11 Responses “Why More Perfect Games?”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
-
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by J.C. Bradbury and SeatGeek MLB, Bill Baer. Bill Baer said: That's too simple. Add more baseless conjecture, man — like no more steroids! RT @jc_bradbury Why More Perfect Games? http://bit.ly/cxIaBz [...]
-
[...] chart from JC Bradbury at Sabrenomics offers a hint (It’s about better [...]
I think errors are down due to Official Scorers not calling them.
Even so, baseball should really do something to balance the sport back to the historical ratio of outcomes. Stephen Jay Gould made that point in one of his books, as I expanded upon here. A string of perfect games is bad for the game, just as it would be if dozens of players suddenly hit .400 every year.
Are fewer errors really the best indicator of better defense? Probably not.
@ J do you have a defensive metric you could suggest going back to 1880? Or do you just enjoy being captain obvious?
J,
Errors are one of the components of a perfect game. That is all.
haven’t k/9 increased over time as well?
I like this chart
This cluster of perfect games isn’t a trend — it’s all perfectly random.
http://bayesball.blogspot.com/2010/06/perfectly-random.html
I’ve come across a blog post suggesting that two seasons with a perfect game is within reason, if we think in terms of Poisson distributions. This, oddly, caused me to have an existential crisis about macroeconomics.