One of the more popular refrains early on in the MLB season is that of "small sample size". That is, the season is so long that drawing conclusions about the entire season from one 15 game stretch is silly.
Of course, that didn't stop Phillies beat writer David Murphy of the Philadelphia Daily News from saying that D-Day was also a small sample size.
"Question is: what evidence is there to suggest that the problems that have plagued the Phillies over the first 15 games will not continue to be problems? D-Day was a small sample size. Hitler also knew he was screwed after it."
Talk about being just a tad bit overdramatic. Comparing real-life events to sports can always be a sticky proposition, especialy if you're a writer (as opposed to a coach just trying to get your team riled up, when it's maybe a little less objectionable). In this example, perhaps the worst part is that the analogy isn't even a good one. A better (but still utterly ridiculous) sports analogy involving D-Day would probably be the dominant team for the first 75% of the season that began to struggle once they faced the slightest bit of adversity. Besides, there's no way to tangibly compare a little over 9% of the MLB regular season to a battle that changed the course of history. The Phillies issues could remain, or they could play their way out of them over the remaining 91% of the season. That's part of what makes the unique MLB schedule what it is.
A 15 game sample size for a struggling team at the beginning of the season isn't the same as the turning point of a major war in world history, no matter how you try to spin it.