Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="connie, post: 3104109, member: 7882"] I think we are in agreement in so far as most of what you say here confirms the proposition that as overall improvement increases, the difference between the best and worst narrows. I do not agree with the proposition: “True parity is actually mediocrity in most cases b/c a large number can't really be good at the same time.” I think that “true parity” may in some cases reflect mediocrity. It may just as easily reflect excellence across-the-board. Of course, much depends on what you mean by “good”. The worst team in major league baseball today is probably better than most teams in major league baseball 50 years ago. The 1927 Yankees were considered “good“. But I am pretty sure that they would be soundly defeated in a seven game series against the 2018 Baltimore orioles. (In fact, while I have not looked, I would not be surprised at all if the fielding percentage at each position for the 2018 orioles is higher than the same figure for the 1927 Yankees. This would be consistent with the data showing that fielding percentages have increased over the decades; players at each position are getting better and better defensively than their counterparts in previous decades.) In this sense, “true parity“ among 2018 teams in a given sport does not necessarily reflect mediocrity, at least not in the sense in which most people understand that word. In fact, probably reflects the opposite. [/QUOTE]