Chip's brilliant interjection: the winner of the game isn't the team with the higher on base percentage, it's the team that scores the most runs. Thanks Chip...and you are A MORON. The poster child for nepotism (though still following in his MORONIC relatives' footsteps). Let's see, yes, there is no correlation between base runners and runs scored. That's what these two idiots are saying. It's all about CLUTCH-HITTING! Well, let's look at the runs leaders in the AL. Texas and Boston. You know what category they also lead the league in? On base percentage (2nd and 1st). They also rank 3rd and 1st in walks, respectively. What team is last in the AL in runs and OBP? The Moneyball team itself, Oakland! (Maybe Billy Beane should re-read the book he wrote.) I'm going to go way out on a limb here: teams with more base runners score more runs. Go ahead, call me crazy. I also believe in evolution and global warming.
Perhaps Toronto's W-L record under Gaston is more related to allowing the fewest runs in the league and not being "aggressive at the plate."
~
3 comments:
You just don't get it do you?
No, I guess I don't.
Man, so you're trying to say that allowing fewer runs can also lead to victories?
Even if you don't score a lot? Because you don't clutch hit enough?
I mean, the team that scores more wins. So pitching is important and all I guess in that if a pitcher can bulldog his way through for a complete game you can save your bullpen...but really, I think you have to score more. And that means hitting behind the runner and being aggressive.
Post a Comment