and if the 7% were all double plays, whereas the 34% were all k's, i don't know why you'd choose the 7%.
and does it matter that slg% and obp correlate higher with runs scored than avg, and rc/9 and eqa higher still? i mean, you can have values and observations, but shouldn't they be reflected in actuals? if you have a theory, you should have sufficient data to test that theory. i'm not saying you're wrong, just that i'm a skeptic, and that other studies i've seen suggest your values aren't supported by the evidence.
|