Beware The Ides Of March Baseball Madness

[Crash Course]

See: http://www.netshrine.com/20040311.html

Discussion welcome and appreciated.

[Crash Course]

Just an add on to the SOTS feature, which I thought of this AM, and would have liked to have included, in retrospect............

In the SOTS, I stated:

teams having above average pitching, in terms of positive RSAA, when given “average hitting" will win about 90.6 games (HN W), and

teams having above average hitting, in terms of positive RCAA, when given " average pitching” will win about 87.5 games (PN W).

On the flip side, for 2003:


teams having below average pitching, in terms of negative RSAA, when given “average hitting" will win about 75.4 games (HN W), and
teams having below hitting, in terms of negative RCAA, when given " average pitching” will win about 73.6 games (PN W).


Therefore, it does appear that teams having below average pitching when given “average hitting" will have a somewhat greater probability of winning more games than teams having below average hitting when given "average pitching.”

This is the opposite of when teams having above average pitching, in terms of positive RSAA, are given “average hitting" and when teams having above average hitting, in terms of positive RCAA, are given "average pitching.”

But, the increase is smaller - - 1.8 to 3.1 wins.

[Crash Course]

Teams having above average pitching and average hitting will win more than teams having above average hitting and average pitching (at least during the regular season).

Would you agree or disagree?

[nyy26wc]

Would you agree or disagree?

The Pythagorean formula agrees. But, it takes a lot of extra pitching vs. extra hitting in order for the difference to equal a single win.

It is not until the team reaches 100 runs above average until the difference between adding that to the offense or taking it away defensively gets you a whole win.

[Crash Course]

Thanks Lee!
On a per game average, is the difference .6 of a run added or taken away?