PDA

View Full Version : Best Offenses in Baseball. Please Rank the Most Consistent Teams



ervinsm84
08-03-2011, 08:11 AM
There has been a lot of conversation about the Reds being inconsistent offensively. However, the issue is consistent to relative to what exactly, so I used the other high scoring and teams at or near their division lead.

So, laid out below is a sampling of the teams that have scored the most runs and teams leading or near the lead of their divisions/in wild card races.
Team names have been removed, replaced with a food name, and will be revealed probably sometime tomorrow.

I chose to cap the max amount of runs a team gets credit for as 7 (so if they score 7, 8, 9, 16, 24, or whatever its the same in this situation), as im pretty sure its been discussed extensively that a teams winning % gains starts to be negligible for scoring the 8th run and more (aka diminishing returns). I also lumped 0 and 1 run totals together bc the win% gain from 0 to 1 runs I believe is a pretty small gain.

So, which foods are the most consistent and have the best offense? Please rank the Foods below

http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/4550/rundistruibitonislkjdl.jpg

ervinsm84
08-03-2011, 01:25 PM
should be easy to spot which is the reds, bc they are so inconsistent right?

LeDoux
08-03-2011, 04:50 PM
There has been a lot of conversation about the Reds being inconsistent offensively. However, the issue is consistent to relative to what exactly, so I used the other high scoring and teams at or near their division lead.

So, laid out below is a sampling of the teams that have scored the most runs and teams leading or near the lead of their divisions/in wild card races.
Team names have been removed, replaced with a food name, and will be revealed probably sometime tomorrow.

I chose to cap the max amount of runs a team gets credit for as 7 (so if they score 7, 8, 9, 16, 24, or whatever its the same in this situation), as im pretty sure its been discussed extensively that a teams winning % gains starts to be negligible for scoring the 8th run and more (aka diminishing returns). I also lumped 0 and 1 run totals together bc the win% gain from 0 to 1 runs I believe is a pretty small gain.

So, which foods are the most consistent and have the best offense? Please rank the Foods below

http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/4550/rundistruibitonislkjdl.jpg

Okay, I'll play.

Corn and Green beans have the most consistent offensive production by my defintion of "consistent."

Bellpeppers have the worst offensive production.

Tomatoes and Pineapples are the most inconsistent.

ervinsm84
08-04-2011, 06:11 AM
Okay, I'll play.

Corn and Green beans have the most consistent offensive production by my defintion of "consistent."

Bellpeppers have the worst offensive production.

Tomatoes and Pineapples are the most inconsistent.

I was hoping more people would join in with guesses, but not surprisingly no one bothered bc the chart shows the problem with "omg the reds offense is soooo inconsistent"

corn= Boston
Green Beans= Yankees

Bellpeppers= Giants

Tomatoes= Phillies
Pineapple= Cleveland

ervinsm84
08-04-2011, 06:14 AM
Apples: Toronto
Oranges: Detroit
Carrots: Reds
Potatoes: Atlanta
Peas: St louis
Peaches: Arizona
Tomatoes: Phillies
Cucumbers: Milwaukee
Corn: boston
Green Beans: yanks
bell peppers: giants
onions: rangers
pineapple: cleveland
Grapefruit: Mets
Tangerines: Rockies

Grouse
08-04-2011, 11:35 AM
Having a consistent offense is not the reds problem. Being a good baseball TEAM is the reds problem.

LeDoux
08-04-2011, 04:09 PM
If the Reds are scoring 5 or more runs in 51% of their games, they project to have a much better record then they currently possess. Add overall the run differential and I agree that offense does not appear to be the main source of Reds woes.

LeDoux
08-04-2011, 04:12 PM
I was hoping more people would join in with guesses, but not surprisingly no one bothered bc the chart shows the problem with "omg the reds offense is soooo inconsistent"



I though this was an excellent thread. I think many people do not like guessing because they just might be wrong. Then, there are a host of post explaining how stupid you are for making that guess.

But good job on the chart. I found it to be very interesting.

:thumbup:

TheBigLebowski
08-04-2011, 04:37 PM
I haven't been on the board much today or I would have played along.

Agreed w/the kudos on the chart and the threat concept.

I must say, however, stats don't always tell the story. Someone in the ORG has a sig that says something to the effect of "statistics are like bikinis. what they reveal is telling, but what they conceal is vital."

Having an offense that consistently produces runs is important, obviously, but having an offense that can consistently produce fundamental baseball plays is vital. This offense is just maddening in its inability to do so.

LeDoux
08-04-2011, 08:01 PM
I must say, however, stats don't always tell the story. Someone in the ORG has a sig that says something to the effect of "statistics are like bikinis. what they reveal is telling, but what they conceal is vital."



I love stats, I really do. But also agree that stats are being over- and mis- used. I read a few articles recently about stat guys questioning the usefulness of them in many instances. I thought Dave Cameron's article was especially powerful. When the stats take precedence over what is actually happening on the field, I think they become counterproductive.

redssince75
08-04-2011, 09:15 PM
I love stats, I really do. But also agree that stats are being over- and mis- used. I read a few articles recently about stat guys questioning the usefulness of them in many instances. I thought Dave Cameron's article was especially powerful. When the stats take precedence over what is actually happening on the field, I think they become counterproductive.

Pretty much how I feel.

However, I'll give ervin this much, his dogged insistence that hitting is not the problem has moved me from placing about 99% of the blame on hitting to only putting about 80% of the problem on it. He's moving the needle, in other words.

To move it any further, I'd need to know how we stack up on our percentage of knocking in RISP with less than 2 outs from innings 5 on. That's where I continually see problems, but maybe it's just me.

ervinsm84
08-04-2011, 09:43 PM
this isnt high level calculus or a complicated combinatrics problem.

its as simple as counting the final total of runs scored in a game.

it strikes me as odd that looking at run scored "statistic" gets less credence than a "statistic" that narrows down to such a limited sampling of the game

LeDoux
08-04-2011, 09:54 PM
this isnt high level calculus or a complicated combinatrics problem.

its as simple as counting the final total of runs scored in a game.

it strikes me as odd that looking at run scored "statistic" gets less credence than a "statistic" that narrows down to such a limited sampling of the game

I am not sure which post or posts this is response to. Is it the notion that "stats" don't tell the whole story?

ervinsm84
08-04-2011, 11:06 PM
I am not sure which post or posts this is in response to. Is it the notion that "stats" don't tell the whole story?

no, its in response to ba with risp with 2 outs in late innings tells the story better

LeDoux
08-04-2011, 11:21 PM
no, its in response to ba with risp with 2 outs in late innings tells the story better

Ah, gotcha.