Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
I think it's a fair point to say, most of the year , the Reds had a positive run differential. I think it was in the 40's at one point.
However, I think this is what is being debated:

Was it an anomaly that the run differential was so high for a bad team, and the run differential should adjust to their true talent level (ie go down over the season)?

OR

Was the win-loss record the anomaly, and it should have gotten better as the season went on , to match the pythag record.. and since it didn't, it's not "bad luck"?

Each is a valid argument, and really not "arguing against the math".
Run differential is just one tool to evaluate a club, it is not perfect.
i hear you, but i do believe over this long of a season, when a team loses a bunch of one-run games, has a positive run differential, and is 10 games under .500 ... that team has been the victim of bad luck.