This morning the temperature here in Chicago was 1 degree. Not two degrees or zero degrees but one degree. Singular. It sounds odd to say it, so it got stuck in my head and I started to think about exactly what is a degree in this case. As I did so, I came to get rather angry.
One degree is one degree Fahrenheit, which is of course the scale we use in the US. This, along with our steadfast refusal to adopt the metric system, has always bugged me.* So today I decided to look it up and see just what a Fahrenheit degree is so I'd know why we as a country have been so stubborn. What I learned was ridiculous enough to make a blog post.
Go to wikipedia and look up Fahrenheit now. The system that we use in opposition to a worldwide standard (that is beautifully logical) is not only totally arbitrary but also the product of some science that is so sloppy I could have done it.
Apparently Mr Fahrenheit used two measurements to scale his system. The first is stupid but at least seems in some slightly way purposeful: he put a thermometer in a brine mixture to find his zero point. Why not use water? Good question. That would make too much sense and thus it would be Celcius like all the rest of the world uses. Better to complicate things by using a mixture the includes ammonium chloride, which wikipedia classifies "a salt." Not "salt," as in NaCl, but something else that is more complicated. The other point he used was not the boiling point (again, too sensible) but the level of the thermometer "when held in the mouth or under the armpit of his wife." The best part is that he intended this point (his wife's body temperature) to be the 100 point on his scale, only he was apparent a crack scientist and so the body temperature we all know today is 98.6. That's 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, the scale not only created with two arbitrary points, but one of them ended up being wrong. He messed up his own scale, which was his invention. I'm having a hard time even coming up with an analogy for that.
There is more good stuff on the wikipedia page about how he went through some mathematical gymnastics adjusting his stupid scale so it would make sense. Honestly, it reads like a description of how little kids might get together and decide on how to split up their allotment of toys, with everyone having a different great idea.
*Almost all of the rest of the world uses the metric system, but we do not. Think about it in this way: we as Americans like to chastise other countries for backward thinking regarding religion, either by adhering to ridiculously fundamental laws or by operating fully as a church state. This is rightfully considered backward and improper. Well, as a lesser of two evils, it's far better to be backward when it comes to religion than when it comes to science.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Restrictor
Do you know how when you are standing chest- or neck-deep in a pool, how it's harder to breathe because your lungs can't fully expand due to the pressure of the water? That's kinda how it feels for me to be jobless still. So many nice things have been happening lately, things coming together, and yet I can't relax and enjoy it like I should, can't fully inhale.
So, cloaked in that bit of happy, here are some of the nice things. We have moved into our new apartment and have almost all of the furniture already. The apartment is big and pretty nice too, and the furniture is.............adult (except for the cardboard box serving as the TV stand). The best part is that it's been cheaper than expected. I had mentally planned for $5,000 in apartment furnishings, which for us includes all furniture except for a small bookshelf, a small dining room table, a desk, and the mattresses. Because we moved out of NYC with so little stuff, lots has had to be bought, and having a large place to live means needing more things. For instance, we have two bathrooms, which is great, but that's two bathrooms to outfit. I now own a full set of towels that are mostly ornamental, that I will never use myself, and this feels strange.
I don't have a neat ledger covering everything but adding in everything from toilet paper to paint to the big sectional I'm currently sitting on, I think I'm just under $4,000. It's a big number to think about while unemployed, but we did a good job getting nice things so I feel good about it.
On the baby front, I'm happy to say that miss Lula can now turn herself over in both directions. I was watching her on the floor yesterday as she was in the middle of the long process of going back-to-front for the first time. She could get over onto her side pretty easily, and then rotate her trailing leg all the way over pretty easily too, so that her lower body was all facing downward. The big obstacle was her inside arm (if rolling toward her left side, then her left arm). Think about what it takes for you to get that arm out of the way when lying on the floor yourself. I was watching this process thinking about this and feeling pretty sure that she wouldn't have the strength to finish the roll because of the left arm. I am proud to say that she did not give up and kept struggling with it for several minutes (fair question is what does that say about me, that--assuming the endeavor was fruitless--I allowed my 3.5 month old baby to struggle in an uncomfortable position for maybe 20 minutes without helping). All the while I was watching, just seeing what would happen, sorta also waiting for the moment when she cracks and the sounds go from honest struggling with the effort, to full-on cries of frustration. Finally, like most things in life, it just sorta happened, the arm slid under and she made it all the way over. It really was something. To celebrate, in the hours since she accomplished this maneuver, she replicated the feat another 5-6 times. The lesson in parenthood here is that there is no turning back with a baby. She learns and does things like a boat going down a swollen river heading for a waterfall.
So, cloaked in that bit of happy, here are some of the nice things. We have moved into our new apartment and have almost all of the furniture already. The apartment is big and pretty nice too, and the furniture is.............adult (except for the cardboard box serving as the TV stand). The best part is that it's been cheaper than expected. I had mentally planned for $5,000 in apartment furnishings, which for us includes all furniture except for a small bookshelf, a small dining room table, a desk, and the mattresses. Because we moved out of NYC with so little stuff, lots has had to be bought, and having a large place to live means needing more things. For instance, we have two bathrooms, which is great, but that's two bathrooms to outfit. I now own a full set of towels that are mostly ornamental, that I will never use myself, and this feels strange.
I don't have a neat ledger covering everything but adding in everything from toilet paper to paint to the big sectional I'm currently sitting on, I think I'm just under $4,000. It's a big number to think about while unemployed, but we did a good job getting nice things so I feel good about it.
On the baby front, I'm happy to say that miss Lula can now turn herself over in both directions. I was watching her on the floor yesterday as she was in the middle of the long process of going back-to-front for the first time. She could get over onto her side pretty easily, and then rotate her trailing leg all the way over pretty easily too, so that her lower body was all facing downward. The big obstacle was her inside arm (if rolling toward her left side, then her left arm). Think about what it takes for you to get that arm out of the way when lying on the floor yourself. I was watching this process thinking about this and feeling pretty sure that she wouldn't have the strength to finish the roll because of the left arm. I am proud to say that she did not give up and kept struggling with it for several minutes (fair question is what does that say about me, that--assuming the endeavor was fruitless--I allowed my 3.5 month old baby to struggle in an uncomfortable position for maybe 20 minutes without helping). All the while I was watching, just seeing what would happen, sorta also waiting for the moment when she cracks and the sounds go from honest struggling with the effort, to full-on cries of frustration. Finally, like most things in life, it just sorta happened, the arm slid under and she made it all the way over. It really was something. To celebrate, in the hours since she accomplished this maneuver, she replicated the feat another 5-6 times. The lesson in parenthood here is that there is no turning back with a baby. She learns and does things like a boat going down a swollen river heading for a waterfall.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Apparently it's been over a month and a half since I last posted. If I had a better sense of that fact, then maybe I'd have done something about it. Life intervenes. Actually, what am I saying? What I've been wandering through these last weeks hasn't been the same as what for the last near-decade I have known as "life."
Moving as an almost-30-year-old, with a wife and a little baby, is very different from moving to and away from college. Remarkable insight, I know. We're finally sorta completing the move this weekend by getting into our own two-bedroom apartment, a place with two bathrooms. I don't know what's a bigger life rite-of-passage: having a baby, or having two bathrooms. I can now have one toilet used exclusively for pooping. Also, one of the showers has one of those hose attachments that lets you take the showerhead off and move it around. This is superb for two reasons: first, let's just say that I can more thoroughly clean certain parts of the body finally; and second, I can take my baby into the shower with me as substitute for bath time. This second thing might seem odd, especially since my baby is a girl and I am a man, but there is a part of the trailer to the recent documentary movie about babies (I actually think it's called "Babies") that includes a quick shot of a man from the waist up hold a baby with one hand in a shower and using the handheld showerhead to clean the baby with the other. For some reason, I saw this trailer a million times, and every time I wished I could do that same thing. (And before you think I'm a weirdo freak for desiring sharing naked time with my baby, know that doctors recommend parents have as much direct skin-on-skin contact as possible when babies are very young. So it's creepiness, but with an alibi.)
Originally, I thought there were two bars within a one-mile radius of our new apartment but it turns out that one of the two is actually a family-style place that only looks like a bar with rows of wooden benches and a barfront that is only where you order your hot dogs/burgers/etc. I should have been tipped off when we walked by on a Sunday afternoon and it was closed.
On a related note, I recently learned that my new hometown of Evanston was a dry city until only 20-30 years ago, and also that you when you buy beer they can't let you take it out of the store without a bag. For a place that is so extremely liberal, they sure do cling to the essence of the old blue laws.
Ok, now instead of going on and on about all the changes in my life the last month, or the new things I've seen or done, or god forbid some of the details of my job search process, I think now I'm going to list some oddities or observations or just bits of found knowledge. Starting now:
Running on grass all the time is very nice.
I ride a bike on paved trails only a little more than twice as fast as I run. I thought it would have been faster.
People from Chicago pronounce the name of their city either Chi-cawg-o, or Chi-cwah-go, not the way that I've only ever heard it by non-natives: Chi-cah-go. Who's right?
Overlooking the soccer field at DePaul University is a giant, like 5-6 story brick mural of either the pope or some other high-ranking Catholic figure. He's not in a classic straight profile shot either, like a guy on a coin, but sorta cut off or cocked to one side, as though he's peeking around the building.
The Jews of Skokie build horrible huge houses that seem designed specifically to look terrible in their context, like a sledgehammer in the middle of a row of glass jars.
Job-searching is a very debasing activity. Not humiliating. I guess it depends on how much pride you have. I just find it debasing.
The Droid X is a spectacular phone that is a couple levels of technology ahead of its battery.
It is possible to live in Chicago in October and not unpack any pair of pants not belonging to a matching suit.
My NFL ratings spreadsheet has allowed me to go 41-26 over 67 wagers placed, for a net betting gain of $335 over the six weeks of the season.
Removing four of the bets made specifically to satisfy bonus requirements at the website, and 37 of 63 of those bets were for an underdog.
That's 59% of all bets for underdogs. Yes there is a lesson of success in there.
If a baby girl smiles at you, it means either that she's happy or that she wants your attention.
If a baby girl smiles at you and she is your daughter, it means she loves you.
Moving as an almost-30-year-old, with a wife and a little baby, is very different from moving to and away from college. Remarkable insight, I know. We're finally sorta completing the move this weekend by getting into our own two-bedroom apartment, a place with two bathrooms. I don't know what's a bigger life rite-of-passage: having a baby, or having two bathrooms. I can now have one toilet used exclusively for pooping. Also, one of the showers has one of those hose attachments that lets you take the showerhead off and move it around. This is superb for two reasons: first, let's just say that I can more thoroughly clean certain parts of the body finally; and second, I can take my baby into the shower with me as substitute for bath time. This second thing might seem odd, especially since my baby is a girl and I am a man, but there is a part of the trailer to the recent documentary movie about babies (I actually think it's called "Babies") that includes a quick shot of a man from the waist up hold a baby with one hand in a shower and using the handheld showerhead to clean the baby with the other. For some reason, I saw this trailer a million times, and every time I wished I could do that same thing. (And before you think I'm a weirdo freak for desiring sharing naked time with my baby, know that doctors recommend parents have as much direct skin-on-skin contact as possible when babies are very young. So it's creepiness, but with an alibi.)
Originally, I thought there were two bars within a one-mile radius of our new apartment but it turns out that one of the two is actually a family-style place that only looks like a bar with rows of wooden benches and a barfront that is only where you order your hot dogs/burgers/etc. I should have been tipped off when we walked by on a Sunday afternoon and it was closed.
On a related note, I recently learned that my new hometown of Evanston was a dry city until only 20-30 years ago, and also that you when you buy beer they can't let you take it out of the store without a bag. For a place that is so extremely liberal, they sure do cling to the essence of the old blue laws.
Ok, now instead of going on and on about all the changes in my life the last month, or the new things I've seen or done, or god forbid some of the details of my job search process, I think now I'm going to list some oddities or observations or just bits of found knowledge. Starting now:
Running on grass all the time is very nice.
I ride a bike on paved trails only a little more than twice as fast as I run. I thought it would have been faster.
People from Chicago pronounce the name of their city either Chi-cawg-o, or Chi-cwah-go, not the way that I've only ever heard it by non-natives: Chi-cah-go. Who's right?
Overlooking the soccer field at DePaul University is a giant, like 5-6 story brick mural of either the pope or some other high-ranking Catholic figure. He's not in a classic straight profile shot either, like a guy on a coin, but sorta cut off or cocked to one side, as though he's peeking around the building.
The Jews of Skokie build horrible huge houses that seem designed specifically to look terrible in their context, like a sledgehammer in the middle of a row of glass jars.
Job-searching is a very debasing activity. Not humiliating. I guess it depends on how much pride you have. I just find it debasing.
The Droid X is a spectacular phone that is a couple levels of technology ahead of its battery.
It is possible to live in Chicago in October and not unpack any pair of pants not belonging to a matching suit.
My NFL ratings spreadsheet has allowed me to go 41-26 over 67 wagers placed, for a net betting gain of $335 over the six weeks of the season.
Removing four of the bets made specifically to satisfy bonus requirements at the website, and 37 of 63 of those bets were for an underdog.
That's 59% of all bets for underdogs. Yes there is a lesson of success in there.
If a baby girl smiles at you, it means either that she's happy or that she wants your attention.
If a baby girl smiles at you and she is your daughter, it means she loves you.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Hitting the Homestretch
A couple of big events have taken place in my transient life, but before we get to that, my baby girl has taken to smiling at us with frequency. And staring and actually interacting for long stretches of time. It is quite remarkable. Quite good.
Back to the news now. First, yesterday morning I had to buy a metrocard that isn't unlimited. I had to stand at the machine and mentally count up the number of subway rides I would take between now and September 17th. $45 is the most they let you buy at one time, and including the $6.75 free bonus you get at that level, and considering that a single ride is $2.25(1), I have 23 rides. This is less than the amount I will need, so since I am not accustomed to looking at the little display on the turnstile when swiping, I can guarantee that sometime around September 14th I will walk straight into a rigid turnstile, and hard too because after 7+ years here I am a pro at swiping quickly and smoothly and getting through as fast as possible.
The next thing is, to me, a big step in our transition. We went to the grocery store on Sunday and we only bought things we would for sure use in the next three weeks. No grabbing the bottle of green curry sauce cause it might be fun, no stocking up on penne because it's on sale, no acquisition of frozen foods of any kind, and no olive oil even though we are very close to being out of it and of course it's a staple. Planning a move, scheduling the rental, closing utilities accounts, haggling with the landlord about the timeliness of the return of the security deposit: these are all things you do because you must. They are part of a timeline and are done without emotion or a sense of context, like walking up stairs. A move doesn't affect you on a daily level really until it affects your stomach. Sometime in the next week, I want to make pasta with the delicious little mini dried ravioli that they sell at Trader Joe's, but since I didn't buy the meatballs I am stuck with plain marinara sauce. I also decided not to buy another jar of honey cause we'd never use it in three weeks and it seems stupid to move a jar of honey a thousand miles, so now when we make a salad it will be too vinegar-y for my tastes because I can't add honey.
I also now feel a stronger need to plan my meals. I know there are still two cartons of butternut squash soup, so I know we must eat it soon even though who in the hell wants butternut squash soup when it's 90 degrees outside?(2) There is also a jar of pre-made cheap-looking pesto sauce that I'll feel obligated to eat, even though why does jarred pesto sauce even exist?(3)
1. Inflation. It was $2.00 when I first moved here. Though, they say that the price of a slice of pizza mirrors the price of a subway ride, that it has been a close relationship over time. If this is true, then all you subway riders are in for an increase, because slices average about $2.50 right now.
2. Maybe we could eat it cold? I really love all types of soup and since I'm a normal human being, I really love the summer, but at least for me, the two do not go together at all. I will be a soup-cooking machine in Chicago.
3. Basil, oil, nuts, blender. It doesn't take any subtlety to make it, no perfect combination of exotic ingredients. To make things worse, the jar I have looks like an alfredo-y type of pesto. I hope it wasn't me that bought it, but I suspect it must have been like 99 cents or something and I couldn't resist. It is my dad's fault that I would do something like that. I promise to fight it.
Back to the news now. First, yesterday morning I had to buy a metrocard that isn't unlimited. I had to stand at the machine and mentally count up the number of subway rides I would take between now and September 17th. $45 is the most they let you buy at one time, and including the $6.75 free bonus you get at that level, and considering that a single ride is $2.25(1), I have 23 rides. This is less than the amount I will need, so since I am not accustomed to looking at the little display on the turnstile when swiping, I can guarantee that sometime around September 14th I will walk straight into a rigid turnstile, and hard too because after 7+ years here I am a pro at swiping quickly and smoothly and getting through as fast as possible.
The next thing is, to me, a big step in our transition. We went to the grocery store on Sunday and we only bought things we would for sure use in the next three weeks. No grabbing the bottle of green curry sauce cause it might be fun, no stocking up on penne because it's on sale, no acquisition of frozen foods of any kind, and no olive oil even though we are very close to being out of it and of course it's a staple. Planning a move, scheduling the rental, closing utilities accounts, haggling with the landlord about the timeliness of the return of the security deposit: these are all things you do because you must. They are part of a timeline and are done without emotion or a sense of context, like walking up stairs. A move doesn't affect you on a daily level really until it affects your stomach. Sometime in the next week, I want to make pasta with the delicious little mini dried ravioli that they sell at Trader Joe's, but since I didn't buy the meatballs I am stuck with plain marinara sauce. I also decided not to buy another jar of honey cause we'd never use it in three weeks and it seems stupid to move a jar of honey a thousand miles, so now when we make a salad it will be too vinegar-y for my tastes because I can't add honey.
I also now feel a stronger need to plan my meals. I know there are still two cartons of butternut squash soup, so I know we must eat it soon even though who in the hell wants butternut squash soup when it's 90 degrees outside?(2) There is also a jar of pre-made cheap-looking pesto sauce that I'll feel obligated to eat, even though why does jarred pesto sauce even exist?(3)
1. Inflation. It was $2.00 when I first moved here. Though, they say that the price of a slice of pizza mirrors the price of a subway ride, that it has been a close relationship over time. If this is true, then all you subway riders are in for an increase, because slices average about $2.50 right now.
2. Maybe we could eat it cold? I really love all types of soup and since I'm a normal human being, I really love the summer, but at least for me, the two do not go together at all. I will be a soup-cooking machine in Chicago.
3. Basil, oil, nuts, blender. It doesn't take any subtlety to make it, no perfect combination of exotic ingredients. To make things worse, the jar I have looks like an alfredo-y type of pesto. I hope it wasn't me that bought it, but I suspect it must have been like 99 cents or something and I couldn't resist. It is my dad's fault that I would do something like that. I promise to fight it.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Formulaic Satisfaction
As you know, I have been cultivating and caring for something that is important to me over these last few months. Doing so has at times been frustrating, at times tedious, at times engrossing, but even so always I have enjoyed it.
Of course I am talking about my baseball ratings spreadsheet.(1)
In the last week or so, I've completed what I'm proud to announce is an accompanying spreadsheet that predicts the results of the playoffs. This second file is superior to the first in that it's almost wholly automated. I am required to enter data in just 48 total cells,(2) and the entire playoffs with its myriad possibilities and probabilities fills itself in for me.
I had been playing with this file mostly late at night or early in the mornings while watching the baby, and also some while at work since I was (conveniently, almost) stuck covering the reception desk twice lately. Yesterday was a beautiful moment, when I finally finished the column representing each team's chances to win the World Series. To test for bugs, I did a simple SUM of the column, and when I hit enter and the cell filled in with a clean number "1"............let's just say it felt good.(3) It meant that there were no real mistakes within the four-sheet file, that I'd done it right.
1. I think I'll always have a weird relationship with my first big sheet because definitely the one team I most associate with it is the Atlanta Braves. The Braves are currently leading their division by 2.5 games and are just 2 back of San Diego for the best overall record in the NL. But it wasn't always so. On May 19, they were in last place, already six games behind with a 13-18 record. But my sheet told me they were good. On May 4, my system told me they were the third best team in the league, just a hair behind the Phillies, and in fact it has told me at every checkpoint from April 22 through today that they were a top-3 team. The system never doubted the Braves, and so I found myself rooting for them to turn it around and then maintain their position.
This rooting for the Braves is odd for me, because as a sports fan I've more or less always hated them.(A) In the early 90s, I was a fully developing baseball fan, my little league career coming to an end and my analytical love for it still a decade away. At exactly this time, my Pirates happened to be winning, and doing so with one of the best players of all time, Barry Bonds. They won three division titles in a row and twice in a row finishing just a game shy of the World Series. Both of these losses came to the Braves, the second in especially tragic circumstances.(B) And even though he wasn't my favorite Pirate, even at my young age, I was well aware that he was easily our best player, the best in the league. He won three MVPs in a four year span. Most people forget this now because of his (alleged) steriod-fueled romp to four straight a decade later, but Bonds was totally robbed out of four straight in the early 90s. The one year he lost was 1991 and the player he lost to was Terry Pendleton, of the Atlanta Braves.(C)
2. There are eight teams that qualify for the playoffs. For each team, I must fill in the team name, the team rating (which of course I copy from the other spreadsheet), and the four individual pitcher factors for the rotation member (which of course I also copy from the other spreadsheet).
3. So here is what you really want to know, the odds for each team to win it all, based on current standings, in order:
Yankees - 24.0%
Rangers - 17.3%
Phillies - 17.3%
Braves - 12.5%
Rays - 11.1%
Twins - 7.0%
Padres - 5.8%
Reds - 5.0%
A. Outside of the usual suspects like Michigan, Notre Dame, and the Cleveland Browns, and maybe Dallas Cowboys, my list of hated teams has varied. As a kid, I hated the 49ers because I didn't want them to tie the Steelers' Super Bowl record. As a teenager, I hated the Pacers and the Heat (and even MJ and the Bulls for a little while) because they always had emotional playoff contests against the Knicks. As an adult, I've hated both the Patriots and the Red Sox for obvious reasons, and also the Seahawks for less obvious ones (oddly, I don't like bitterness, or complaining). My OSU alumni status required me to hate Florida in recent years.
B. I'll never forget you, Francisco Cabrera, you piece of shit. My dad had already bought game 1 World Series tickets for us that year. I've still never been to a World Series game, and Pittsburgh has not yet had another winning season. It's not the Curse of the Bambino, but in many ways, it's more pathetic.
C. Bonds had more than two more WAR than Pendleton, and double the WPA. If you don't know what those acronyms mean, I'm sorry.
Of course I am talking about my baseball ratings spreadsheet.(1)
In the last week or so, I've completed what I'm proud to announce is an accompanying spreadsheet that predicts the results of the playoffs. This second file is superior to the first in that it's almost wholly automated. I am required to enter data in just 48 total cells,(2) and the entire playoffs with its myriad possibilities and probabilities fills itself in for me.
I had been playing with this file mostly late at night or early in the mornings while watching the baby, and also some while at work since I was (conveniently, almost) stuck covering the reception desk twice lately. Yesterday was a beautiful moment, when I finally finished the column representing each team's chances to win the World Series. To test for bugs, I did a simple SUM of the column, and when I hit enter and the cell filled in with a clean number "1"............let's just say it felt good.(3) It meant that there were no real mistakes within the four-sheet file, that I'd done it right.
1. I think I'll always have a weird relationship with my first big sheet because definitely the one team I most associate with it is the Atlanta Braves. The Braves are currently leading their division by 2.5 games and are just 2 back of San Diego for the best overall record in the NL. But it wasn't always so. On May 19, they were in last place, already six games behind with a 13-18 record. But my sheet told me they were good. On May 4, my system told me they were the third best team in the league, just a hair behind the Phillies, and in fact it has told me at every checkpoint from April 22 through today that they were a top-3 team. The system never doubted the Braves, and so I found myself rooting for them to turn it around and then maintain their position.
This rooting for the Braves is odd for me, because as a sports fan I've more or less always hated them.(A) In the early 90s, I was a fully developing baseball fan, my little league career coming to an end and my analytical love for it still a decade away. At exactly this time, my Pirates happened to be winning, and doing so with one of the best players of all time, Barry Bonds. They won three division titles in a row and twice in a row finishing just a game shy of the World Series. Both of these losses came to the Braves, the second in especially tragic circumstances.(B) And even though he wasn't my favorite Pirate, even at my young age, I was well aware that he was easily our best player, the best in the league. He won three MVPs in a four year span. Most people forget this now because of his (alleged) steriod-fueled romp to four straight a decade later, but Bonds was totally robbed out of four straight in the early 90s. The one year he lost was 1991 and the player he lost to was Terry Pendleton, of the Atlanta Braves.(C)
2. There are eight teams that qualify for the playoffs. For each team, I must fill in the team name, the team rating (which of course I copy from the other spreadsheet), and the four individual pitcher factors for the rotation member (which of course I also copy from the other spreadsheet).
3. So here is what you really want to know, the odds for each team to win it all, based on current standings, in order:
Yankees - 24.0%
Rangers - 17.3%
Phillies - 17.3%
Braves - 12.5%
Rays - 11.1%
Twins - 7.0%
Padres - 5.8%
Reds - 5.0%
A. Outside of the usual suspects like Michigan, Notre Dame, and the Cleveland Browns, and maybe Dallas Cowboys, my list of hated teams has varied. As a kid, I hated the 49ers because I didn't want them to tie the Steelers' Super Bowl record. As a teenager, I hated the Pacers and the Heat (and even MJ and the Bulls for a little while) because they always had emotional playoff contests against the Knicks. As an adult, I've hated both the Patriots and the Red Sox for obvious reasons, and also the Seahawks for less obvious ones (oddly, I don't like bitterness, or complaining). My OSU alumni status required me to hate Florida in recent years.
B. I'll never forget you, Francisco Cabrera, you piece of shit. My dad had already bought game 1 World Series tickets for us that year. I've still never been to a World Series game, and Pittsburgh has not yet had another winning season. It's not the Curse of the Bambino, but in many ways, it's more pathetic.
C. Bonds had more than two more WAR than Pendleton, and double the WPA. If you don't know what those acronyms mean, I'm sorry.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Do you want to see something awesome? Of course you do.
That is what happens when I have a baby. Data. We have it for every day of our baby's life starting with Day 4, July 12. You can get a pretty amazing picture of what it's like to raise an infant through the first six weeks just by looking at this chart. She fed from mom's breast 20 times in her fourth day. Think about that for a second. She dropped somewhat quickly over the next 8-9 days as she learned how to feed better, how to take in more during each feeding, and then stabilized into a very slow downward trend. At 6+ weeks now, she feeds between 7 and 10 times per day, which is pretty much exactly average for a baby that age. This makes me as a father feel good.
Another thing that is "supposed" to happen with babies her age is that they are supposed to start having few messy diapers as the digestive system gets more mature and learns how to not simply pass "shit" through. You can see this in the graph (though not perfectly thanks to the little increase in the last couple days, an increase that is attributable to grandma being in town and giving mom and dad a hard time and forcing more than the necessary amount of changes). Anyway, she has indeed had a real decrease from a previous level of averaging about 8 per day to 6-7 per day now.
The final line on the graph doesn't quite tell as big of a story, which really is itself the story. Lula's hours awake is the yellow line. Aside from one odd spike when she was awake for 14 hours at her one-month-old mark, her time awake has been very consistent. There is no real trend to the line, at least as presented here. If I were to have two plots of time awake--one for time awake during the day and one for time awake at night--then there would be a remarkable difference apparent. Starting 3-4 weeks ago, the time awake at night line would drop a lot, and for the last three weeks, the line would hover just slightly above zero. That is right, my baby pretty much sleeps through the night, and has done so since before she was even one month old. This is my first chance to parent-gloat and so I'm going enjoy it.
Changing subject here briefly, I have tried out some different forms of music with our little one to find out what she likes at this age. No, I am not going to assume that her tastes at 5-6 weeks will remain her tastes for life, and probably it's less about taste than simply about sound, but let's say that early results have been encouraging.
Most happily for me, she doesn't seem to react much at all to what would be considered kid's or baby music, the grating crap that comes out of kid toys. She enjoys the tune that comes out of her stuffed pink rabbit, but I think that's more a function of the rabbit and not the music. All the rest of that stuff goes under her head.
She pretty clearly likes jazz, especially Thelonious Monk, but including all that I've played for her. She is mostly ambivalent to Bob Dylan and the Beatles, but has a truly shocking affinity for Led Zeppelin and even seemed to enjoy the limited amount of Springsteen she heard before falling asleep.
That is what happens when I have a baby. Data. We have it for every day of our baby's life starting with Day 4, July 12. You can get a pretty amazing picture of what it's like to raise an infant through the first six weeks just by looking at this chart. She fed from mom's breast 20 times in her fourth day. Think about that for a second. She dropped somewhat quickly over the next 8-9 days as she learned how to feed better, how to take in more during each feeding, and then stabilized into a very slow downward trend. At 6+ weeks now, she feeds between 7 and 10 times per day, which is pretty much exactly average for a baby that age. This makes me as a father feel good.Another thing that is "supposed" to happen with babies her age is that they are supposed to start having few messy diapers as the digestive system gets more mature and learns how to not simply pass "shit" through. You can see this in the graph (though not perfectly thanks to the little increase in the last couple days, an increase that is attributable to grandma being in town and giving mom and dad a hard time and forcing more than the necessary amount of changes). Anyway, she has indeed had a real decrease from a previous level of averaging about 8 per day to 6-7 per day now.
The final line on the graph doesn't quite tell as big of a story, which really is itself the story. Lula's hours awake is the yellow line. Aside from one odd spike when she was awake for 14 hours at her one-month-old mark, her time awake has been very consistent. There is no real trend to the line, at least as presented here. If I were to have two plots of time awake--one for time awake during the day and one for time awake at night--then there would be a remarkable difference apparent. Starting 3-4 weeks ago, the time awake at night line would drop a lot, and for the last three weeks, the line would hover just slightly above zero. That is right, my baby pretty much sleeps through the night, and has done so since before she was even one month old. This is my first chance to parent-gloat and so I'm going enjoy it.
Changing subject here briefly, I have tried out some different forms of music with our little one to find out what she likes at this age. No, I am not going to assume that her tastes at 5-6 weeks will remain her tastes for life, and probably it's less about taste than simply about sound, but let's say that early results have been encouraging.
Most happily for me, she doesn't seem to react much at all to what would be considered kid's or baby music, the grating crap that comes out of kid toys. She enjoys the tune that comes out of her stuffed pink rabbit, but I think that's more a function of the rabbit and not the music. All the rest of that stuff goes under her head.
She pretty clearly likes jazz, especially Thelonious Monk, but including all that I've played for her. She is mostly ambivalent to Bob Dylan and the Beatles, but has a truly shocking affinity for Led Zeppelin and even seemed to enjoy the limited amount of Springsteen she heard before falling asleep.
Friday, August 6, 2010
A Mask
I am looking for a job now. This is very necessary and very evil. Constant looking and what I will call relentless waiting. Because I have to sign up for many websites in order to look for or apply to jobs, my inbox is filling up with job "opportunities" from people I don't know. The problem is that all of these are crap, and most are computer generated, trying to get me to sell something for them. I am not a salesman. Sometimes they are trying to get me to apply to a very menial job or to sign up to their headhunting agency (which is a whole other story). Of all the email there has been only one that seems legitimate (it was accompanied by an actual phone message from an actual person), but I haven't made real contact yet so I don't know what kind of prospect it is.
Job-searching is about patience and persistence, but mostly it's about selling yourself and by extension lying. I am terrible at these things. I am terrible because it makes me very uncomfortable talking myself up. My whole approach to life is to simply get my things done as best I can and to let that speak for itself. I don't need credit and I don't need praise. Selling yourself requires generating your own praise and claiming credit often for things undeserved.
The paragon of the entire process is of course the resume. When making connections to other people, or in networking yourself through helpers, usually the only currency involved is a resume. Plenty of times when applying directly for a job you are given the opportunity to also include a cover letter, but the convention behind this is also far too formal to be worth a damn, and besides when dealing only with contacts cover letters are never used. It's always simply the resume.
It's a little intimidating and absurd that your whole professional existence could be reduced to a single page of words, or that your entire essence should be shoe-horned into something so formulaic.
Has anyone ever felt truly satisfied with their resume? I'd like to think that if you do your job well, and you contribute beyond simply what's in the job description--that you always actively apply your brain--that it should be impossible to boil down your value into an easy description. Part of this is the nature of the comprehensiveness of my job, but I find it difficult to succinctly even describe my current job. How am I then supposed to compress my experience into something that would be appealing to a recruiter?
I am not someone who makes great first impressions. I don't think I put people off--well, sometimes, but mostly not. I just am not a person that a stranger will walk away from and think "Gee that guy was really nice or really personable." For one thing, it's been my experience that a person who will cause that reaction is a horrible phony. I don't really enjoy or tolerate chit-chat, and that is basically what job-searching is all about.
I like to think that when someone deals with me, that there is always something more to me than I offer. I don't feel it's necessary to always supply the punchline or interject with a witty remark. It's ok to let a conversation flow naturally even if it doesn't flow directly through you, and even if you have something to add. Anyway, I am really just usually so confident with myself that I don't feel the need to show myself off or to attempt to create any kind of adoration in those around me.
My hope is that the more that people get to know me and the more they uncover the more they will like me. This approach isn't very compatible with looking for a job. And I can somewhat accept that, since it is me doing the looking and therefore needing to be proactive. It's just a necessary evil.
I'm not sure what my intent is in writing this post. I'm not trying to complain, and I'm not trying to offer a better solution. I guess I'm just haplessly describing a situation, putting something out there that I can re-read after successfully completing my search and landing a superduper job. For now I will go touch up my resume, which is kinda like perfecting a mask of myself with the intent of wearing it and making it seem like me. The world is really not ready or patient or interested enough to just see my real face.
Job-searching is about patience and persistence, but mostly it's about selling yourself and by extension lying. I am terrible at these things. I am terrible because it makes me very uncomfortable talking myself up. My whole approach to life is to simply get my things done as best I can and to let that speak for itself. I don't need credit and I don't need praise. Selling yourself requires generating your own praise and claiming credit often for things undeserved.
The paragon of the entire process is of course the resume. When making connections to other people, or in networking yourself through helpers, usually the only currency involved is a resume. Plenty of times when applying directly for a job you are given the opportunity to also include a cover letter, but the convention behind this is also far too formal to be worth a damn, and besides when dealing only with contacts cover letters are never used. It's always simply the resume.
It's a little intimidating and absurd that your whole professional existence could be reduced to a single page of words, or that your entire essence should be shoe-horned into something so formulaic.
Has anyone ever felt truly satisfied with their resume? I'd like to think that if you do your job well, and you contribute beyond simply what's in the job description--that you always actively apply your brain--that it should be impossible to boil down your value into an easy description. Part of this is the nature of the comprehensiveness of my job, but I find it difficult to succinctly even describe my current job. How am I then supposed to compress my experience into something that would be appealing to a recruiter?
I am not someone who makes great first impressions. I don't think I put people off--well, sometimes, but mostly not. I just am not a person that a stranger will walk away from and think "Gee that guy was really nice or really personable." For one thing, it's been my experience that a person who will cause that reaction is a horrible phony. I don't really enjoy or tolerate chit-chat, and that is basically what job-searching is all about.
I like to think that when someone deals with me, that there is always something more to me than I offer. I don't feel it's necessary to always supply the punchline or interject with a witty remark. It's ok to let a conversation flow naturally even if it doesn't flow directly through you, and even if you have something to add. Anyway, I am really just usually so confident with myself that I don't feel the need to show myself off or to attempt to create any kind of adoration in those around me.
My hope is that the more that people get to know me and the more they uncover the more they will like me. This approach isn't very compatible with looking for a job. And I can somewhat accept that, since it is me doing the looking and therefore needing to be proactive. It's just a necessary evil.
I'm not sure what my intent is in writing this post. I'm not trying to complain, and I'm not trying to offer a better solution. I guess I'm just haplessly describing a situation, putting something out there that I can re-read after successfully completing my search and landing a superduper job. For now I will go touch up my resume, which is kinda like perfecting a mask of myself with the intent of wearing it and making it seem like me. The world is really not ready or patient or interested enough to just see my real face.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Just that Obvious
Having a newborn means never being certain of anything. She can't talk, and at two weeks old, she's not even developed enough to know how to cry properly to convey her needs. Having a newborn also means having an intense desire to comfort and care for the baby. These two things lead me directly to the internet for information of all sorts. Unfortunately, information of all sorts is exactly what I find.
Websites prey on the constant fear that is being a parent and try to use it to sell you things. They know that people will search around for any info on even the most innocuous things, so they will have content on everything imaginable, and they will say just about anything.
The other day I was looking around both for general knowledge-gaining purposes and because little Lula was not easily comforted and stayed up through most of a whole night. I stumbled upon an article on a big baby/pregnancy info site that seemed to promise helpfulness: "Twelve reasons babies cry and how to soothe them." I already knew about the main reasons for crying: hunger, tiredness, dirty diaper, and too hot/cold, but I sure didn't know twelve reasons, so I took a look.
Turns out this article is a classic example of an article seeming to contain helpful info but in fact being nothing but mere words and sentences arranged so as to give the impression of information. I think the article only exists to generate page clicks and provide a space for their advertisers. Of the twelve reasons, one was "Tummy trouble." This in addition to two covering hunger and needing to burp. The #8 reason that babies cry is, apparently, "Something small." Seriously, that is the heading for section #8.
But it gets better. Numbers 10 and 11 are, respectively, "Wants less stimulation" and "Wants more stimulation." Beautiful. Let me get this straight: I'm a concerned parent, trying to understand why my baby is crying. This helpful piece of literature is telling that it could either be too much or too little of the exact same thing. They're thorough, at least.
The best of the bunch though surely has to be #12. After wading through 10 and 11, how about coming to the big finish of the why babies cry article and finding that it is titled "Not feeling well"? The first line of this section is: "If you've met your baby's basic needs and comforted him and he's still crying, he could be coming down with something."
Brilliant. I think that kind of scientific breakthrough might be worthy of a Nobel prize. Really, it makes you wonder why the list had twelve reasons, when their final one is good enough to render all the others unneeded. Why do babies cry? Because they are not feeling well. Of course, that solves everything.
Websites prey on the constant fear that is being a parent and try to use it to sell you things. They know that people will search around for any info on even the most innocuous things, so they will have content on everything imaginable, and they will say just about anything.
The other day I was looking around both for general knowledge-gaining purposes and because little Lula was not easily comforted and stayed up through most of a whole night. I stumbled upon an article on a big baby/pregnancy info site that seemed to promise helpfulness: "Twelve reasons babies cry and how to soothe them." I already knew about the main reasons for crying: hunger, tiredness, dirty diaper, and too hot/cold, but I sure didn't know twelve reasons, so I took a look.
Turns out this article is a classic example of an article seeming to contain helpful info but in fact being nothing but mere words and sentences arranged so as to give the impression of information. I think the article only exists to generate page clicks and provide a space for their advertisers. Of the twelve reasons, one was "Tummy trouble." This in addition to two covering hunger and needing to burp. The #8 reason that babies cry is, apparently, "Something small." Seriously, that is the heading for section #8.
But it gets better. Numbers 10 and 11 are, respectively, "Wants less stimulation" and "Wants more stimulation." Beautiful. Let me get this straight: I'm a concerned parent, trying to understand why my baby is crying. This helpful piece of literature is telling that it could either be too much or too little of the exact same thing. They're thorough, at least.
The best of the bunch though surely has to be #12. After wading through 10 and 11, how about coming to the big finish of the why babies cry article and finding that it is titled "Not feeling well"? The first line of this section is: "If you've met your baby's basic needs and comforted him and he's still crying, he could be coming down with something."
Brilliant. I think that kind of scientific breakthrough might be worthy of a Nobel prize. Really, it makes you wonder why the list had twelve reasons, when their final one is good enough to render all the others unneeded. Why do babies cry? Because they are not feeling well. Of course, that solves everything.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
How Ya Sleepin?
Here is a weird admission for you: yesterday, briefly, I looked at my baby girl not as a simple adorable and helpless little human being, but as something else. I saw her as a reason for me being awake when I didn't want to.
I don't need to tell you this is not a good thing. Children do not always behave perfectly. As they age they do all manner of regrettable things. It's my job as a father to take the broader view and always continue to support and encourage her to do the right thing and to do the best she can. In this case, "the best she can" is essentially zero since she's not even two weeks old.
I realized my error pretty quickly and felt the appropriate amount of internal remorse, but I thought this was a good thing to highlight because there will be infinitely more instances just like it, and I hope to view her fully as a (tiny) person when they happen, and not simply as a vehicle to whatever annoyance or discomfort she is causing me.
Shifting gears, I'd like to say some more about sleep. Sleep, or my daily status with it, is far and away the number one topic for people when conversing with me. It's the first thing anyone mentions when finding out I've recently become a parent. It's even the first thing people talk about who see me regularly, like they need to have their constant updates. The subject's ubiquity has gotten so that I despise talking about it now. I remember the summer after graduating high school the first and often only thing anyone ever said to me was to ask about how I was excited to go off to college. Then last summer after getting married, every single person felt the need to generically ask how was married life. These questions are all in the same family as "So, what do you do?" The asker doesn't care the answer, he only asks because it lets him put a checkmark on his invisible social norms list.
The other thing about these constant sleep queries is the implicit assumption that my life has been turned upside down and that I'm walking around in some catatonic state of sleeplessness. Interestingly, it's the same for both former parents and the wholly uninitiated. Apparently, there is something in our culture that causes "new parent" to irrefutably equal "not getting enough sleep."
After first acknowledging that every situation is unique, let me shine a little light on this bit of accepted doctrine. New parents* do in fact sleep, and often several hours in one night. We of course average fewer hours post-baby than we did pre-baby, but I'm pretty sure for most parents the difference is much smaller than consensus would have you believe. I touched on this already, but the problem is really the inconsistency of the sleep. You might get only a couple hours one night or your six total hours might be split up into 4 or 5 segments of differing length. You might fall asleep at 9pm and wake at 1am, then only get 45 more minutes the rest of the night. Indeed, this can wear on you, but the important thing is that it's manageable. It's not like any of this ever comes as a surprise to a new parent: you have at least 8 or 9 months to get mentally prepared. And you adapt, because you have human instincts. Sara and I now can quickly recognize a window of sleeping opportunity and will pounce on it, even if it's still daylight outside or if it means sneaking in 45 minutes sitting upright on the couch in the room with no air conditioning.
The other key ingredient is that you are a new parent. This is an absurdly exciting time in your life. You are full of endorphins. In fact, you actually enjoy being awake at 3:30am because it means that you are at least looking at but more probably actually holding your baby child, which is really what it's all about. Whatever parenthood takes away from you, it gives back in another way, enough to more than compensate.
Think about it this way, in which scenario would your overall being be more "up": when you are getting a consistent 7-8 hours of sleep every day and doing basically the same thing in your life that you always have; or getting an interrupted and irregular 4 hours of sleep but you've also got a tiny beautiful baby at which you sare constantly involuntarily smiling?
Am I tired? In the traditional sense, yes I guess maybe I am. But I've also got such a huge infusion of energy and general happiness that the question seems hardly relevant.
*Assume all of this discussion is concerning only dual-parent households. I really have no idea how single parents would manage at the beginning of a baby's life.
I don't need to tell you this is not a good thing. Children do not always behave perfectly. As they age they do all manner of regrettable things. It's my job as a father to take the broader view and always continue to support and encourage her to do the right thing and to do the best she can. In this case, "the best she can" is essentially zero since she's not even two weeks old.
I realized my error pretty quickly and felt the appropriate amount of internal remorse, but I thought this was a good thing to highlight because there will be infinitely more instances just like it, and I hope to view her fully as a (tiny) person when they happen, and not simply as a vehicle to whatever annoyance or discomfort she is causing me.
Shifting gears, I'd like to say some more about sleep. Sleep, or my daily status with it, is far and away the number one topic for people when conversing with me. It's the first thing anyone mentions when finding out I've recently become a parent. It's even the first thing people talk about who see me regularly, like they need to have their constant updates. The subject's ubiquity has gotten so that I despise talking about it now. I remember the summer after graduating high school the first and often only thing anyone ever said to me was to ask about how I was excited to go off to college. Then last summer after getting married, every single person felt the need to generically ask how was married life. These questions are all in the same family as "So, what do you do?" The asker doesn't care the answer, he only asks because it lets him put a checkmark on his invisible social norms list.
The other thing about these constant sleep queries is the implicit assumption that my life has been turned upside down and that I'm walking around in some catatonic state of sleeplessness. Interestingly, it's the same for both former parents and the wholly uninitiated. Apparently, there is something in our culture that causes "new parent" to irrefutably equal "not getting enough sleep."
After first acknowledging that every situation is unique, let me shine a little light on this bit of accepted doctrine. New parents* do in fact sleep, and often several hours in one night. We of course average fewer hours post-baby than we did pre-baby, but I'm pretty sure for most parents the difference is much smaller than consensus would have you believe. I touched on this already, but the problem is really the inconsistency of the sleep. You might get only a couple hours one night or your six total hours might be split up into 4 or 5 segments of differing length. You might fall asleep at 9pm and wake at 1am, then only get 45 more minutes the rest of the night. Indeed, this can wear on you, but the important thing is that it's manageable. It's not like any of this ever comes as a surprise to a new parent: you have at least 8 or 9 months to get mentally prepared. And you adapt, because you have human instincts. Sara and I now can quickly recognize a window of sleeping opportunity and will pounce on it, even if it's still daylight outside or if it means sneaking in 45 minutes sitting upright on the couch in the room with no air conditioning.
The other key ingredient is that you are a new parent. This is an absurdly exciting time in your life. You are full of endorphins. In fact, you actually enjoy being awake at 3:30am because it means that you are at least looking at but more probably actually holding your baby child, which is really what it's all about. Whatever parenthood takes away from you, it gives back in another way, enough to more than compensate.
Think about it this way, in which scenario would your overall being be more "up": when you are getting a consistent 7-8 hours of sleep every day and doing basically the same thing in your life that you always have; or getting an interrupted and irregular 4 hours of sleep but you've also got a tiny beautiful baby at which you sare constantly involuntarily smiling?
Am I tired? In the traditional sense, yes I guess maybe I am. But I've also got such a huge infusion of energy and general happiness that the question seems hardly relevant.
*Assume all of this discussion is concerning only dual-parent households. I really have no idea how single parents would manage at the beginning of a baby's life.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Midseason Baseball Update
I hope that you will excuse that these are a couple days late (something about priorities), but I've completed my All-Star Break ratings update, this time with a full end-of-season projection. A couple weeks ago, I added a section to my spreadsheet so that it automatically spits out rest-of-season wins for each team. All I do is add those to the actual standings and I've got easy projections.
Anyway, here first is the American League. First column is the full season rating, second column is the rating weighted for recent performance (I've found this to be more accurate for future projection and so it's bolded), and the third column is the projected full season win total.
Next are the projected final standings with only the "games back" listing. Rounded to the nearest full game, of course.
Mostly straightforward here. You might notice how much Texas benefits from the weighting. Their schedule has been pretty weak lately but they have taken full advantage and Vegas has been happy to give them their due. If anything, the six-game cushion I'm predicting is too low since it doesn't know they added Cliff Lee.
The other interesting thing is the predicted three-way tie in the Central. Vegas still likes Minnesota, even though they are the laggards in the real standings. For what it's worth, I think I agree with them, as their rotation is fairly solid top-to-bottom, though Morneau being out for a long stretch might be enough to kill them in a tight race. Chicago has been one team that's mystified me all year. They look mediocre at best and yet Vegas has held out hope all year until finally the last few weeks they caught fire to validate the respect (that's why you trust the numbers over your own instincts every day of the week). None of the three teams is all that good, evidenced by the fact that any of them would be fifth in the East.
National League
Projected Standings
From my perspective, much more interesting here. If you'll allow me, I have to say that these ratings have been extremely prophetic so far this season. They correctly predicted the rise of Atlanta, Texas, and the White Sox. If someone had been selling shares of those teams, I could have bought them at low prices in the past couple months and them sold them right now at huge profits. Alas.
I mention this because if my numbers are to be trusted there are some changes coming in the NL standings. Cincinnati, holding a small lead, is expected to finish three game up (though with the big caveat that the Cardinals have had some curiously weak lines lately, meaning that Vegas may be about to abandon ship on their league favorite). Similarly, it took a very long time, but it looks like Vegas finally believes in the Reds as at least a worthy pennant race participant. That's nothing compared to the tightest division in baseball, the NL West. All season, San Diego has been leading the pack. All season, Vegas has considered them pretenders. Finally, enough of the season has been completed so that the difference between results and expectations is close enough to expect the Padres to stay in the race right until the end. They have the misfortune of competing against two teams Vegas likes to make a second-half run, though, in LA and Colorado. The Dodgers especially should be a feared team, coming in with a weighted rating a full 40 points higher than San Diego.
Finally, Philadelphia is currently two back in the Wild Card standings, but are favored to win it. Adding in the Mets and Giants, and more than half the NL projects within three games of the playoffs.
Anyway, here first is the American League. First column is the full season rating, second column is the rating weighted for recent performance (I've found this to be more accurate for future projection and so it's bolded), and the third column is the projected full season win total.
| Rating | Weighted | Season Wins | |
| Yankees | .618 | .617 | 101.4 |
| Rays | .577 | .580 | 95.7 |
| Red Sox | .570 | .566 | 91.9 |
| Rangers | .539 | .558 | 89.9 |
| Twins | .538 | .537 | 86.6 |
| Angels | .523 | .527 | 84.1 |
| Tigers | .512 | .523 | 87.5 |
| White Sox | .513 | .514 | 87.4 |
| Athletics | .494 | .505 | 78.3 |
| Blue Jays | .486 | .491 | 88.5 |
| Mariners | .495 | .484 | 69.7 |
| Royals | .459 | .461 | 72.8 |
| Indians | .451 | .441 | 66.4 |
| Orioles | .429 | .418 | 58.5 |
Next are the projected final standings with only the "games back" listing. Rounded to the nearest full game, of course.
| AL EAST | AL CENTRAL | AL WEST | |||
| Yankees | -- | Tigers | -- | Rangers | -- |
| Rays | -5 | White Sox | -- | Angels | -6 |
| Red Sox | -9 | Twins | -- | Athletics | -12 |
| Blue Jays | -13 | Royals | -14 | Mariners | -20 |
| Orioles | -43 | Indians | -21 | ||
| WILD CARD | |||||
| Rays | -- | ||||
| Red Sox | -4 | ||||
| Blue Jays | -8 | ||||
| AL Central | -9 |
Mostly straightforward here. You might notice how much Texas benefits from the weighting. Their schedule has been pretty weak lately but they have taken full advantage and Vegas has been happy to give them their due. If anything, the six-game cushion I'm predicting is too low since it doesn't know they added Cliff Lee.
The other interesting thing is the predicted three-way tie in the Central. Vegas still likes Minnesota, even though they are the laggards in the real standings. For what it's worth, I think I agree with them, as their rotation is fairly solid top-to-bottom, though Morneau being out for a long stretch might be enough to kill them in a tight race. Chicago has been one team that's mystified me all year. They look mediocre at best and yet Vegas has held out hope all year until finally the last few weeks they caught fire to validate the respect (that's why you trust the numbers over your own instincts every day of the week). None of the three teams is all that good, evidenced by the fact that any of them would be fifth in the East.
National League
| Rating | Weighted | Season Wins | |
| Cardinals | .575 | .563 | 89.3 |
| Phillies | .566 | .552 | 88.3 |
| Dodgers | .543 | .542 | 88.0 |
| Braves | .546 | .538 | 92.0 |
| Rockies | .536 | .527 | 87.0 |
| Giants | .524 | .522 | 84.8 |
| Reds | .498 | .512 | 86.1 |
| Mets | .497 | .509 | 85.2 |
| Cubs | .522 | .506 | 75.6 |
| Padres | .491 | .502 | 87.2 |
| Marlins | .509 | .499 | 78.8 |
| Brewers | .505 | .499 | 76.6 |
| Nationals | .455 | .477 | 72.7 |
| Dbacks | .482 | .466 | 67.6 |
| Astros | .444 | .446 | 68.2 |
| Pirates | .419 | .429 | 61.8 |
Projected Standings
| NL EAST | NL CENTRAL | NL WEST | |||
| Braves | -- | Cardinals | -- | Dodgers | -- |
| Phillies | -4 | Reds | -3 | Padres | -1 |
| Mets | -7 | Brewers | -12 | Rockies | -1 |
| Marlins | -13 | Cubs | -13 | Giants | -3 |
| Nationals | -19 | Astros | -21 | Dbacks | -20 |
| Pirates | -27 | ||||
| WILD CARD | |||||
| Phillies | -- | ||||
| Padres | -1 | ||||
| Rockies | -1 | ||||
| Reds | -2 | ||||
| Mets | -3 | ||||
| Giants | -3 |
From my perspective, much more interesting here. If you'll allow me, I have to say that these ratings have been extremely prophetic so far this season. They correctly predicted the rise of Atlanta, Texas, and the White Sox. If someone had been selling shares of those teams, I could have bought them at low prices in the past couple months and them sold them right now at huge profits. Alas.
I mention this because if my numbers are to be trusted there are some changes coming in the NL standings. Cincinnati, holding a small lead, is expected to finish three game up (though with the big caveat that the Cardinals have had some curiously weak lines lately, meaning that Vegas may be about to abandon ship on their league favorite). Similarly, it took a very long time, but it looks like Vegas finally believes in the Reds as at least a worthy pennant race participant. That's nothing compared to the tightest division in baseball, the NL West. All season, San Diego has been leading the pack. All season, Vegas has considered them pretenders. Finally, enough of the season has been completed so that the difference between results and expectations is close enough to expect the Padres to stay in the race right until the end. They have the misfortune of competing against two teams Vegas likes to make a second-half run, though, in LA and Colorado. The Dodgers especially should be a feared team, coming in with a weighted rating a full 40 points higher than San Diego.
Finally, Philadelphia is currently two back in the Wild Card standings, but are favored to win it. Adding in the Mets and Giants, and more than half the NL projects within three games of the playoffs.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
All Filled Up
A lot of people at work have very reasonably been asking me if I'm tired. I am a little, of course, but not exceptionally so. Our baby is really very well behaved so far in life.
It got me to thinking about being tired, though. Physically, it has been quite manageable. It's not really the lack of sleep that is the problem but the inconsistency. I think I'm still getting more than six hours per night, but it's broken up into pieces. Nothing I won't become used to in a little more time.
It is the emotional side of exhaustion and its effect on my metaphysical self that is more apparent to me. It is extremely tiring to be constantly looking out for someone else, to be constantly thinking of and caring for another's needs before your own. It is very tiring to always feel the relentless weight of responsibility.
This is something that human beings must mature into. A couple years ago, I didn't have it. Our instincts are to look out for ourselves, so that it's mostly effortless to live a life. It takes practice and an infinite level of devotion and commitment to another person to get used to behaving differently. I'm happy to be on that path, happy and proud to think about it becoming routine.
Some people live exhausting lives. They work hard, they don't sleep much, they go out and party a little too much. Burning the candle at both ends. The toll from this kind of (some might say reckless) behavior is almost wholly physical, though. You destroy your body, which is of course exhausting. But it is also fairly easy to do. You make the decisions for yourself, you live with the consequences, everything has its balance. It is your life and your life only.
Naturally, I had never known this before, but having a family brings out a unique kind of exhaustion that would better be called a comprehensive state of being, the kind that keeps your body and spirit sound. I think it is the true fullness of the human experience.
It got me to thinking about being tired, though. Physically, it has been quite manageable. It's not really the lack of sleep that is the problem but the inconsistency. I think I'm still getting more than six hours per night, but it's broken up into pieces. Nothing I won't become used to in a little more time.
It is the emotional side of exhaustion and its effect on my metaphysical self that is more apparent to me. It is extremely tiring to be constantly looking out for someone else, to be constantly thinking of and caring for another's needs before your own. It is very tiring to always feel the relentless weight of responsibility.
This is something that human beings must mature into. A couple years ago, I didn't have it. Our instincts are to look out for ourselves, so that it's mostly effortless to live a life. It takes practice and an infinite level of devotion and commitment to another person to get used to behaving differently. I'm happy to be on that path, happy and proud to think about it becoming routine.
Some people live exhausting lives. They work hard, they don't sleep much, they go out and party a little too much. Burning the candle at both ends. The toll from this kind of (some might say reckless) behavior is almost wholly physical, though. You destroy your body, which is of course exhausting. But it is also fairly easy to do. You make the decisions for yourself, you live with the consequences, everything has its balance. It is your life and your life only.
Naturally, I had never known this before, but having a family brings out a unique kind of exhaustion that would better be called a comprehensive state of being, the kind that keeps your body and spirit sound. I think it is the true fullness of the human experience.
Monday, July 12, 2010
A Magnificent Forest
Let's see, what to talk about today?
The World Cup ended sorta quietly, though Spain did win me about $70 with the win, so thanks. I haven't run for a while because I'm being cautious with a chronically tight hamstring. I got some good use out of the grill yesterday and was reminded again how delicious chicken thighs are and how foolishly infrequently I buy them compared to breasts. Oh, and last Friday I became a father.
Actually, here is little Lula on her birthday:
Just spectacular, isn't it? I can hardly believe that I get to go home every day and that little beauty will be there waiting for me.
It's weird, throughout the whole birth process, being at the hospital, then bringing her home and spending a couple of nights and days just watching her get used to things, there have been a seemingly infinite number of things that would normally cause me to think: that would make something interesting to write about. I suppose that if I had let myself slip out of the moment these last few days, I would have been overwhelmed with the desire to write some of this stuff down, or at least to make a mental note to do it later.
Here I am now finally taking a couple minutes to document the occasion and I can't see how much any of it really matters. Just details, like a stock ticker constantly running and spitting out numbers which are meaningless without the context. The context is everything. The wholeness of the experience is so vast and obviously significant that all else washes away. It's the opposite of the saying, "you can't see the forest for the trees."
Probably as the days pass things will be different, but right now I can't see the trees. Quite frankly, I don't really need to.
The World Cup ended sorta quietly, though Spain did win me about $70 with the win, so thanks. I haven't run for a while because I'm being cautious with a chronically tight hamstring. I got some good use out of the grill yesterday and was reminded again how delicious chicken thighs are and how foolishly infrequently I buy them compared to breasts. Oh, and last Friday I became a father.
Actually, here is little Lula on her birthday:
Just spectacular, isn't it? I can hardly believe that I get to go home every day and that little beauty will be there waiting for me.It's weird, throughout the whole birth process, being at the hospital, then bringing her home and spending a couple of nights and days just watching her get used to things, there have been a seemingly infinite number of things that would normally cause me to think: that would make something interesting to write about. I suppose that if I had let myself slip out of the moment these last few days, I would have been overwhelmed with the desire to write some of this stuff down, or at least to make a mental note to do it later.
Here I am now finally taking a couple minutes to document the occasion and I can't see how much any of it really matters. Just details, like a stock ticker constantly running and spitting out numbers which are meaningless without the context. The context is everything. The wholeness of the experience is so vast and obviously significant that all else washes away. It's the opposite of the saying, "you can't see the forest for the trees."
Probably as the days pass things will be different, but right now I can't see the trees. Quite frankly, I don't really need to.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Maybe I'm Falling Out of Love with You, NY
I've finally started to feel a little of the lame-duck effect as I walk around this city. Last night I think I committed to picking a firm moving-out date (whereas previously I had argued that we should wait to move until I have a job offer(1)). This afternoon I contacted a moving company to discuss logistics.(2) It's happening.
I've done a good job of focusing on the present with both my life and my job these last several months, so that I think not too much has suffered from the fuck-it-I'll-be-gone-in-a-few-months-anyway laziness. But now we are getting close enough so that lots of things I'm doing now I am doing for the last time. A couple weeks ago I was at Blue & Gold, our old regular spot (not to mention the "basement" of my apartment for over a year), and it occurred to me while there that since my friends don't hang out there as often that it would probably be the last time I'm there. Sara hates Williamsburg (can't say I totally disagree), and so when we got on the G train to head home from there last weekend, I felt like there was a decent chance I'd never be back. A few weeks ago at the office I had to work on rearranging the seating assignments in order to accommodate interns and the new class of employees (a rite of summer here), and of course I understood while doing it that it would be for the last time.
I hope this doesn't sound sentimental, because I surely haven't been getting misty during any of this. The point is that instead of just going about my business like always, the reality of the end has seeped into my consciousness, which thankfully feels at least as exciting for me as it does sad.
One thing that is negative about this is I have sorta stopped being excited by things happening around me in this city. There has been an empty storefront on a corner close to my apartment for a few months now. Lately it has started to seem apparent that this will open soon as a kind of diner. Normally this would make me happy on a very simple level, but when thinking about it I found myself unmoved because I wouldn't be around to enjoy it much anyway. They're expanding the waterfront park near me at the end of Atlantic, but what do I care? Apparently there is no longer a V train and the M is running differently, or some other nonsense. Usually I would be all over this news and have the new routes memorized in case of late-night re-routing necessities, but since those aren't daily trains for me, I'm not bothering to learn them.
It's not any one of the little facts, it's the accumulation of them that amounts to something, and that something is a curious but growing sense of apathy (for today), excitement (for tomorrow), and almost boredom (for my surroundings). Anymore, I'm just unimpressed, I suppose.
Guilty.
1. My prior argument being that I already have a steady income here, so why move to Chicago until I know I'll have a steady income there? On a philosophical level, it's obvious, but of course we don't live in that realm. There is real value to not living in limbo indefinitely, and as the months or even just weeks pass our future baby will be growing out of our apartment space. The last straw was when I decided that, in the event that I haven't acquired a job by our desired moving date, it would be much easier to keep looking if I'm already living in the correct city, and not forced to fly for interviews (also costly). And my lovely wife really doesn't like the idea of not knowing when we're leaving, which is important to me.
2. Almost exactly $1000 for someone else to move my stuff a thousand miles. Not terrible. Having an infant when planning a long-distance move complicates things immensely. Not to mention that it finally dawned on me the other day that when we actually drive ourselves there, we'll have to stop at least every 3 hours so Sara can feed the baby. I am the kind of person who will try to hold in a piss for hours so as to make the best time possible. Patience will be required.
I've done a good job of focusing on the present with both my life and my job these last several months, so that I think not too much has suffered from the fuck-it-I'll-be-gone-in-a-few-months-anyway laziness. But now we are getting close enough so that lots of things I'm doing now I am doing for the last time. A couple weeks ago I was at Blue & Gold, our old regular spot (not to mention the "basement" of my apartment for over a year), and it occurred to me while there that since my friends don't hang out there as often that it would probably be the last time I'm there. Sara hates Williamsburg (can't say I totally disagree), and so when we got on the G train to head home from there last weekend, I felt like there was a decent chance I'd never be back. A few weeks ago at the office I had to work on rearranging the seating assignments in order to accommodate interns and the new class of employees (a rite of summer here), and of course I understood while doing it that it would be for the last time.
I hope this doesn't sound sentimental, because I surely haven't been getting misty during any of this. The point is that instead of just going about my business like always, the reality of the end has seeped into my consciousness, which thankfully feels at least as exciting for me as it does sad.
One thing that is negative about this is I have sorta stopped being excited by things happening around me in this city. There has been an empty storefront on a corner close to my apartment for a few months now. Lately it has started to seem apparent that this will open soon as a kind of diner. Normally this would make me happy on a very simple level, but when thinking about it I found myself unmoved because I wouldn't be around to enjoy it much anyway. They're expanding the waterfront park near me at the end of Atlantic, but what do I care? Apparently there is no longer a V train and the M is running differently, or some other nonsense. Usually I would be all over this news and have the new routes memorized in case of late-night re-routing necessities, but since those aren't daily trains for me, I'm not bothering to learn them.
It's not any one of the little facts, it's the accumulation of them that amounts to something, and that something is a curious but growing sense of apathy (for today), excitement (for tomorrow), and almost boredom (for my surroundings). Anymore, I'm just unimpressed, I suppose.
Guilty.1. My prior argument being that I already have a steady income here, so why move to Chicago until I know I'll have a steady income there? On a philosophical level, it's obvious, but of course we don't live in that realm. There is real value to not living in limbo indefinitely, and as the months or even just weeks pass our future baby will be growing out of our apartment space. The last straw was when I decided that, in the event that I haven't acquired a job by our desired moving date, it would be much easier to keep looking if I'm already living in the correct city, and not forced to fly for interviews (also costly). And my lovely wife really doesn't like the idea of not knowing when we're leaving, which is important to me.
2. Almost exactly $1000 for someone else to move my stuff a thousand miles. Not terrible. Having an infant when planning a long-distance move complicates things immensely. Not to mention that it finally dawned on me the other day that when we actually drive ourselves there, we'll have to stop at least every 3 hours so Sara can feed the baby. I am the kind of person who will try to hold in a piss for hours so as to make the best time possible. Patience will be required.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Name Race
Things I learned at the doctor's office yesterday:
1. There are no physical signs that point to labor being anything close to imminent.
2. If this baby proves especially stubborn, then Sara will be induced Monday evening, July 12, so that she will be born on July 13. So at least we finally have a strict latest-possible date.
3. Through billions and trillions of babies being born, and unfathomable medical advances, and totally comprehensive amounts of information available to everyone involved, doctors still don't know exactly when a child will be born. Depending on how precise you define "roughly," doctors still don't even know roughly when a child will be born. After her examination yesterday, the doctor admitted to us that Sara could go into labor today or she could fail to as late as 19 days from now. That's almost a three-week window.
Given this knowledge, I'm not going to think about the imminent possibility of it happening for a while longer, until next weekend if possible. I'll keep myself up on the signs and keep thinking about what I need to do when the time comes, but the waiting part I'm stepping away from. In fact, mentally I'm preparing for the arrival to be about two weeks from now.
The naming process is very nearly finished, more or less on schedule, I guess. It's weird, but thinking about this process reminds of a horse race or something similar. At first we had all these potential names and then slowly some faded from the pace. Early on, we had a front-runner emerge, and in fact lead the pack almost the whole way around the track. As the field winnowed, a pack emerge behind the leader From time to time a candidate would depart or appear in this pack, but for the most part this was the group from which our name would come. (We're not saying what our choice is, but I feel like I can say without checking with my wife what some of the rejected choices were. I won't give up the last few still on the table, though). Stella joined the pack relatively late but her run with the leaders proved short-lived. Veda snuck in for a time but never really had enough momentum. Ophelia was one of the first to loose the leading pace, and her etymological cousin, Cordelia, would later suffer the same fate. Viola and Ruby made such brief appearances that I'm not even sure if it happened or if I'm making it up. Uliana, a decided underdog, hung in long enough to get a pat on the back for a good effort. Penelope was running very strong initially, and had a fair amount of staying power, but then faded fast. Vienna came out of nowhere midway through the race, shot right up near the front, and then just as suddenly disappeared from the field. Finally, Josephine, a forgotten participant at the start, picked up steam all along the way, climbing into the top four or five and holding steady, was just never able to fully bridge the gap as two contenders broke away from the field.
While all of this was happening, our lone leader was strolling along, challenged but comfortable in the front. A couple of late arrivals materializing in the trailing pack, initially not distinguishing themselves much but holding strong. Then as some of the second pack started falling away, it become apparent that the two latecomers were legitimate contenders, biding their time until breaking free together to chase the leader. Maybe it was the tough job of constant pacemaking, but the leader started to tire just enough that the two were able to join her at the front for a pack of three. They stayed level for some time, the initial leader perhaps possessing a slim advantage still, when the crowd started to get wrapped up in the excitement of the two newbies at the front. At some point, almost imperceptibly, the longtime leader broke stride and slowly allowed the other two to make the pass. Getting and nearer and nearer the finish line, these two have been neck and neck, one holding the lead only as long as her stride leads forward, as the longtime frontrunner holds her position a couple lengths back but far ahead of the rest of the field.
Even though I'm really a participant, I don't know which will win, but just like any other observer, I'm extremely excited to find out.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
A Shift
According to the questionable accuracy of the due date, we're now just over two weeks from the big day. A week ago, Sara passed the milestone of officially being "full-term," which means that she could deliver the baby and it wouldn't have any premature complications. It's important in that it's the final prenatal hurdle to clear; the only things that could go wrong now are only related to the birth process itself. For someone like me, who tries very hard to keep my focus only on the things happening now that can be controlled, finally getting to a point of simply waiting is nice. For a few months, it was the constant and helpless fear of a miscarriage, along with the need for Sara to be extremely careful with basically everything she did. Then there were doctor visits and the accompanying tests, holding your breath waiting for the results to see if the baby would be born with all manner of diseases, disorders, or syndromes. Finally the much more unlikely prospect that the baby would come premature, with its attendant worries. Those are all passed now. And yet we wait more, now mostly clueless about when it will happen. We rewatched parts of the childbirth class DVD, the parts about going into labor, to refamiliarize ourselves with dropping, passing the mucus plug, effacement, breaking water, weight stabilization or even loss, dilation, and the change from Braxton-Hicks into legitimate contractions. I am confident that we will know when the big show has started in earnest, and when we need to remain patient. For now I try to remain patient.
Yesterday morning before going in to work I accompanied Sara to her weekly doctor appointment, this one with our primary obstetrician. For the first time ever I left with a palpable sense that it was actually going to happen, and soon. Sara had lost two pounds since the previous week, and three pounds in the last three weeks total. The doctor felt around quite a bit and estimated that the fetus was something around 6.5 to 7 pounds, which is almost exactly average as a final birth weight. She also took much more time in explaining to us all of the details of going to the hospital and even the prospect of having to be induced if the fetus proves stubborn. One thing that I can say is that through many of the earlier visits, the doctors will seem to answer questions on auto-pilot, not really investing themselves or sharing in the excitement of the patients, but now that we are so close, our doctor finally met us on totally equal emotional ground. This intensity was a little jarring to me. Now I finally feel the reality of what's going to happen. I understand what it's all about. Unfortunately I can't explain it quite yet, but perhaps afterward.
Going to work after all of this yesterday morning was difficult. I found it basically impossible to insert myself into the happenings of the office or even simply my own personal routines. I couldn't make sense of the business of my job compared to the active time bomb that was sitting inside my wife back at home.
Probably the fact that Monday was Sara's first weekday off for the summer magnified the sensation, but I had an extremely strong urge to be with her, and not actually to be with her to talk or whatever else but simply to be there, like standing guard. That seemed like my real job. I'm sure this will only get much much stronger after we have the baby. Here I have a wife who is more or less just sitting at home the next few weeks (?) waiting for amazing. She is not at all helpless but she is in a reduced state of ability and an increased state of discomfort. Rather like an honestly sick person. If you've ever had a wife or similarly important person to you come down with a sickness that forces her home from work, you might understand the feeling a little. You spend most of the day thinking of the little things you can do when you get home in the evening to make her feel better. It's very distracting, but a sick person is merely sick; what keeps her home is the end. A pregnant person is a prelude to something else. A pregnant person is basically the walking embodiment of empathy and anxiety.
June 15. I think I will try to forget about the possibility of Sara going into labor until at least the next doctor visit, which is June 23. At that point it would be very likely to happen within two weeks, and I can handle two weeks of being on edge. Three-plus weeks is asking a bit much.
Yesterday morning before going in to work I accompanied Sara to her weekly doctor appointment, this one with our primary obstetrician. For the first time ever I left with a palpable sense that it was actually going to happen, and soon. Sara had lost two pounds since the previous week, and three pounds in the last three weeks total. The doctor felt around quite a bit and estimated that the fetus was something around 6.5 to 7 pounds, which is almost exactly average as a final birth weight. She also took much more time in explaining to us all of the details of going to the hospital and even the prospect of having to be induced if the fetus proves stubborn. One thing that I can say is that through many of the earlier visits, the doctors will seem to answer questions on auto-pilot, not really investing themselves or sharing in the excitement of the patients, but now that we are so close, our doctor finally met us on totally equal emotional ground. This intensity was a little jarring to me. Now I finally feel the reality of what's going to happen. I understand what it's all about. Unfortunately I can't explain it quite yet, but perhaps afterward.
Going to work after all of this yesterday morning was difficult. I found it basically impossible to insert myself into the happenings of the office or even simply my own personal routines. I couldn't make sense of the business of my job compared to the active time bomb that was sitting inside my wife back at home.
Probably the fact that Monday was Sara's first weekday off for the summer magnified the sensation, but I had an extremely strong urge to be with her, and not actually to be with her to talk or whatever else but simply to be there, like standing guard. That seemed like my real job. I'm sure this will only get much much stronger after we have the baby. Here I have a wife who is more or less just sitting at home the next few weeks (?) waiting for amazing. She is not at all helpless but she is in a reduced state of ability and an increased state of discomfort. Rather like an honestly sick person. If you've ever had a wife or similarly important person to you come down with a sickness that forces her home from work, you might understand the feeling a little. You spend most of the day thinking of the little things you can do when you get home in the evening to make her feel better. It's very distracting, but a sick person is merely sick; what keeps her home is the end. A pregnant person is a prelude to something else. A pregnant person is basically the walking embodiment of empathy and anxiety.
June 15. I think I will try to forget about the possibility of Sara going into labor until at least the next doctor visit, which is June 23. At that point it would be very likely to happen within two weeks, and I can handle two weeks of being on edge. Three-plus weeks is asking a bit much.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Perfect Bet
What would you do if a fund manager was promising you a one-time 30% annual return? Setting aside a philosophical debate about "promising" a "return," you'd give him just about all of your savings as fast as possible.I have a tip for you. All you need is the ability to withdraw a chunk of money and be ok with not having access to it for about four months. Actually, that makes this more like a 4-month CD. A CD with a 30% yield.*
Anyway, take as much money as you can temporarily live without and deposit it at sportsbook.com. Then go to the Baseball tab and find the link for "Stephen Strasburg Props." Put a check next to the box that says NO (-1000) under the "Will He Record a No Hitter During the 2010 Regular Reason." Wager all of your deposit on this bet.
Then all you do is wait four months and collect.
-1000 gives a 10% return. Bet 100, win 10. Simple. The perfect bet is real.
But allow me to break it down for you.
The most prolific no-hit pitcher ever, Nolan Ryan, had seven in his career, which spanned 773 starts, for a rate of 0.9% of all starts.
Sandy Koufax is second all-time, with four but in just 314 career starts, so 1.27% of all starts.
That's for a career. Additionally--looking only at the far outliers, and allowing for small-sample wildness--four times a pitcher has thrown two in a single season:
Ryan, 2 in 39 starts, 5.1%
Allie Reynolds, 2 in 26 starts, 7.69%
Virgil Trucks, 2 in 29, 6.9% (amazingly he went only 5-19 that year)
Johnny Vander Meer, 2 in 29, also 6.9%
Next, and very importantly, consider that Strasburg has an innings cap for 2010 of about 160. He's already thrown 62, so he's got less than 100 to go. That equates to maybe 15 more starts. One no hitter in 15 starts is a rate of 6.67%. So they've set his line at about equal to the greatest no-hitter seasons ever. We could have a long discussion about probability if you like, but the bottom line is you can never ever predict something to be the farthest outlier on the line. It's impossible.
That out of the way, there's more. In addition to an innings cap, Mr Strasburg will have a pitch max within each of his starts. This will be slightly more flexible than his year-long innings max but even being liberal you can assume that he wont ever be throwing more than 110 pitches, and the likelihood of him throwing over 100 is low, maybe 3-4 times out of 15. Here is a little secret: to throw a no-hitter you have to complete the game. This week he dominated the AAAA Pirates, but it took him 94 pitches to get through 7 innings. To finish the game at that rate, he'd require over 120. And that is not an uncommon rate of pitches thrown. Covering all of 2009, there were 4,860 starts made by pitchers. 152 times the pitcher threw a complete game. 97% of the time, a starting pitcher failed to complete the game. Even just applying this expected rate of simply completing the game, it takes an average pitcher 32 starts to compile one complete game. Again, Strasburg has only about 15 to work with, and we're only talking about complete games, let alone no hitters. For more perspective there, since the last expansion in 1998, there have been 21 no hitters in over 60,000 starts made. That's 0.035%, one in 2,857. It's ridiculous, utterly ridiculous, to think that one guy could have anything even remotely close to a 9% chance of throwing a no hitter in his next 15 starts. I don't care if that guy is a robot.
Adding these factors together, what is required of Strasburg to cause you to lose your NO no hitters bet is for him to equal the best no hit rates of all time, but to do so with both hands tied behind his back.
Anything is possible, that is a fact. But when gambling you can't consider the fluke possibilities, you have to focus on the most likely scenarios. When the break-even point for a bet is 9.1%, and the actual chance of it happening is easily less than 1%, then you jump all over it. It's the perfect combination really: an incredibly low chance of losing (well less than 1% that he gets a no-no), coupled with a payout that is at least ten or twenty times higher than it should be.
*Via Chase, the shortest CD they offer is for six months. The return yield is 0.50%, a mere 60 times lower than our proposed bet here.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Who are these people that have the capability to be so demonstrative on their cell phones out on the sidewalks before 8:00am? Sure there are some real go-getter morning people in the world, but I'm seeing them in downtown Brooklyn coming out of apartment buildings, not downtown Manhattan outside investment banking houses. I guess some people just need to be seen right from the get-go. There is just no need for that.
I was reading something on a baby site yesterday. A few weeks ago, I moved over fully to reading about post-birth items, and one of them was titled something like this: "Caring for your newborn's umbilical cord stump." Caring for my newborn's umbilical cord stump. Obviously this is something that I'll need to remember to actually remark upon after I've experienced it, but just reading that line makes me feel like a character in David Lynch short film.
Sara asked me last night if we should take an old bedsheet and cover our couch with it, to protect against the baby's vomit. And so it begins.
We met with the fourth of five obstetricians at our doctor's office yesterday, maybe the most senior of the group. We might have been her last appointment of the day, and it's the only time we'll see her unless Sara goes into labor at a weird time and she's covering the shift, but this woman was almost jarringly blase about the whole thing. I think Sara could have told her that the fetus's hands were stabbing out through her stomach and stealing bits of food off her plate and she would have given us a glazed response: "Yeah sure, that's normal."
In a way, I like the idea of a somewhat grizzled doctor running the show, because if some shit hits the fan, then you know this woman will be ready for it, but on the other hand, giving birth is usually a long intimate process, and actually having a personality attached to the doctor is not a totally frivolous preference.
I really blanch at seeming to criticize her for this, because I'm not, and because curiosity and a zest for information are very good right now, but sometimes I wonder if she doesn't take too seriously the myriad pieces of advice or simple experiential stories offered to her by other parents. It's part of Sara's nature to really care what other people have to say, and rather not part of mine. That's ok, that's a simple difference that I hope I'm mature enough to accept (and even to accept that my approach is lesser). I guess it's the other parents that I silently have issue with. Just because you had/have a child, doesn't make you some expert. Your experience, while perhaps sometimes applicable to others, is only your experience and not the universal law. There are so many ins and outs to the whole process of making a baby into a person that I feel it's kinda self-centric to project yourself across wide spectrums of experience. (Heh. The spell-check is flagging that word "spectrums." At first I couldn't imagine why but then it dawned on me: damned Romans. "Spectra?" That, or the spell-checker's got more of a philosophical slant than I would have guessed. Anyway, I'm leaving it.)
I think people are always trying to find places where they can interject themselves and be listened to, or simply to feel like their opinion is needed or valued. It serves to glorify themselves, at least in their own eyes. Parenthood is one of those things that allows a lot of latitude for a person to feel like an expert, because every experience is unique, and because culturally it's hard to really criticize a parent, at least one that isn't leaving his kids locked in a parked car or something. But the thing most of the self-centered masses fail to consider before constantly sharing their expertise is that this extremely broad and universal uniqueness serves to undercut their preciousness. In terms of the rest of the world, there is nothing special about having or raising a child. It happens every day in all corners of the world to all types of people. It's not at all important to everyone else. It's important to you, to you it's a miracle and "the greatest and toughest thing you'll ever do" and all manner of hyperbole. To you. Not to everyone. Too few people understand this. No--too few people behave accordingly.
I was reading something on a baby site yesterday. A few weeks ago, I moved over fully to reading about post-birth items, and one of them was titled something like this: "Caring for your newborn's umbilical cord stump." Caring for my newborn's umbilical cord stump. Obviously this is something that I'll need to remember to actually remark upon after I've experienced it, but just reading that line makes me feel like a character in David Lynch short film.
Sara asked me last night if we should take an old bedsheet and cover our couch with it, to protect against the baby's vomit. And so it begins.
We met with the fourth of five obstetricians at our doctor's office yesterday, maybe the most senior of the group. We might have been her last appointment of the day, and it's the only time we'll see her unless Sara goes into labor at a weird time and she's covering the shift, but this woman was almost jarringly blase about the whole thing. I think Sara could have told her that the fetus's hands were stabbing out through her stomach and stealing bits of food off her plate and she would have given us a glazed response: "Yeah sure, that's normal."
In a way, I like the idea of a somewhat grizzled doctor running the show, because if some shit hits the fan, then you know this woman will be ready for it, but on the other hand, giving birth is usually a long intimate process, and actually having a personality attached to the doctor is not a totally frivolous preference.
I really blanch at seeming to criticize her for this, because I'm not, and because curiosity and a zest for information are very good right now, but sometimes I wonder if she doesn't take too seriously the myriad pieces of advice or simple experiential stories offered to her by other parents. It's part of Sara's nature to really care what other people have to say, and rather not part of mine. That's ok, that's a simple difference that I hope I'm mature enough to accept (and even to accept that my approach is lesser). I guess it's the other parents that I silently have issue with. Just because you had/have a child, doesn't make you some expert. Your experience, while perhaps sometimes applicable to others, is only your experience and not the universal law. There are so many ins and outs to the whole process of making a baby into a person that I feel it's kinda self-centric to project yourself across wide spectrums of experience. (Heh. The spell-check is flagging that word "spectrums." At first I couldn't imagine why but then it dawned on me: damned Romans. "Spectra?" That, or the spell-checker's got more of a philosophical slant than I would have guessed. Anyway, I'm leaving it.)
I think people are always trying to find places where they can interject themselves and be listened to, or simply to feel like their opinion is needed or valued. It serves to glorify themselves, at least in their own eyes. Parenthood is one of those things that allows a lot of latitude for a person to feel like an expert, because every experience is unique, and because culturally it's hard to really criticize a parent, at least one that isn't leaving his kids locked in a parked car or something. But the thing most of the self-centered masses fail to consider before constantly sharing their expertise is that this extremely broad and universal uniqueness serves to undercut their preciousness. In terms of the rest of the world, there is nothing special about having or raising a child. It happens every day in all corners of the world to all types of people. It's not at all important to everyone else. It's important to you, to you it's a miracle and "the greatest and toughest thing you'll ever do" and all manner of hyperbole. To you. Not to everyone. Too few people understand this. No--too few people behave accordingly.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Simple Truth
I've interacted with a lot of people in the last few months about pregnancy and having children. And since my wife is just about 35 weeks pregnant, I've spent just about that much time thinking about it myself. Just about the most important conclusion that I've come to is a very simple one, but that really should be repeated quite often, as it tends to get lost in the hubbub.
The point of pregnancy is not to be pregnant or to tell people you are pregnant. The point of pregnancy, of having a family, of childbirth, of everything, is to raise a human being and make sure he/she is as healthy and ultimately as prepared for adulthood as possible. That is the task. Every single tiny bit of the years-long process is about the child, not about you.
If you are a parent, or are in a relationship with a pregnant person, or are considering having a kid, and your motivation or desire is remotely divergent from that, then stop. You are not prepared do be the best you can for another person.
I've said it a lot (maybe mostly to myself), but you have to get your own life in order before you can even think about sharing a life with someone else. This is many times more important when talking about a child, something truly helpless and clueless.
Are you disciplined enough to stick to a workout of diet regimen? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you responsible enough to save money, even when it's painful or inconvenient? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you a person who is ok to always let the other person in an argument have the last word? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you mentally strong enough to sit and sweat for hours in a hot room because it's preferable for someone else? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you selfless enough to always choose the more difficult path so that someone else doesn't have to? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you ok never ever being the center of attention?
Can you handle the neverending stress of approaching life like Joe DiMaggio* every moment of your life?
Believe me, it's a little intimidating thinking about all of this, and I'm not so deluded to think that I'm some kind of zen master as it comes to every one of these points. But I am aware of them, and I am fully prepared to meet them.
*Always one of my favorite quotes/stories ever: supposedly some writer asked Joltin Joe why he was so professional, why he tried so hard every day, ran out grounders, always kept his uniform pristine, why he never let himself have an off-day, and his response was: "Because somewhere in the crowd might be a little kid who's never seen me play, and I owe it to that kid to show him how great I am."
The point of pregnancy is not to be pregnant or to tell people you are pregnant. The point of pregnancy, of having a family, of childbirth, of everything, is to raise a human being and make sure he/she is as healthy and ultimately as prepared for adulthood as possible. That is the task. Every single tiny bit of the years-long process is about the child, not about you.
If you are a parent, or are in a relationship with a pregnant person, or are considering having a kid, and your motivation or desire is remotely divergent from that, then stop. You are not prepared do be the best you can for another person.
I've said it a lot (maybe mostly to myself), but you have to get your own life in order before you can even think about sharing a life with someone else. This is many times more important when talking about a child, something truly helpless and clueless.
Are you disciplined enough to stick to a workout of diet regimen? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you responsible enough to save money, even when it's painful or inconvenient? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you a person who is ok to always let the other person in an argument have the last word? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you mentally strong enough to sit and sweat for hours in a hot room because it's preferable for someone else? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you selfless enough to always choose the more difficult path so that someone else doesn't have to? If not, don't have a kid.
Are you ok never ever being the center of attention?
Can you handle the neverending stress of approaching life like Joe DiMaggio* every moment of your life?
Believe me, it's a little intimidating thinking about all of this, and I'm not so deluded to think that I'm some kind of zen master as it comes to every one of these points. But I am aware of them, and I am fully prepared to meet them.
*Always one of my favorite quotes/stories ever: supposedly some writer asked Joltin Joe why he was so professional, why he tried so hard every day, ran out grounders, always kept his uniform pristine, why he never let himself have an off-day, and his response was: "Because somewhere in the crowd might be a little kid who's never seen me play, and I owe it to that kid to show him how great I am."
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Baseball Season Projections
I'm back again with some results from the baseball ratings, and although I'm not sure how shockingly informative they will be, at least this time they're in a more accessible format: projected season win totals for every team.
As usual, these are current through right now.
AL East
Yankees -- 102
Rays -- 97
Red Sox -- 88
Blue Jays -- 77
Orioles -- 64
The Yankees continue to be the best team by a fair amount, so even though they currently trail Tampa in the standings, they should pull away at some point later in the year.
Boston is a very interesting case. They've played poorly and are already 6.5 back of Tampa and 5 back of NY. The system still thinks Boston is at least an equal to Tampa, but their early deficit plus slightly more difficult remaining schedule puts them well back. Even on May 13, their playoff chances can't be much higher than 25-30% at best.
AL Central
Twins -- 90
Tigers -- 81
White Sox -- 79
Indians -- 73
Royals -- 69
Minnesota is the best team and should cruise through the summer, because their only competition at the moment, Detroit, is playing over its head. In fact, the second-best team in this division is Chicago, and not by just a little. This shows you how important falling behind by five games is, even this early. Those games never come back.
AL West
Rangers -- 85
Angels -- 80
Athletics -- 77
Mariners -- 74
These results don't differ much from popular perception. Seattle has played terribly so far. They have one of the worst records in the AL and have played one of the easiest schedules. They are no great team, but they're better than 13-20, and my numbers don't even include much Cliff Lee. If they didn't lay an egg the first six weeks of the season, they'd have been a great darkhorse.
NL East
Phillies -- 91
Braves -- 87
Mets -- 80
Marlins -- 79
Nationals -- 75
My ratings don't like the Phillies, but love the Braves. A sharp observer would note than Philly is currently 4.5 games up on Atlanta, but my projection shows just a 4 game final edge. Yes, the system thinks Atlanta is better going forward. The same thing I just said about Seattle applies tenfold to Atlanta. They have been disappointing so far, but Vegas has not given up on them. Elsewhere, no, I'm sorry, Washington is not for real. If only they had more pitching.......
NL Central
Cardinals -- 96
Cubs -- 81
Reds -- 81
Brewers -- 81
Astros -- 68
Pirates -- 66
Here is your runaway best team in the NL, a team that is actually behind Philly in the real standings at the moment, largely because they lost three of four to them head-to-head last week. How can this be? Well, the series last week was in Philadelphia. Philly sent each of their best four starters out, while St Louis was without their ace. In spite of this, St Louis was favored in two games and was a toss-up in another. The only game Philly was clearly favored in featured their Cy Young candidate going against the Cardinals' 4th/5th starter. If the playoffs started tomorrow, I would bet large sums of money on St Louis to beat Philly.
AL West
Giants -- 84.7
Padres -- 83.8
Dodgers -- 83.4
Rockies -- 82.4
Dbacks -- 75
Easily the most exciting division, largely because it contains three solid teams, plus the one team that Vegas missed most badly on during the preseason: San Diego. Their lines from their first 18 games suggest a team that would win 76 games in a season. Their lines from the most recent 15 games suggest an 82 game winner. That is a huge difference for the Vegas folks who don't usually miss by much. The key here is not to get carried away by their 21-12 record and focus on the fact that even after Vegas has corrected their Padre lines, they're still just a .500 team. My ratings have LA and Colorado as the top teams here, with SF a notch below, and SD another notch below. The actual standings have exactly reversed that, which is why the full-season projection feature such a logjam. If I had to bet, I'd trust the numbers and go with the Dodgers.
As usual, these are current through right now.
AL East
Yankees -- 102
Rays -- 97
Red Sox -- 88
Blue Jays -- 77
Orioles -- 64
The Yankees continue to be the best team by a fair amount, so even though they currently trail Tampa in the standings, they should pull away at some point later in the year.
Boston is a very interesting case. They've played poorly and are already 6.5 back of Tampa and 5 back of NY. The system still thinks Boston is at least an equal to Tampa, but their early deficit plus slightly more difficult remaining schedule puts them well back. Even on May 13, their playoff chances can't be much higher than 25-30% at best.
AL Central
Twins -- 90
Tigers -- 81
White Sox -- 79
Indians -- 73
Royals -- 69
Minnesota is the best team and should cruise through the summer, because their only competition at the moment, Detroit, is playing over its head. In fact, the second-best team in this division is Chicago, and not by just a little. This shows you how important falling behind by five games is, even this early. Those games never come back.
AL West
Rangers -- 85
Angels -- 80
Athletics -- 77
Mariners -- 74
These results don't differ much from popular perception. Seattle has played terribly so far. They have one of the worst records in the AL and have played one of the easiest schedules. They are no great team, but they're better than 13-20, and my numbers don't even include much Cliff Lee. If they didn't lay an egg the first six weeks of the season, they'd have been a great darkhorse.
NL East
Phillies -- 91
Braves -- 87
Mets -- 80
Marlins -- 79
Nationals -- 75
My ratings don't like the Phillies, but love the Braves. A sharp observer would note than Philly is currently 4.5 games up on Atlanta, but my projection shows just a 4 game final edge. Yes, the system thinks Atlanta is better going forward. The same thing I just said about Seattle applies tenfold to Atlanta. They have been disappointing so far, but Vegas has not given up on them. Elsewhere, no, I'm sorry, Washington is not for real. If only they had more pitching.......
NL Central
Cardinals -- 96
Cubs -- 81
Reds -- 81
Brewers -- 81
Astros -- 68
Pirates -- 66
Here is your runaway best team in the NL, a team that is actually behind Philly in the real standings at the moment, largely because they lost three of four to them head-to-head last week. How can this be? Well, the series last week was in Philadelphia. Philly sent each of their best four starters out, while St Louis was without their ace. In spite of this, St Louis was favored in two games and was a toss-up in another. The only game Philly was clearly favored in featured their Cy Young candidate going against the Cardinals' 4th/5th starter. If the playoffs started tomorrow, I would bet large sums of money on St Louis to beat Philly.
AL West
Giants -- 84.7
Padres -- 83.8
Dodgers -- 83.4
Rockies -- 82.4
Dbacks -- 75
Easily the most exciting division, largely because it contains three solid teams, plus the one team that Vegas missed most badly on during the preseason: San Diego. Their lines from their first 18 games suggest a team that would win 76 games in a season. Their lines from the most recent 15 games suggest an 82 game winner. That is a huge difference for the Vegas folks who don't usually miss by much. The key here is not to get carried away by their 21-12 record and focus on the fact that even after Vegas has corrected their Padre lines, they're still just a .500 team. My ratings have LA and Colorado as the top teams here, with SF a notch below, and SD another notch below. The actual standings have exactly reversed that, which is why the full-season projection feature such a logjam. If I had to bet, I'd trust the numbers and go with the Dodgers.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
I'm Going to Name My Baby "Cash Cow"
Or "Manipulated."
As is well-documented, I am a master of sympathy (and empathy, and apathy, and any -pathies really). I care greatly for others. So I feel like my opinion counts extra when I tell you that a lot of pregnancy symptoms are a bunch of shit, none moreso than a man's supposed "sympathy symptoms."
For those unaware, in most pregnancy literature, there are prominent mentions of an effect wherein an expectant father will experience lesser, but similar symptoms as his pregnant wife. Nausea, sluggishness, food cravings, all the fun ones. The idea, I think, is that a man's empathy will actually trigger physical reactions in his body, so that he will share the experience of pregnancy more with his wife.
This is psychological bullshit, of course.(1) Its main intent as far as I can imagine is to help prop up the very lucrative industry that is pregnancy. I fought my way through a wedding preparation last year, dodging the endless financial sinkholes endemic to weddings all along the way, and now I'm wading through the other great unnecessary money-wasting industry in this country.(2)
There are many books and many websites devoted to pregnancy. Maybe 2% of the info contained inside them is of value. If you ever find yourself expecting a child, here is a tip: attend all your doctor visits and ask many questions at them. Make sure to ask the questions in such a way as to convey that you don't know much about the process. Your doctor will tell you everything you need to know.(3) All those books are there to make money, not to inform you of anything. And the really devious thing about the whole industry is that the books/websites/etc are not only meant to make you spend money on them, they are interconnected and meant to make you spend money on all manner of loosely related products.(4) It's like all the pregnancy-type companies are in cahoots. A rising tide lifts all boats, that sort of thing, and the pregnancy tide is a biggie.
Back to the point. No a man will not have diarrhea at the same time as his wife, not unless they ate dinner at a dicey Indian place the night before. No a man will not have back pain when his wife is carrying around the bowling ball in her stomach. This should be obvious, but since it's related to pregnancy, anybody will believe anything.
To take this a dangerous step further, I'm going to say that lots and lots of the pregnancy symptoms experienced by the actual mother-to-be are bullshit, too. I'm clearly not saying that pregnant women don't have plenty of experiences for which the word symptom doesn't do proper justice, but I am saying that the industry uses the curious and captive audience of pregnant couples as an excuse to claim just about every possible human malady is caused by pregnancy. In virtually every instance, the culprit will be the same: hormones. You can blame anything on hormones. Are you pregnant? Do you sing poorly? Hormones! Do you bite your fingernails? Does your poop smell like poop? Does swiss chard taste funny to you? Hormones! Sometimes, pregnancy hormones really are to blame, and that's all it takes to become a catch-all.
I really should take a second to mention how amazing Sara has been as it relates to all of this, before I say that I've been around other pregnant people who claim to have experienced all the symptoms when that's almost an impossibility. Sara has had her fair share of discomfort and inconvenience, but she's never taken advantage of her situation and she's never made up problems and blamed them on the pregnancy. This is because she is amazing.(5) Other women are not so amazing and other husbands are not so lucky.
1. It's a placebo effect of a placebo effect. A woman suffers from nausea not because she actually has to vomit (yes of course sometimes she will--I'm talking about the many other times when she doesn't really), but because she's been told to expect to have nausea. And then because she thinks she has nausea, the man is also supposed to think he has nausea. Quite a little trick.
2. How many billion dollars are pumped into our nation's economy thanks to weddings and chilbirth? A terrifying amount. If we ever get health-care fixed, this is the next big albatross of waste in the economy.
3. Here is something that no pregnancy book will ever tell you: you don't really need to know much of anything until you're well into the third trimester. There is a somewhat obvious list of foods that you should know not to eat early on. Any medication you take you should do what it says on the package and check with your doctor first. That's it until it's time to take your hospital tour, which is free. You can even get a very informative (and pausable and rewatchable) childbirth class via DVD and $15 is a lot less than $300 to do it live. You don't need to know anything else. Actually you don't need to know the stuff from the childbirth class, either, but it's comfortable to have the knowledge. Seriously, you're insurance company will be paying a ton to send you to 15-20 doctor visits, you might as well take advantage.
4. One example of this is in the aforementioned DVD, which is otherwise devoid of riff-raff. The doctor conducting the class takes a 10 minute break from actually spreading knowledge to talk very enthusiastically about why you should bank your umbilical cord blood. Banking cord blood is an industry unto itself, with competing companies and everything. She even mentions one company by name, and shortly thereafter that company's name and phone number appears on the screen. Thanks for that. Of course what they don't tell you is that there is no certainty that you'll ever be able to use this blood, and that it costs several thousand dollars.
5. I shouldn't bury this in a footnote, but this is one of those things that makes me love her more than ever. When I decided to marry her a little bit less than two years ago, I was completely sure that she was just the right person for me, that although we aren't exactly alike, that her things would fit with my things and it would be wonderful. What I could never have imagined then is that over time, other little things about her would present themselves to me that make her even more perfect for me. Since I try not to believe too much in intuition and mysticism, I can only attribute this to blind luck.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Less than Two Months to Go
As of today, we are just 8 weeks away from Sara's due date. Only 20% of a pregnancy left. Not a lot of time, even though there is better than a 50/50 shot the baby comes late.
Someone asked me today if I was getting nervous. Somehow the question caught me off-guard, but no I'm not nervous, I'm still very excited. To do what I always do and compare something to my experience in athletics, I feel exactly like I used to before a really big race, but one in which my preparation was excellent. I'd start feeling excited and get that sensation in my chest but I'd be welling with confidence at the same time.
So you could say that I am ready, at least unconsciously. Literally, though, I am not ready. Today after work I'm stopping at Lowe's and buying the wood to build the baby dresser/shelf/changing table. Since I'm being nice to my neighbors and restricting myself to sawing on a weekend afternoon, and since I need to apply a couple coats of paint, I don't expect to be finished with it for two or three weeks. That leaves us with more than enough time, but of course Sara is unhappy that it wasn't done last month.
Another thing I have noticed about myself in the last couple weeks is that I've been more naturally industrious. I've been very easily disciplined and systematically getting things done, both at work and home. This wasn't a purposeful change, it just happened.
I can't speak for Sara exactly, but I think our name brainstorming has mostly come to an end. We have two or three names that I would be happy with, and one specifically that I seem to be settling on. I still want to be open to others, and I want to try to come up with some possibilities that aren't names in the traditional sense. Nothing blatantly absurd, but there doesn't need to be some fixed amount of sound and letter combinations that are accepted as "names." Names like Hazel or Willow or Brooke came from words that weren't just names, so why not new ones? Anything can be a name, because a name is the most arbitrary thing in the world.
Someone asked me today if I was getting nervous. Somehow the question caught me off-guard, but no I'm not nervous, I'm still very excited. To do what I always do and compare something to my experience in athletics, I feel exactly like I used to before a really big race, but one in which my preparation was excellent. I'd start feeling excited and get that sensation in my chest but I'd be welling with confidence at the same time.
So you could say that I am ready, at least unconsciously. Literally, though, I am not ready. Today after work I'm stopping at Lowe's and buying the wood to build the baby dresser/shelf/changing table. Since I'm being nice to my neighbors and restricting myself to sawing on a weekend afternoon, and since I need to apply a couple coats of paint, I don't expect to be finished with it for two or three weeks. That leaves us with more than enough time, but of course Sara is unhappy that it wasn't done last month.
Another thing I have noticed about myself in the last couple weeks is that I've been more naturally industrious. I've been very easily disciplined and systematically getting things done, both at work and home. This wasn't a purposeful change, it just happened.
I can't speak for Sara exactly, but I think our name brainstorming has mostly come to an end. We have two or three names that I would be happy with, and one specifically that I seem to be settling on. I still want to be open to others, and I want to try to come up with some possibilities that aren't names in the traditional sense. Nothing blatantly absurd, but there doesn't need to be some fixed amount of sound and letter combinations that are accepted as "names." Names like Hazel or Willow or Brooke came from words that weren't just names, so why not new ones? Anything can be a name, because a name is the most arbitrary thing in the world.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Fun with the Ratings
Before I get to the pitcher factors, I'm happy to say that I've upgraded the ratings, and they are clearly the better for it.
As it turns out, regressing the ratings 50% toward preseason projections was much too conservative, so now they're only being regressed 30%. The Vegas lines, which remember are the sole inputs of my system, are so good that even just 20 games worth of lines is enough to produce a very clear picture of team value. The ratings now have a much truer look and I don't have the bunching problem I mentioned the other day.
Secondly, I was doing my opponent adjustment wrong. Not to get into it too much, but for example, I had the Yankees' unadjusted rating of about .600 being adjusted down despite the factor that their opponent rating was .530, which is obviously not right.
The last thing I've cleaned up is to finally add in opponent values for interleague games. I had debated what to do with this. Because the AL is vastly superior to the NL, some additional adjustment beyond home-field seemed necessary, I just wasn't sure what it should be. Some searching let me know that the adjustment should be between .050 and .060 per team, meaning an NL team should be deducted and an AL team given that much. This is a big number. For instance, adding in the deduction, the best NL team, Philadelphia, when playing the AL is only as good as Milwaukee. Or going the other way, Kansas City versus the NL becomes as good as the Angels. Anyway, after explaining all that, I decided not to add any adjustment at all. All AL teams play the same number of interleague games (18), so it wouldn't matter. And in the NL, twelve of the teams play 15 games, while only four play 18. Those last four teams are the only ones who'd be affected by an adjustment, and it would be just .050 per opponent over just three games, which equates to a shade under .001 per game. I decided this wasn't worth the effort. Create your own damn system if you feel otherwise.
Here then are the fixed ratings, updated through games played last night.
Yankees .619
Red Sox .574
Rays .550
Twins .538
Rangers .522
Angels .514
White Sox .510
Mariners .497
Tigers .495
Athletics .487
Indians .477
Royals .454
Blue Jays .453
Orioles .451
Phillies .5752
Cardinals .5748
Braves .554
Dodgers .550
Rockies .540
Cubs .524
Brewers .512
Marlins .5093
Giants .5092
Dbacks .506
Padres .482
Reds .480
Mets .476
Astros .447
Nationals .438
Pirates .426
The Braves are the one team that looks clearly odd. They are in last place with an 8-14 record, and have lost 9 straight games, and yet they're not terribly far behind the two best teams in their league according to my numbers (you could just as easily say "according to Vegas" here). So let's look a little closer at them.
Their lines have been coming down lately, but not hugely so. Their schedule has been very difficult, averaging .542, second-toughest in the league. In four recent games played at St Louis, they were actually the favorite in one of them. In a three game series at home vs Philly, they were somewhat large favorites in both of the non-Halladay games. I don't know what to say, other than I fully expect their rating to come down in the coming weeks.
Now, on to the pitcher factors. I say "factors" and not "ratings" because these are not ratings of each pitcher's quality, but just a measurement of how each pitcher affects his team's rating. In spite of this, the list I'll unveil in a second is still largely intuitive on its own. This owing to the fact that usually good pitchers play for good teams, and--within each team's pitching staff--there is usually a pretty similar drop-off from the top guy on down to the replacement starters, so that while Zach Greinke is awesome and the Royals are poor, so too is Dan Haren awesome but his teammates weak.
Each rating is based on 100. (Mostly for looks. They ought to be based on 1.00, really.) To adjust an individual team line, just multiply the pitcher factor (Lincecum is 1.25, not 125) by the team rating. Simple.
The top ten from each league:
AL
1. Felix Hernandez 120
2. Zach Greinke 120
3. Justin Verlander 112
4. CC Sabathia 110
5. Brett Anderson 108
6. Ricky Romero 107.5
7. Shaun Marcum 106
8. Jake Peavy 105.5
9. Mark Buehrle 105
10. Matt Garza 104
NL
1. Tim Lincecum 125
2. Roy Halladay 121
3. Johan Santana 115
4. Dan Haren 114
5. Ubaldo Jimenez 113
6. Adam Wainwright 113
7. Chris Carpenter 112
8. Josh Johnson 112
9. Yovani Gallardo 110
10. Ricky Nolasco 108
10. Cole Hamels 108
For completeness, there are four pitchers with factors below 90: Kris Benson, Todd Wellemeyer, Dan McCutchen, Chris Narveson and the worst: Dontrelle Willis. Vegas hates them some Dontrelle Willis, so much that his mere presence in the Tigers rotation increases the factors of every other Detroit starter by a point or two.
Finally, some errata from the pitching numbers.
- The Braves' opening day starter, Derek Lowe, is only his team's fourth-best. Their best is actually their youngest, Tommy Hanson.
- Barry Zito's resurgence is not lost on Vegas. His first start rated around 95, but his most recent is up to 102. Mike Pelfrey of the Mets has had a similar increase, but to a lesser extent.
- Going the other way and getting worse: Rich Harden, John Maine, and sorta Jake Peavy.
- Jon Lester has overtaken World Series Hero Josh Beckett as the ace of the Red Sox.
- Vicente Padilla, Joe Torre's genius pick to start opening day for LA, is very nearly the Dodgers' worst starter.
- The recently-demoted-to-the-bullpen Carlos Zambrano was still very clearly rating as the Cubs' best starter.
- The most balanced pitching staff is pretty obviously the Reds, with four starters rating between 99 and 101, and the fifth is a rookie who overall rates at just 94, but his most recent game scored a 100. Honorable mention to the Angels, with all five between 97 and 102.
- The biggest possible mismatch within leagues would be Roy Halladay at home facing Pittsburgh's Dan McCutchen. Philly would be expected to win that game over 83% of the time. For an interleague game, CC Sabathia at home against McCutchen would produce a win expectation of over 88% for the Yankees.
As it turns out, regressing the ratings 50% toward preseason projections was much too conservative, so now they're only being regressed 30%. The Vegas lines, which remember are the sole inputs of my system, are so good that even just 20 games worth of lines is enough to produce a very clear picture of team value. The ratings now have a much truer look and I don't have the bunching problem I mentioned the other day.
Secondly, I was doing my opponent adjustment wrong. Not to get into it too much, but for example, I had the Yankees' unadjusted rating of about .600 being adjusted down despite the factor that their opponent rating was .530, which is obviously not right.
The last thing I've cleaned up is to finally add in opponent values for interleague games. I had debated what to do with this. Because the AL is vastly superior to the NL, some additional adjustment beyond home-field seemed necessary, I just wasn't sure what it should be. Some searching let me know that the adjustment should be between .050 and .060 per team, meaning an NL team should be deducted and an AL team given that much. This is a big number. For instance, adding in the deduction, the best NL team, Philadelphia, when playing the AL is only as good as Milwaukee. Or going the other way, Kansas City versus the NL becomes as good as the Angels. Anyway, after explaining all that, I decided not to add any adjustment at all. All AL teams play the same number of interleague games (18), so it wouldn't matter. And in the NL, twelve of the teams play 15 games, while only four play 18. Those last four teams are the only ones who'd be affected by an adjustment, and it would be just .050 per opponent over just three games, which equates to a shade under .001 per game. I decided this wasn't worth the effort. Create your own damn system if you feel otherwise.
Here then are the fixed ratings, updated through games played last night.
Yankees .619
Red Sox .574
Rays .550
Twins .538
Rangers .522
Angels .514
White Sox .510
Mariners .497
Tigers .495
Athletics .487
Indians .477
Royals .454
Blue Jays .453
Orioles .451
Phillies .5752
Cardinals .5748
Braves .554
Dodgers .550
Rockies .540
Cubs .524
Brewers .512
Marlins .5093
Giants .5092
Dbacks .506
Padres .482
Reds .480
Mets .476
Astros .447
Nationals .438
Pirates .426
The Braves are the one team that looks clearly odd. They are in last place with an 8-14 record, and have lost 9 straight games, and yet they're not terribly far behind the two best teams in their league according to my numbers (you could just as easily say "according to Vegas" here). So let's look a little closer at them.
Their lines have been coming down lately, but not hugely so. Their schedule has been very difficult, averaging .542, second-toughest in the league. In four recent games played at St Louis, they were actually the favorite in one of them. In a three game series at home vs Philly, they were somewhat large favorites in both of the non-Halladay games. I don't know what to say, other than I fully expect their rating to come down in the coming weeks.
Now, on to the pitcher factors. I say "factors" and not "ratings" because these are not ratings of each pitcher's quality, but just a measurement of how each pitcher affects his team's rating. In spite of this, the list I'll unveil in a second is still largely intuitive on its own. This owing to the fact that usually good pitchers play for good teams, and--within each team's pitching staff--there is usually a pretty similar drop-off from the top guy on down to the replacement starters, so that while Zach Greinke is awesome and the Royals are poor, so too is Dan Haren awesome but his teammates weak.
Each rating is based on 100. (Mostly for looks. They ought to be based on 1.00, really.) To adjust an individual team line, just multiply the pitcher factor (Lincecum is 1.25, not 125) by the team rating. Simple.
The top ten from each league:
AL
1. Felix Hernandez 120
2. Zach Greinke 120
3. Justin Verlander 112
4. CC Sabathia 110
5. Brett Anderson 108
6. Ricky Romero 107.5
7. Shaun Marcum 106
8. Jake Peavy 105.5
9. Mark Buehrle 105
10. Matt Garza 104
NL
1. Tim Lincecum 125
2. Roy Halladay 121
3. Johan Santana 115
4. Dan Haren 114
5. Ubaldo Jimenez 113
6. Adam Wainwright 113
7. Chris Carpenter 112
8. Josh Johnson 112
9. Yovani Gallardo 110
10. Ricky Nolasco 108
10. Cole Hamels 108
For completeness, there are four pitchers with factors below 90: Kris Benson, Todd Wellemeyer, Dan McCutchen, Chris Narveson and the worst: Dontrelle Willis. Vegas hates them some Dontrelle Willis, so much that his mere presence in the Tigers rotation increases the factors of every other Detroit starter by a point or two.
Finally, some errata from the pitching numbers.
- The Braves' opening day starter, Derek Lowe, is only his team's fourth-best. Their best is actually their youngest, Tommy Hanson.
- Barry Zito's resurgence is not lost on Vegas. His first start rated around 95, but his most recent is up to 102. Mike Pelfrey of the Mets has had a similar increase, but to a lesser extent.
- Going the other way and getting worse: Rich Harden, John Maine, and sorta Jake Peavy.
- Jon Lester has overtaken World Series Hero Josh Beckett as the ace of the Red Sox.
- Vicente Padilla, Joe Torre's genius pick to start opening day for LA, is very nearly the Dodgers' worst starter.
- The recently-demoted-to-the-bullpen Carlos Zambrano was still very clearly rating as the Cubs' best starter.
- The most balanced pitching staff is pretty obviously the Reds, with four starters rating between 99 and 101, and the fifth is a rookie who overall rates at just 94, but his most recent game scored a 100. Honorable mention to the Angels, with all five between 97 and 102.
- The biggest possible mismatch within leagues would be Roy Halladay at home facing Pittsburgh's Dan McCutchen. Philly would be expected to win that game over 83% of the time. For an interleague game, CC Sabathia at home against McCutchen would produce a win expectation of over 88% for the Yankees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
