Comments on: Pitch’ Counts, Of Another Nature http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/528 This and that about baseball stats. Fri, 08 Jan 2010 01:47:03 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Steve Lombardi http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/528/comment-page-1#comment-3585 Steve Lombardi Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:03:16 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/528#comment-3585 Thanks Andy - I had forgotten about your look at this too. Thanks Andy - I had forgotten about your look at this too.

]]> By: Andy http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/528/comment-page-1#comment-3583 Andy Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:17:31 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/528#comment-3583 I discussed some similar stuff a while back, although it didn't have 2007 numbers: http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/178 and http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/190 What that first post shows is basically that if a team in 2006 used 3 or fewer pitchers, it was more likely to win. As soon as it used a 4th pitcher, it became much more likely to lose, and teams using 5 or more pitchers were more likely to lose. I discussed some similar stuff a while back, although it didn't have 2007 numbers:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/178

and

http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/190

What that first post shows is basically that if a team in 2006 used 3 or fewer pitchers, it was more likely to win. As soon as it used a 4th pitcher, it became much more likely to lose, and teams using 5 or more pitchers were more likely to lose.

]]>