Originally Posted by Whitesox029
My final argument is this: when numbers are blindly used as the only basis for prediction, the prediction will very often fail. Here's a simplistic analogy: If you roll a die 1000 times and take the average of all the values that come up, you will get something close to 3.5. Yet only an idiot would actually believe that this means that 3.5 was the most likely number to come up on the next roll, because he would be failing to account for other factors, such as the fact that 3.5 is not a number that appears on any side of a die. Similarly, someone who believes a 162-game baseball season can be reasonably predicted just by looking at numbers--and actually makes important decisions that are based on those projections--is just as big a fool.
This is literally the single worst analogy I have ever read because A) only a complete and utter moron would base probablity on mean and not mode. Like, I cannot comprehend how stupid someone would have to be to make such an error and B) obviously a dice roll is the definition of a random event. Even if you rolled a 6 on a 6-sided dice 10,000 times in a roll the odds you'd roll a 6 on #10,001 is still 1/6. Comparing a weighted, statistical model (such as say... PECOTA) to a truly random event shows a real and fundamental lack of understanding of statistics and probability.