCat98]

Fwiw, my law school was a first tier school my first year there, but tier two the other two years. Maybe I brought the ranking down. In any event, I don't think it was ever out of the top 60 during my time there. I would have went regardless of ranking because it's where I wanted to be.

 

[Y.A.G Si Ye Nots]

Fwiw,
.

Not very much, like that degree.

I would have went regardless of ranking because it's where I wanted to be.

Yeah. That's similar to what the kid in the disability class said to my high school girlfriend who was the captain of the cheerleading squad. He asked her on a date. When she politely declined by saying that she already had a boyfriend, he responded by saying that it was alright since he'd rather sit in his room playing Dungeons & Dragons anyways.

my law school was a first tier school my first year there, but tier two the other two years.
.

(You don't have to explain anything, Tier Three. I talk shit on here to deplorables. Based on your political allegiance, you're a deplorable. The fact that Murox feels the need to come running to your side - in between his posts talking about the apartments he owns, his banker's knowledge of his financial success, his luxury vehicles, his award winning yard, his travels, etc. - just makes it all the more enjoyable for me.)

 

[HerdBuckeye]

Fwiw, my law school was a first tier school my first year there, but tier two the other two years. Maybe I brought the ranking down. In any event, I don't think it was ever out of the top 60 during my time there. I would have went regardless of ranking because it's where I wanted to be.

We are number 60. Yeah team!!!!

 

[ThunderCat98]

We are number 60. Yeah team!!!!

Are you kidding me??? I guarantee your stupid a$$ never attended, much less graduated, from a school ranked that high.

 

[HerdBuckeye]

Are you kidding me??? I guarantee your stupid a$$ never attended, much less graduated, from a school ranked that high.

We Are ......number 60.