Several of you sent in this bizarro-world pearl of wisdom from my close friend Tim McCarver during today's Fox broadcast:"We had our friends at Stats, Inc. check and see whether more multi-run innings came with a lead off homer or a lead off walk. You would think that a lead off walk would lead to more big innings than a lead off home run. Not true. A lead off home run, this year, has lead to more multi-run innings than lead off walks. It's against conventional thinking."
It's against conventional thinking. Really.
In my mind, conventional thinking on this subject goes like this: if the first hitter in the inning scores one run all by himself, it's more likely that his team will score two+ runs that inning than if he does not. Because in that situation, in order to achieve a multiple-run inning, the team has only to score one
additional run. Instead of two
runs. See how that works?
McCarver has been obsessed with this subject before. Do a search for him on this very blog, and you will find some real gems.
I like to imagine the guy at Stats, Inc. who had to field that call.McCarver
: So, basically, we want to know which situation leads to more multiple-run innings. A lead-off home run, or a lead-off walk.Chet, Over at Scouts Inc.
: ...Who is this?McCarver
: Timothy Chadwick McCarver, sir, at your service.Chet
: And you want to know whether a team is more likely to score two runs in an inning --McCarver
: -- if the lead-off guy homers, as opposed to walking?McCarver
: It's if he homers.McCarver
: How did you research that so fast? I didn't even hear typing.Chet
: Okay. Hang on. (Sound of obviously fast and nonsensical typing for two seconds
) Yup, there it is. It's if he homers.McCarver
: I'll be the son of a monkey's uncle! That goes against conventional thinking!Chet
: I don't think you know what those words mean.
It's almost October, people. Soon, we'll get all McCarver, all the time. Buckle up.
Labels: tim mccarver