|
Replies: 35
| visibility 1
|
Letterman [267]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 249
Joined: 2/25/15
|
So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 27, 2015, 10:05 PM
|
|
Based on my very lame statistical analysis, we have about a 37% chance of winning our regional (slightly higher odds than that of the host school). If we win our regional, I think we have roughly a 43% chance of winning our super regional. If we win the Super Regional, I think we have roughly a 10% chance of winning the CWS. So I believe today we have about a 16% (roughly 1:6) chance of making it to the CWS. And a 1-2% (roughly 1:63) chance of winning the CWS. Do we need to make the CWS field in order to call it a successful season? Do we need to win the CWS in order to call it a successful season?
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Making Super Regional
May 27, 2015, 10:19 PM
|
|
and being competitive in the Super Regional would be a win in my book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2457]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 4246
Joined: 3/12/08
|
what he said***
May 27, 2015, 11:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [72]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 147
Joined: 12/5/98
|
Winning the Regional
May 27, 2015, 11:46 PM
|
|
At a minimum - Need to show some progress, overall win percentage, RPI, etc are down from last year and previous years. Haven't put up much of a fight in past few years in regionals either. This program needs to show progress on the field to get fanbase back on board and make us doubters feel like there is light ahead that is not just complete sunshine pumping.
It's still going to feel like a bad season with a strong finish though. This program should be able to host and win regionals not just be a 3 seed that got a favorable draw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Much like college basketball
May 27, 2015, 11:59 PM
|
|
The goal is to get into the tournament and do well. Do you think anyone was upset by UConn's regular season when they won it all as an 8 seed? Clemson still has everything to play for and a great, no just good, but great season is still on the table. Now, can Clemson actually take care of business? I guess we'll find out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38422]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33199
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: Much like college basketball
May 28, 2015, 12:09 AM
|
|
I agree . I think just being selected to this year's field is a small success , considering how little of it we seemed to have at times on the baseball field.
Win the regional and we have way over achieved .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23418
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Super Regional***
May 28, 2015, 12:53 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1400]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1393
Joined: 11/30/10
|
Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 12:55 AM
|
|
the absolute minimum expectation should be reaching a Super Regional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 6:48 AM
|
|
So "every year the ABSOLUTE minimum" should be to what only 3 teams even managed to do the last two years in a row. 3 out of over 300 D1 baseball teams. Less than 1%. No teams - none - made a Super Regional for the last three consecutive years. The absolute ignorance about this sport is what makes any discussion about it so maddening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [759]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 1460
Joined: 10/16/03
|
It's not ignorance, just different expectations.
May 28, 2015, 7:47 AM
|
|
It's actually refreshing that someone has such a precise metric to judge success. In Kaplony's mind, Coach Leggett has been successful in approximately 50% of his seasons. And in the past 4 years, Kaplony would say that 42 teams have been more successful than us.
I wouldn't say that I agree with his expectations, but I can respect Kaplony's metric for judging a successful season.
Viztiz, what is your metric for judging a successful season?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: It's not ignorance, just different expectations.
May 28, 2015, 8:14 AM
|
|
But, what you're saying isn't what he was saying. Words matter - "EVERY year the ABSOLUTE minimum." That means any coach who doesn't attain that is unsuccessful. All of the 42 programs you mention are unsuccessful by his metric. That's stupid. The question wasn't who has been more succesful. He didn't say "I really only think it as a succesful season if we make it to a Super Regional." He said we have to achieve the absolute minimum of a Super Regional and it has to be every year to be succesful. The absolute minimum has to have some meaning also - so by his words even making a Super Regional is not quite good enough otherwise he wouldn't need to qualify it.
My standard for success is going to shift with the realistic expectations for the team in any given season. It might sound great in the locker room to tell every team, every year that they're going to win it all, but if championships are the only measure of success and satisfaction then I don't understand being invested as a fan. By that measure being a Clemson fan at all sports has been an awfully low return on investment in my lifetime. For me 2002 and 2006 can be disappointments and 2010 can be a huge success. 2011 was a disappointment but I'm not gonna say we weren't "successful" that year. We had a good-great regular season but fell at home in the tourney. 2012 wasn't a great regular season but we played in a regional at South Carolina and lost two games by one run a piece to a team that would go on to play for a 3rd straight national championship.
Unlike most I actually see this season as something of a success. After the end to last season, the lack of support from the AD, the fans turning against the coach and team, the injuries and other factors I expected this to be a disaster of a swan song season for Jack Leggett. And it looked like it at times. But the team never folded. And even as I always try to hold out hope I certainly thought this team was done after the Wofford loss. I really didn't expect us to win more than a couple more games. From here I just want to see some good baseball and some fight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [759]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 1460
Joined: 10/16/03
|
Thanks for clarifying your definition.
May 28, 2015, 8:50 AM
|
|
I can see that it is a growth approach. An approach that would punish our 2006 football season (sorry to change sports) when we showed so much promise, then fell into a hole late.
I can definitely respect and appreciate your view. It has a more emotional/momentum feel that reflects an athlete's point of view. More about living up to your potential instead of meeting a rigid milestone.
Ultimately I don't think any fan's expectations are right or wrong, and I don't believe fans should be forced to conform to someone else's expectations. Expectations shouldn't be available as a target for argument, no matter how difficult they are to achieve. Our expectations should become a transparent point of reference to promote a healthy Tigernet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22358
Joined: 4/24/04
|
I largely agree with you, but the one thing i would have
May 28, 2015, 10:51 AM
[ in reply to Re: It's not ignorance, just different expectations. ] |
|
to nitpick is that you seem to only judge the team based on how they perform versus rational expectations for a team of that caliber. A team that is barely over .500 is a success if they even make a solid showing in a regional, much less win it. However, that does not address the question of why we are fielding teams two years in a row with such low expectations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5434]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 11911
Joined: 9/23/01
|
Re: Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 10:06 AM
[ in reply to Re: Same as every year ] |
|
Viztiz You are way to smart to be on this board. I guess that's why some of the downers never get into a conversation with you LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 10:42 AM
|
|
too
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5434]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 11911
Joined: 9/23/01
|
Re: Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 1:27 PM
|
|
?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Same as every year
May 28, 2015, 1:53 PM
|
|
He is "too smart" not "to smart" before trying to insult an entire board of people you should probably know the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1400]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1393
Joined: 11/30/10
|
Last time I checked
May 28, 2015, 1:33 PM
[ in reply to Re: Same as every year ] |
|
I wasn't pulling for 300 other teams, I pull for one.
Would my expectations be realistic for every single program? Absolutely not. Nobody expects Furman,Wofford, USC-Upstate, etc to make a Super Regional every year.
But when you are talking about one of the truly elite programs in college baseball history, a program in the Top 10 in alltime wins, and 11th in College World Series appearances the the expectations aren't being unrealistic.
Setting your expectations based upon what others do is not based in reality. That's like saying you don't expect Artavis Scott to get drafted because only 1.7% of college players ever play professional football.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Last time I checked
May 28, 2015, 1:44 PM
|
|
Bringing Furman and football players into this is completely off-topic and is, at best, setting up a strawman argument to counter my pertinent facts. You set the terms. Every year a super regional at minimum or the program is unsuccessful. These are your words. Drop the hyperbole and maybe we can have a grown up conversation about baseball. No programs, none meet your criteria for success. Not even during a single coaches tenure. None. Not the ten more winningest. None. Is that a reasonable criteria? No, but please feel free to change topic again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1400]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1393
Joined: 11/30/10
|
Ah
May 28, 2015, 1:55 PM
|
|
So bringing 300 other baseball programs is pertinent but simply naming some of the 300 other programs is a strawman.
Got it!
As for bringing Artavis Scott into the discussion it was a case of transferring your logic into a similar situation to make a point.
Using your logic all 301 baseball programs in the country should have the exact same expectations every single year because they all play baseball. Clemson's expectations should be the same as LSU's which are the same as Mercer's which are the same as Prairie View A&M's. No other factor matters except the fact that they are one of 301 NCAA DI programs.
Again, Got it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Ah
May 28, 2015, 2:21 PM
|
|
You're still entirely off point. Fine, disregard my 300 teams 1% comment since you're using it as a distraction from the real topic. No team reaches your "minimum" standard. NONE. So quit pretending I was arguing our standards should be similar to Furmans. Again - this is a strawman argument and I shouldn't even let you drag me into it.
EVERY YEAR SUPER REGIONAL MINIMUM. You apparently continue to stand behind this as your standard since you have not clarified or backpedaled in anyway. I think it is absolutely pertinent that no team even for a significant number of years has accomplished your minimum goal.
And since you refuse to stick with the topic at hand I'll try and use your own derailments to illustrate the fallacy of your thinking. Is it reasonable to think that Artavis Scott my have an All American Season or play in the NFL? Absolutely. If he fails to do either does that mean he was "unsuccessful." Using your standards as they apparently apply to baseball yes - regardless of what his contributions are and what other factors come into play - if he doesn't meet your preassigned quota for success he is a failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Last time I checked
May 28, 2015, 2:01 PM
[ in reply to Re: Last time I checked ] |
|
You brought Furman into it with your 300 school comment not him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Last time I checked
May 28, 2015, 2:26 PM
|
|
I like that you both want to get hung up on the 1%/out of 300 stat so you can shift topic and ignore that NO TEAMS meet his criteria ever in the history of the sport! Sorry that by tossing in the 1% you would actually pretend to think I believe our standard should be inline with the bottom teams rather than realizing - as I have pointed out over and over - that not even the best of the best accomplish his EVERY YEAR MINIMUM goal. Why don't you say something about giving everyone a trophy next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Last time I checked
May 28, 2015, 2:31 PM
|
|
Im not hung up on anything I am simply correcting your accusation that he was the one who brought Furman and Wofford into the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 8:13 AM
|
|
Since we have already lost 27 games this season making it to the CWS. We make it to Omaha and the season will be a success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5434]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 11911
Joined: 9/23/01
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 10:36 AM
|
|
So we have to make it to Omaha ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 10:47 AM
|
|
That is what he said....
How about instead of attacking others answers you give one yourself
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5434]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 11911
Joined: 9/23/01
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 1:26 PM
|
|
With this team I'd say winning the regional would be a good year.
Why you so mad LOL. Who did I attack???
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 11:30 AM
[ in reply to Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson? ] |
|
That's what I said , losing in the supers if we make it would put us at 29-30 losses. That's not a good year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: So what constitutes a good year for Clemson?
May 28, 2015, 10:47 AM
|
|
Since the whole Championship thing is out the window more than likely I would say a decent season would be to make it to Supers and be competitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1851]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 2646
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Statistical analysis
May 28, 2015, 2:55 PM
|
|
Think your numbers are vastly skewed. If you refer to Boyd Nation's "Boyd's World" web site you will see some dramatically different odds.
Boyd is looking at it like this:
Clemson winning the Regional: 16.6
Clemson winning the Super: 4.8
Appearing in the final game of the CWS: 0.2
CWS Champion: 0.0
With that said I hope these guys shock us all and go on a nice run!!
GO TIGERS!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [267]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 249
Joined: 2/25/15
|
Re: Statistical analysis
May 28, 2015, 7:33 PM
|
|
I can't believe that you'd think that my very lame statical analysis was tainted by orange colored glasses. 
I've never bet on a game, but certainly would consider dropping a couple hundred on each of those bets, if I could get the "Boyd's World odds."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [267]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 249
Joined: 2/25/15
|
Re: Statistical analysis
May 29, 2015, 12:37 PM
[ in reply to Statistical analysis ] |
|
Tigerfan3224 posted an ESPN article this morning which reported that 9 of the past 11 championships were won by teams that were not top 8 seeds. Interestingly Boyd's World projections indicate about a 75% chance that one of the top 8 seeds will win. Doesn't seem to be consistent with what's actually happening. I think Boyd's World understates the chances of all of the lower seeds. Again, I want to repeat that my projections are lame, but probably not the only lame projections out there
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5225]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4634
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Win it ALL baby...win it ALL! Surviving regional good too.
May 28, 2015, 6:48 PM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [640]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1148
Joined: 10/3/09
|
Love the analytical breakdown..
May 28, 2015, 8:07 PM
|
|
UL is a solid, complete team (excellent bull pen - best thing for a post season run) team with home field advantage. Some tough teams in their regional but I think they are sound enough as a team to take care of business.
Our tigers. Wow what a bumpy ride this season. One Monday I'm thinking, "finally we are clicking" only to see us slip up at home midweek to a lesser opponent (PC, CSU, Winthrop, etc). When Slaton and White were interchanged, that was the difference maker. (Even though I agree with someone, can't remember, who posted about Duggs at lead off and White at 2 slot...hit and run all day). This team has played spectacular against formidable opponents and half-arsed in games they should be up for.
I am dying to see us come out of the gates vs. ASU firing on all cylinders and start our new sea with a bang but I don't know what Tiger team will show up: FSU- confident as hell sweepers or SIMPLE PLAY NIGHTMARE- SQUAD vs. Tarholes
No matter what, GO TIGERS!! Let's kick some Cali ####!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
If you put Omaha on the hat, not getting there is failure
May 29, 2015, 12:45 PM
|
|
that said, Omaha should've never been put on the hats in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 35
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
