I recall a while back David wondering out loud whether the Reds
average runs scored/allowed was really telling the full story:

2008
Scored Allowed
runs W L W L
10+ 5 - 0 0 - 10
9 8 - 1 1 - 10
8 5 - 1 0 - 5
7 5 - 2 3 - 9
6 9 - 2 2 - 8
5 6 - 6 7 - 15
4 9 - 8 3 - 5
3 7 - 12 12 - 7
2 2 - 17 14 - 1
1 0 - 13 9 - 1
0 0 - 9 5 - 0

"Ron Johnson" <johnson@ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message
>I recall a while back David wondering out loud whether the Reds
> average runs scored/allowed was really telling the full story:
>
> 2008
> Scored Allowed
> runs W L W L
> 10+ 5 - 0 0 - 10
> 9 8 - 1 1 - 10
> 8 5 - 1 0 - 5
> 7 5 - 2 3 - 9
> 6 9 - 2 2 - 8
> 5 6 - 6 7 - 15
> 4 9 - 8 3 - 5
> 3 7 - 12 12 - 7
> 2 2 - 17 14 - 1
> 1 0 - 13 9 - 1
> 0 0 - 9 5 - 0

So when the reds score 4 or 5, they are a 500 team,
but when the other team scores 4 or 5 the reds are 10-20?
Ouch.

dfs

On Aug 22, 5:22 pm, "David Short"
<David.No.Sh...@Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote:
> "Ron Johnson" <john...@ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message
> >I recall a while back David wondering out loud whether the Reds
> > average runs scored/allowed was really telling the full story:
>
> > 2008
> >         Scored     Allowed
> > runs   W     L     W      L
> > 10+    5  -   0      0  -  10
> > 9        8  -   1      1  -  10
> > 8        5  -   1      0  -   5
> > 7        5  -   2      3  -   9
> > 6        9  -   2      2  -   8
> > 5        6  -   6      7  -  15
> > 4        9  -   8      3  -   5
> > 3        7  -  12    12  -   7
> > 2        2  -  17    14  -   1
> > 1        0  -  13     9  -   1
> > 0        0  -   9      5  -   0
>
> So when the reds score 4 or 5, they are a 500 team,
> but when the other team scores 4 or 5 the reds are 10-20?
> Ouch.

I'm most concerned that nearly a third of their games they score less
than three runs. That they're 2-40 in those games doesn't shock me as
much as that there are 42 times the offense couldn't manage any better
than that. Even the 20 games of allowing 9+ is easier to swallow.
Was it the 1999 team that wasn't shut out all season? Hard to believe
that was possible when you watch the current incarnation fail at the
plate.

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:22:22 -0400, "David Short"
<David.No.Short@Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote:

>"Ron Johnson" <johnson@ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message
>>I recall a while back David wondering out loud whether the Reds
>> average runs scored/allowed was really telling the full story:
>>
>> 2008
>> Scored Allowed
>> runs W L W L
>> 10+ 5 - 0 0 - 10
>> 9 8 - 1 1 - 10
>> 8 5 - 1 0 - 5
>> 7 5 - 2 3 - 9
>> 6 9 - 2 2 - 8
>> 5 6 - 6 7 - 15
>> 4 9 - 8 3 - 5
>> 3 7 - 12 12 - 7
>> 2 2 - 17 14 - 1
>> 1 0 - 13 9 - 1
>> 0 0 - 9 5 - 0
>
>So when the reds score 4 or 5, they are a 500 team,
>but when the other team scores 4 or 5 the reds are 10-20?
>Ouch.

I was surprised to see that they have scored one run or less 22 times.
Ouch, indeed.

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008, Kevin McClave wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:22:22 -0400, "David Short"
> <David.No.Short@Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote:
>
>> "Ron Johnson" <johnson@ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message
>>> I recall a while back David wondering out loud whether the Reds
>>> average runs scored/allowed was really telling the full story:
>>
>> So when the reds score 4 or 5, they are a 500 team,
>> but when the other team scores 4 or 5 the reds are 10-20?
>> Ouch.
>
> I was surprised to see that they have scored one run or less 22 times.
> Ouch, indeed.

I think the Bengals might approach that mark this year.