Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2016 10:26:00 AM (view original):
Is it interesting? I'm pretty sure I've said, multiple times, that trading strikeouts for non-outs is a good thing.
Well it's interesting because you've claimed, through your in-depth historical statistical analysis, that there is no correlation between strikeouts and run scoring.
Yet you've asserted that a smaller strike zone would result in (a) more runs and (b) fewer strikeouts.
Even though one thing is not directly leading to the other, they are indirectly related in that they both spawn from the same circumstance.
Perhaps the foundation of your claim that "strikeouts are the same as all other outs" is just a massive pile of ****?