0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.
This is an article back from April at the start of the year. Nothing more has been said since that time.
Quote from: hockeyfan1 on July 29, 2015, 11:06:48 AMIt (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.Well it is kind of important considering the team no longer "has eight games left to play on their homestand" wherein "we should know a lot more about how big a deal this turf is."
Quote from: Andy007 on July 29, 2015, 12:47:32 PMQuote from: hockeyfan1 on July 29, 2015, 11:06:48 AMIt (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.Well it is kind of important considering the team no longer "has eight games left to play on their homestand" wherein "we should know a lot more about how big a deal this turf is."So, Deadspin pretty accurate, eh? (*sic*)
Quote from: hockeyfan1 on July 29, 2015, 01:11:42 PMQuote from: Andy007 on July 29, 2015, 12:47:32 PMQuote from: hockeyfan1 .link=topic=3290.msg234202#msg234202 date=1438182408It (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.Well it is kind of important considering the team no longer "has eight games left to play on their homestand" wherein "we should know a lot more about how big a deal this turf is."So, Deadspin pretty accurate, eh? (*sic*)It probably was. When the article was published. In April.
Quote from: Andy007 on July 29, 2015, 12:47:32 PMQuote from: hockeyfan1 .link=topic=3290.msg234202#msg234202 date=1438182408It (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.Well it is kind of important considering the team no longer "has eight games left to play on their homestand" wherein "we should know a lot more about how big a deal this turf is."So, Deadspin pretty accurate, eh? (*sic*)
Quote from: hockeyfan1 .link=topic=3290.msg234202#msg234202 date=1438182408It (the article) is still worthy to post and to know.Well it is kind of important considering the team no longer "has eight games left to play on their homestand" wherein "we should know a lot more about how big a deal this turf is."
That's the point. Even if the article dates back to April, it's worth a read. That is all.
Quote from: hockeyfan1 on July 29, 2015, 01:23:57 PMThat's the point. Even if the article dates back to April, it's worth a read. That is all.But it's actually not worth reading if the data posted in it isn't valid anymore. After more than 2 home games, are people still reacting negatively towards the turf? Are there still stats that back up the idea that the turf is having an impact on the BABIP at Rogers Centre, or are the stats posted in the article just a case of using an incredibly small sample size? Has the team made any changes in the past 3 months to improve the turf?