Just figured I would share this

[therealUT]

Reading an essay on knowledge and the following paragraph made me feel like I was thirteen again:

A similar phenomenon occurs when a poor fielder makes a spectacular catch. In this case he will be given credit of a sort -- he will get pats on the back from his teammates and applause from the crowd. But it won't be the same kind of credit that Griffey gets. Griffey makes spectacular catches all the time -- his catches manifest his great skills. Not so when Albert Belle makes such a catch. If the catch is difficult, it is almost just good luck that he makes it. And opposing fans will treat it that way, withholding the credit they would readily give to Griffey.

Knowledge as Credit for True Belief
John Greco

Wish he would have mentioned Belle's temper.

 

[KiffinKiller]

wth...

 

[therealUT]

What, nobody likes Albert Belle?

 

[2ironVol]

Do you remember the time Belle threw a fastball into the crowd? :birgits_giggle: I would almost bet my paycheck that he kicked an ass or two in the clubhouse during his time in MLB

It's funny that no one speaks of him anymore.

 

[n_huffhines]

Reading an essay on knowledge and the following paragraph made me feel like I was thirteen again:

Wish he would have mentioned Belle's temper.

This actually seems to coincide with Billy Beane's approach to baseball. He questioned what we actually "know" from watching. The example of Griffey's diving catches was used. He looks spectacular compared to maybe Johnny Damon, but what if Damon is actually the more effective fielder? Meaning Damon doesn't have to make diving catches cause he knows where he should be before the ball is hit, and he actually has a higher putout %, ceteris paribus.

 

[PoochPunt3rdDown]

Hmmmmmm....

 

[KiffinKiller]

if only I cared about baseball