Posted by tecwrg on 7/5/2016 5:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/5/2016 4:37:00 PM (view original):
Why are you comparing it to ERA and not actual runs/9?

It doesn't make much difference:

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.031772737
R Square 0.001009507
Adjusted R Square 0.00020646
Standard Error 0.569554764
Observations 1246

So you're combining three disparate baseball eras (pre-steroid, steroid, and post-steroid) and trying to come to a conclusion?

Your analysis is flawed.

There's no reason why we can't look at the data for multiple decades together.

It's not like run scoring has ever really gone crazy. For example, since 1920, the average runs per game in the NL is 8.7 with a standard deviation of 0.7. So basically, anything from 8 RPG to 9.4 RPG is normal. Almost every season since 1920 has been within that range.

There were more seasons above 9.4 RPG in the 1920's than there were in the 1990's and 2000's.

^ That's combined RPG for both teams.

No, of course there's "no reason" to do that.

If, that is, you're trying to cook the numbers to support your flawed premise.

In which case, it's a great idea to do that.

?

I think you don't like the conclusion, so you're looking for a way to discredit the numbers. There's nothing out of the ordinary about the run scoring today. There's nothing remarkable about the run scoring in 2003. Not compared to the rest of baseball history.

Games* were higher scoring in 1930 than they were in 2000. Games were lower scoring in 1992 than they were in 2014. There will always be a variance but the game doesn't really change.


*NL, I didn't look at the AL numbers.

If you combine NL and AL, the average shifts a little but the standard deviation barely moves. You still get a lot more years above 1 standard deviation in the 1920s and 1930s than you do in the 1990's and 2000's.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/4/2016 10:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 7/4/2016 9:59:00 PM (view original):
the power of tec compels him?

Do you really want tec walking around here thinking he's Christ?

I thought he already did!

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
?

I think you don't like the conclusion, so you're looking for a way to discredit the numbers. There's nothing out of the ordinary about the run scoring today. There's nothing remarkable about the run scoring in 2003. Not compared to the rest of baseball history.

Games* were higher scoring in 1930 than they were in 2000. Games were lower scoring in 1992 than they were in 2014. There will always be a variance but the game doesn't really change.


*NL, I didn't look at the AL numbers.

Nice disingenuous argument.

You take the highest scoring MLB season (1930) in terms of R/G in the modern era (by a WIDE margin) and say that the peak of the steroid era (2000) in terms of R/G did not come close.

Come back when you can make a sincere argument.

I'm throwing it out as an example.

Almost all of the "steroid era" was within 1 standard deviation of historical league scoring.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/5/2016 7:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
?

I think you don't like the conclusion, so you're looking for a way to discredit the numbers. There's nothing out of the ordinary about the run scoring today. There's nothing remarkable about the run scoring in 2003. Not compared to the rest of baseball history.

Games* were higher scoring in 1930 than they were in 2000. Games were lower scoring in 1992 than they were in 2014. There will always be a variance but the game doesn't really change.


*NL, I didn't look at the AL numbers.

Nice disingenuous argument.

You take the highest scoring MLB season (1930) in terms of R/G in the modern era (by a WIDE margin) and say that the peak of the steroid era (2000) in terms of R/G did not come close.

Come back when you can make a sincere argument.

So he'll be back around Never:30?

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/5/2016 8:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/5/2016 7:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
?

I think you don't like the conclusion, so you're looking for a way to discredit the numbers. There's nothing out of the ordinary about the run scoring today. There's nothing remarkable about the run scoring in 2003. Not compared to the rest of baseball history.

Games* were higher scoring in 1930 than they were in 2000. Games were lower scoring in 1992 than they were in 2014. There will always be a variance but the game doesn't really change.


*NL, I didn't look at the AL numbers.

Nice disingenuous argument.

You take the highest scoring MLB season (1930) in terms of R/G in the modern era (by a WIDE margin) and say that the peak of the steroid era (2000) in terms of R/G did not come close.

Come back when you can make a sincere argument.

So he'll be back around Never:30?

We should be so lucky.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 8:01:00 PM (view original):
I'm throwing it out as an example.

Almost all of the "steroid era" was within 1 standard deviation of historical league scoring.

Was it higher or lower than the historical league scoring?

Higher. But that doesn't exclude it from the way baseball has always worked.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/5/2016 10:02:00 PM (view original):
Higher. But that doesn't exclude it from the way baseball has always worked.

If you say so.

I mean, you've clearly shown that you know all about baseball.

Yes, baseball has always worked the same way.

Remember when Home Run Baker was leading the league with 10-12 homers? Same thing today.
Remember the offensive explosion in the 60s that led to MLB lowering to curtail hitting? Makes perfect sense.
Remember when the AL decided pitchers were hitting too well so they created the DH? Had to be done.
Remember when virtually all the players blew up and looked like they lived in the gym? Still couldn't surpass ol' Home Run Baker.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/6/2016 8:45:00 AM (view original):
Yes, baseball has always worked the same way.

Remember when Home Run Baker was leading the league with 10-12 homers? Same thing today.
Remember the offensive explosion in the 60s that led to MLB lowering to curtail hitting? Makes perfect sense.
Remember when the AL decided pitchers were hitting too well so they created the DH? Had to be done.
Remember when virtually all the players blew up and looked like they lived in the gym? Still couldn't surpass ol' Home Run Baker.

Ok, but there's still three outs in an inning, three bases and home. 27 outs in a game.

The players have changed. Some rules have changed. Overall run scoring has varied very little since 1920.

Baseball is still baseball.