Farmer1906 said:

---

Lonestar_Ag09 said:

---

Not once has Brantley been mention with Bagwell so you can't retroactively add that on.

---

Bagwell was basically the acting GM when he was signed. He's also the guy who said Brantley would be back by opening day.

---

I get that but i guess what I mean is that no one on here has blamed him for that, his negativity has always come from Abreu and Montero

and holding on to the Ausmus stuff, I don't believe that was ever a very serious consideration but I do believe eventually he will be a GM his first shot just shouldn't be for the defending World Champs

Im just personally very disappointed that my lesson didn't come from you.

I am fairly strong in math, but know next to nothing about statistics.

Like, the difference b/w the probability of a single coin flip vs a string of consecutive coin flips

Mathguy64 said:

---

I just love the math/stat term discussion from a bunch of people, half of whom probably flunked 142 at least once.

Carry on ladies and gents.

---

The only math I took at A&M was stat and failing was actually passing

redline248 said:

---

There is no doubt almost every player wants to be in the field. Players want to play

---

And the reason is because they feel better at the plate. This isn't an assumption on my part. It's a very real thing.

My son says the new Mendoza Line is a .600 OPS. He's above that. That's a start. He was at .542 for a long time.

texasaggie2015 said:

---

I think we're all too dumb to know what any of that means

---

Exactly!
Now he's saying stuff that sounds simple but is actually in a sensa flying over my head lol

Talk to me like were using alligators when discussing greater than and less than or my favorite, 8x8 fell on the floor and when they got up they were 64...

I had to take the first Stat class (141?). My final grade was like a 30, but it was curved to a 90something. It was truly the only class I took where I learned absolutely nothing.

Mathguy64 said:

---

Regression to the mean is just the fancy way of saying you are waiting for the Law of Large Numbers to kick in all while believing that the value of the statistic itself hasn't changed.

---

And that is the issue with pure analytics. We are human beings not programmed robots (at least not yet).

And then their is the analysis of the statistics. People can change, sometimes a simple adjustment to a bad habit can have massive impact on things.

I was a basketball coach and I had kid who had developed a bad habit of letting his shooting elbow "leak" out and it made his shot erratic. It took a lot of work and patience but one he got that under control his shot flat took off and thus so did his confidence.

Hitting is like that as well, very minute adjustment can cause huge swings one way or the other. A ball striking a round bat an 1/8th of an inch either higher or lower is the difference between a 450ft bomb and line drive or high fly.

Add the fact that the human body is not a machine and can face subtle changes day to day caused by a gazillion factors feeds into this as well.

Mathguy64 said:

---

I just love the math/stat term discussion from a bunch of people, half of whom probably flunked 142 at least once.

Carry on ladies and gents.

---

I will have you know that I did NOT fail 142


I was a liberal arts major so I didnt have to take anything above college alegbra

I think I did 151, 152, & PHYS 216. They all sucked. A lot.
edit: and STAT 303.

Finally a math throwdown on Texags! As someone who had to get through 308 I've been waiting on this for years.

TexAg2001 said:

---

I had to take the first Stat class (141?). My final grade was like a 30, but it was curved to a 90something. It was truly the only class I took where I learned absolutely nothing.

---

Same here. Prof was cool as hell and super young. I'd get my test back with a grade of 47 only to find out it was towards the upper end of the curve. No idea how I got an A, but I'll take it. I actually love math, but stat was a b****.

On an Astros related note, this is the second time in less than two weeks I have heard Tucker's name pop up in trade speculation from people in the know. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me when Alvarez is on the shelf and Brantley is a lotto ticket. If Brown were to go that route it better be for something damn good.

DVC2010 said:

---

How do y'all even remember the course numbers?

---

I had to look it up. It all kind of came flooding back after being repressed for years.

CFTXAG10 said:

---

On an Astros related note, this is the second time in less than two weeks I have heard Tucker's name pop up in trade speculation from people in the know.

---

Whoa.. I have not heard anything about this.

I remember all my math, econ, chem, and phys course numbers - the rest I don't care about.

DVC2010 said:

---

How do y'all even remember the course numbers?

---

It can be a curse. I can still remember the career batting averages for DiMaggio, Williams, Ruth etc from a book I read when I was a kid.

Farmer1906 said:

---

As Deluxe said the other day, Tucker is probably the exact type of player we should be targeting in trades.

• Lefty Bat
• Good power/speed combo
• More than a rental
• Well above avg across the board offensively
• Can play more than LF/DH
• Buying low
• Big game experience
• Culture fit

We'd be insane to trade him away.

---

There is exactly 1 player I would include Tucker in a trade for, and sadly I dont believe it could be a 1 for 1 trade so it becomes not worth it

Bravo sir. not the purpose for the username but well played. I believe I took 3 classes there, 2 math and a biology class

and I mean I guess you can count dual credit English in high school

Here is who it would consider trading Tucker for.
Wander
Acuna
Julio
Luis Robert
Rutschman
Reynolds

TRM said:

---

Username checks out

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

As Deluxe said the other day, Tucker is probably the exact type of player we should be targeting in trades.

• Lefty Bat
• Good power/speed combo
• More than a rental
• Well above avg across the board offensively
• Can play more than LF/DH
• Buying low
• Big game experience
• Culture fit

We'd be insane to trade him away.

---

Yea. I suppose maybe I understand the instinct to shop him around and see what's out there. Seems clear he's gone after 2025. But I just think of him as next in line after Cole, Springer, Correa, etc. (i.e. guys we knew would leave after their contracts were up).

The Astros model isn't to trade high VAR players before they become free agents. We juice high VAR players for every last drop. Then let them walk and reload behind them. Not sure why we wouldn't do the same with Ted.

It's almost impossible to conjure up a trade that makes sense for both parties anyway. More than likely, a team that wants to trade for Ted is going to be in win-now mode and will probably want to give up a nice haul of prospects for him. That's not what we need.

If we skid into the all star break and it's looking like a lost season, I suppose I could see a small small small case for it. But even then, I'd rather just regroup and make a couple more runs with Ted in 2024-25.

Lonestar_Ag09 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Here is who it would consider trading Tucker for.
Wander
Acuna
Julio
Luis Robert
Rutschman
Reynolds

---

None of those are who I was referring...

---

You'd trade 2.5 seasons of Tucker for 0.5 of Ohtani? No way for me. Angels 100% make that trade if they believe Ohtani won't sign with them.

All the guys I listed have longer yet reasonable contracts and are almost as good or better. And it's all hypothetical because only Robert has a chance at being available and if he is, they won't want Tucker for him, they'll want all the prospects.

I would hazard a guess that some of you, maybe many, were not even born yet before I left College Station. No way I remember a single undergrad class.

I take that back. I remember a Philosophy of Art class with McDermott. He was a nut but I enjoyed his rants. I think he passed away a few years ago.

I think Luis Robert is an absolute stud and at the end of their careers stands a damn good chance to better than Tucker.

To land him in a trade would absolutely gut the farm system (at least it should if the CWS has a GM that's worth a shlt).