Yanks for Sotomayor
Last Thursday, former Yankee and current YES Network announcer David Cone, testified at Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court Confirmation hearing. Speaking before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Cone recounted details of the Sotomayor decision which helped end the Major League Baseball Players Association strike of 1994.
Said Cone:
Judge Sotomayor grasped not only the complexity of the case but its importance to our sport. Her decision was upheld by a unanimous Court of Appeals panel comprised of judges appointed by different presidents from different parties with different juridical philosophies.
On the day he announced her nomination, President Obama observed that some have said Judge Sotomayor saved baseball. Others may think this is an overstatement, but look at it this way. A lot of people, both inside and outside of baseball, tried to settle the dispute.
via Former MLB Pitched David Cone Testifies at Sonia Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearings
No Fordham Contests?
Starting this November 20, Yankee Stadium will become the occasional home of Division I college football. Notre Dame will host Army this fall, and Army has scheduled three more games for each of the next three years, including one against local favorite Rutgers.
Homer Denial
The Steinbrenners still are not convinced that Yankee Stadium requires changes. On the subject of the Yankees' big home run totals, Yankees Chairman Hal Steinbrenner commented, "Right now, it's not a big enough sample size."
Actually, scientifically speaking, 47 games is a large enough sample size.
NOTE: Make sure to check back every Wednesday for Pinstripe Politics, your source for that gray area where the Yankees and society converge. Also, check in with the BNN on Fridays for The Yankees, Unobstructed, our weekly Yankee opinion column.
For more of Graham Kates' sports writing, check out his True/Slant blog "Coaches in the Crosshairs" (www.trueslant.com/grahamkates).
Graham Kates wrote: "Actually, scientifically speaking, 47 games is a large enough sample size."
ReplyDeleteHow do you figure?
I've been reading The Drunkard's Walk by Leonard Mlodinow, and he cites many examples of what may seem like patterns appearing in very large samples. He uses a lot of baseball statistics as examples, including the Roger Maris 1961 season, and you would be suprised records are dependent on a certain level of randomness. (In fact, the only one that can't be explained is DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak!)
I don't specifically have an opinion on the stadium's dimensions (though I've always opposed the idea of the new stadium), but I don't think that "scientifically speaking" we have a large enough sample.
I'm open to hearing a defense of your statement, though.
- Greg
Greg,
ReplyDeleteWhile I must admit that I wrote that line fairly carelessly (and without considering its ramifications), I do stand by it.
47 games played by two entire teams amounts to a much better sample size than a single season for an individual player, or one man's hitting streak.
In those games there have been well over 5,000 plate appearances.
Those thousands of plate appearances have produced home runs at an incredible pace. Last year in 81 games there were 160 home runs (1.98 home runs per game), so far this year, before tonight's game, there had been 156 in 48 games (3.25 home runs per game).
No kidding, as I've been typing this, Mark Teixera just hit another one.
-Graham