Reds fans from around the blogosphere (including here) have noted, time and time again, the tragedy of this year's team. This team is leading the NL in runs scored, and stand to score well over 800 runs this year. Given that, a team with even bad pitching--I'm not talking about good pitching, just bad pitching--and we're in contention.
Sadly, the pitching aspires to suck.
Enter Brian at Redlegsnation.com, one of my favorite posters for his solid statistical analysis and great long-form essays.
He looks at the possibility of the Reds scoring 100 runs over the league average....something they could do, and something that has been done only 35 other times. Now, and here's the tragedy part, only four of those 36 had a losing record, and those four called either Coors Field or the Baker Bowl home.
He writes:
S
ince 1900 only 35 teams have had 100 runs over the league average. Today the Reds lead the NL in runs scored with 660 runs, this gives them a plus 89 in runs scored vs. the current average and they are on pace to score 848 runs. If they top the leagues average by 100 runs and have a losing record then they will be only the 4th team out of those 36 to have a losing record, and the only team that didn’t play in Colorado or the Baker Bowl
It’s a pretty impressive list, 71% of the teams on the list won either their division or league (or in case of the 1951 Dodgers were in a playoff) 31% won the World Series and 6% shared the same year with another team on the list that won the league title.14.25% of them are the Rockies or the Depressions version of the Rockies the Philadelphia Phillies.
Did you see that? Seven in ten won a division or their league, and nearly one in three won the World Series. You shouldn't score this many runs and still lose. It just isn't natural.
He writes on, looking at the Reds' propensity to put teams onto this list...but rarely to be a team known for good pitching.
No comments:
Post a Comment