Not gonna go it. I’ve shown evidence against the main point. It’s up to the person that suggested the idea “not unusual for Caribbean players” to put some evidence up in support of it. Something other than a quote.

I could go on and on giving you a long list of names of players with good plate discipline that are of Caribbean descent. The point isn’t whether or not Caribbean players have better plate discipline than the average player. It’s whether or not it’s “unusual” that someone from the Caribbean has poor plate discipline. Of course it isn’t! But it also isn’t “unusual” for players from the U.S. or Japan or Norway to have bad plate discipline.

The original post made it seem as if most Caribbean players have plate discipline issues. I was providing data counter to that point. Dismiss it all you want but the data are real and they stand contrary to that idea, even if it’s a mis-read of the original post.

it’s that I’m oversensitive to people making sweeping accusations against other groups of people. That’s a fault I can live with.

The problem with your defense here is this:

“Jeff Franceour has always been a free swinger, not unusual for U.S. players. The great slugger so-and-so once said ‘they don’t pay me to take a walk.”

That statement is every bit as true as yours and would have just as much factual support. Players with bad plate discipline could be described as “not unusual” regardless of country of origin, hair color, or sexual orientation. It seemed as if you were singling out Caribbean players as being particularly noteworthy for their poor plate discipline. Acapulco Tea Party and I provided evidence contrary to your point (whereas all you’ve provided is a humorous but ultimately irrelevant quote). If I read that wrong I apologize but it’s hard to find another way to read it.

I also have a very lose friend that’s jewish that makes jokes about how cheap jews are.

I’ll wait until you show me data on the frugality of the average jewish American vs. the average American. Prove me wrong.

Stereotypes often have some basis in fact.

Do you see how silly your arguments are?

Both statements are true. Sometimes the stereotypes have a nugget of truth at their core, and sometimes they do not.

This particular stereotype is one that has been given no factual support other than a quote by a person of that group. So it may possibly have a basis in fact, but in fact that no evidence has been presented to show that to be the case. How is this a valid defense?