Quote:
|
Well, as we already suspected, the White Sox don't look very small at all by this measure, as the Sox were one of the teams most dependent on the the long ball in 2005. The Nats' home park, an inhospitable place for home run hitters, probably has something to do with their leading this category. In looking at the numbers, I think it's difficult to claim that scoring a high percentage of your runs on homers is a bad thing. The "leaders" in this category (the top seven shown above) averaged 699 runs scored for the season, while the trailers averaged nearly 100 more (785).
|
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...ball-whos-who/
Sure, they did a lot of "small ball" type things, but most of their runs came from the home run... 4th most reliant in the league for it, in fact. Also, it's highlighted by the fact that going back to 2000, they've had an above average offense every year except... 2005! And that year they were among the team leaders in home runs hit (partially a side effect from their stadium, but you get my point, regardless!)
I wasn't trying to attack you or anything, I was just making the point that you made a very false statement.