Rox Talk - Better to Score or Prevent?

More Important to Score Runs or Prevent Runs?

In this article and the linked one internal to the article indicates that limiting your opponent's runs is more conducive to winning. They scored an anemic 697 runs (4.3 a game) but when you only allow 583 runs to be scored well that is one way to win 92 games!

So what does the data from 2000 - 2010 show. Graph below shows number of wins versus runs allowed (against). Somewhat linear although not a true correlation at a R2 of 0.47. Compare this to the second graph below which is wins versus runs scored and you can see that there is a bit more correlation with pitching then hitting (R2 of 0.47 versus 0.38). So nothing definitive but seemingly holding your opponent to less runs is more significant then beating your opponent with your stick.

Outliers Dodgers only allowed 556 (85 wins, 2003), Atlanta 565 (101 wins, 2002), San Diego 581 (90 wins, 2010), San Francisco 583 (92 wins, 2010), and Houston 609 (89 wins, 2005). Hard to believe that two of these was last year all in the NL West. Anyone want to debate the merits of pitching in the NL West? Of those five teams three made the playoffs, Atlanta, San Francisco, and Houston. Outliers White Sox 978 runs (95 wins, 2000), Yankees 968 runs (94 wins, 2007), Rox 968 runs (82 wins, 2000), Boston 961 runs (95 wins, 2003), and Indians 950 runs (90 wins, 2000). Of these only the White Sox, Yankees, and Boston made the playoffs.

The graph below shows the 330 teams from 2000 to 2010 runs scored versus runs against. The red are the playoff teams. Appears there is a line of demarcation...

Rox Spring Training Thoughts
Will the Rox be better in April since veterans will be seeing pitching versus previous years when teams didn't travel to Tuscon? Hope so...

Early 2011 over/unders have Rox at 87.5 (Giants at 88.5). I like 88.

Walk is a hit... and Helton would have...3014 hits (instead of 2236).

It's the Ballpark stupid....