clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Small Sample Size: This Week's Lesson

New, 8 comments
ST. LOUIS, MO - APRIL 2: Albert Pujols #5 of the St. Louis Cardinals returns to the dugout after striking out against the San Diego Padres at Busch Stadium on April 2, 2011 in St. Louis, Missouri.  (Photo by Dilip Vishwanat/Getty Images)
ST. LOUIS, MO - APRIL 2: Albert Pujols #5 of the St. Louis Cardinals returns to the dugout after striking out against the San Diego Padres at Busch Stadium on April 2, 2011 in St. Louis, Missouri. (Photo by Dilip Vishwanat/Getty Images)
Getty Images

I know you know. Right? How couldn't you? You made it here, yet if you read the reactionary sportsmedia you may be wondering:

1. Are Pujols' early struggles a sign of things to come?

2. At 0-3, is it time for the Red Sox to panic?

3. Are the Rays screwed with Longoria out for 3 weeks?

4. At 3-1, has the Royals' "Process" delivered a year (or two) early?

5. At (your team's record), is it time to (book playoff tickets/sell your seats)?

No, no, no, no, aaaaand no.

It's small sample size, SSS, not enough data points. It's the same thing every year: expectant fans shocked that they're not still undefeated, low-expectations fans suddenly thinking, "wow, we might be onto something!", after correctly projecting yet another 90+ loss season.

Nothing has changed, entirely. It's definitely too early to tell anything, not that there aren't seeds of warning being planted. And it will be too early for another 3-4-5-6 weeks. You already know this. So why are you worried?

See you this time next year -- or next week.