As you probably know, the Boston Beaneaters went up one game to nil nothing over the Denver Bears in the 2007 World Series with a 13 to 1 victory (the Beaneaters donated one of their two extra points to the Bears in a fine show of sportsmanship).
I always ponder DIPS whenever I watch an inning like the bottom of the 5th where a team pounds line drive after line drive for base hits with seemingly no end in sight. It’s not that I believe my conclusions any less mind you, just that it’s interesting when you see what appears to be a blatant contradiction to something you’re more or less sure is true.
The explanations seem more like excuses, but are probably nonetheless accurate: the Red Sox are a well above average hitting team, Fenway Park is an excellent park for hits on balls in play, the Rockies weren’t really striking anyone out, there were a few walks mixed in, a few of the hits were cheapish, things like this happen in a small sample, etc. ad nauseum.
Your reaction to it nevertheless remains the same: “These bastards are making me look like an idiot!” Even the most seemingly rational analysts are prone to fits of the irrational. Whether I seem rational to anyone is another story.
2 responses so far ↓
1 Pizza Cutter // Oct 25, 2007 at 11:47 am
Small sample sizes never behave rationally. And it’s those small sample sizes that drive our emotions. Perhaps a little craziness can be forgiven.
2 Crisp-y Piazza Cust // Oct 25, 2007 at 3:35 pm
It’s weird how DIPS works. Over the course of a season it more or less makes you look like a genius, but those individual games can be pesky. I buy into DIPS as much as the next guy, but I seem to commonly find individual games where a pitcher will strike out 7 guys over 6 innings and yet give up 10 hits or more. Then in his next start he’ll strike out 3 in 7 IP, and surrender 4 hits.
Leave a Comment