Zero > One

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: Correct.

Chet: -- if the lead-off guy homers, as opposed to walking?

McCarver: Correct.

Chet: 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.