djvh@drutx.UUCP (VanHandelDJ) (11/09/85)
> > "Also, regarding the (SA+OB) argument, I looked it up for all World Series > from 1940-1981 (the year of my Baseball Encyclopedia). The results follow: > > 1940's : 7-3 > 1950's : 7-3 > 1960's : 5-5 > 1970's : 5-5 > 80 & 81: 0-2 > ------------- > 42 years 24-18 > > The team with the greater (SA+OB) has won 24/42 of the series. I was > very surprised that it wasn't 30 or 35/42. > > It *appears* that since the return of stolen bases and the advent of > relief pitchers, (SA+OB) is no longer a good indicator of winning. > The verdict is still out on whether or not it is a good indicator of > run production. > Here is data for the discussion of "runs vs (SA + OB)": This chart contains the records for all World Series from 1940-1981. 1940's : 8-2 1950's : 8-2 1960's : 8-2 1970's : 9-1 80 & 81: 0-2 ------------- 42 years 33-9 So, while it *appears* that (SA + OB) is not a good indicator for winning games, it does *appear* to be a good (consistantly over the years) indicator of runs scored. The WS team with the higher (SA+OB) outscored the opponent in 33/42 of the WS played between 1940-1981. This brings us back (here we go again . . :-)) to Carter vs Pena. Carter has the higher (SA+OB), and probably would produce more runs than Pena given any team each might play for. According to the data above, we cannot *really* say that Carter will win more games for you than Pena. I do think Carter is the better player, but we need a better stat to show this, if there is one. Dave Van Handel