Tuesday, May 22, 2007


For no apparent reason, other than my own general inquisitiveness, I chose to look up the stats for the last several years to see how this Giants bunch compares in runs scored..Employing my admittedly weak long division skills, I divided the runs scored by the number of games played to get a per game average. I rounded off because my current level of geekiness is already way too high. So...

2002..4.8 runs per game

What does it all mean? I don't know. The 02 team went to the World Series scoring at a 4.8 clip. For those of you who are math gifted: Is 4.8 runs scored compared to 4.4 a huge difference over the course of a season? It could be the difference from finishing 1 game out of the playoffs or playing for the ring.

Still, the 04 team scored at a 5.2 clip and finished out of the money. A quick guess would suggest the Giants didn't pitch all that well in 04. 05 is easy enough to understand. No Bonds. You could argue that he makes up a big chunk of that run scoring average all by his lonesome..

Anyhoo, the Giants are currently scoring at their lowest rate other than the Bonds-less season. But the starting pitching has been very, very good..The pen is up and down yet the Giants are scoring more runs than they are giving up. The big blowout over Colorado is driving that oddity. 500 teams don't usually outscore their opponents.

Do the Giants trade away a starting pitcher for a bat that can get them closer to that 5.2 runs they had in 04 or even the more modest 4.8 that got them to the seventh game? Again, I have no idea..

1 comment:

obsessivegiantscompulsive said...

Unless we get a premier type slugger who would make a difference, I think the Giants should keep their strength in pitching intact and use the cheap labor in pitching to fund more spending on position players. We have a bundle of money freed up after this season, see if there are any young hitter we can lure here, else use our young position players and see where that leads us.