So I am watching the Red Sox vs. Rangers game on ESPN and they throw out some crazy number....

[GoldGlove21]

They were talking about AGonz and said that his numbers would go up from the

.300-30-100 type of player his is to someehing like .300-35-125. Orel Hershiser goes on to say that his numbers would be better that because the Red Sox would score 1,000 runs and that should equate to about 100 wins. That was kind of crazy so I decided to look it up.

Since 1900 only 7 teams have scored 1000 or more runs.

1004- 1930 Cardinals

1062- 1930 Yankees

1067- 1931 Yankees

1002- 1932 Yankees

1065- 1936 Yankees

1027- 1950 Red Sox

1009- 1999 Indians

We all know about the awesome lineup the Yankees ran out in the late 20's through the mid 30's. We also know the awesome lineup the 1999 Indians ran out on the field. Ted Williams was a member of the 1950 Red Sox team mentioned above. I just found it interesting that 7 teams have done something in the last 100+ years and somehow that translates to 100+ wins.

I know the runs to wins converter a lot of folks like to use is 10 to 11, which means 1000 runs would equate to 91 to 100 wins, but how does this take pitching into affect at all?

Based on the lineups on teams in the AL, I would expect the lead run scoring teams to be the Red Sox and Rangers. I do not think anyone else will be in their league and that they will be followed by the Yankees, White Sox, Tigers, Twins and Orioles (not an exact order). In the NL I think the Brewers, Phillies, and Braves will lead the league in runs scored.

[TradeAngelos]

They were talking about AGonz and said that his numbers would go up from the

.300-30-100 type of player his is to someehing like .300-35-125. Orel Hershiser goes on to say that his numbers would be better that because the Red Sox would score 1,000 runs and that should equate to about 100 wins. That was kind of crazy so I decided to look it up.

Since 1900 only 7 teams have scored 1000 or more runs.

1004- 1930 Cardinals

1062- 1930 Yankees

1067- 1931 Yankees

1002- 1932 Yankees

1065- 1936 Yankees

1027- 1950 Red Sox

1009- 1999 Indians

We all know about the awesome lineup the Yankees ran out in the late 20's through the mid 30's. We also know the awesome lineup the 1999 Indians ran out on the field. Ted Williams was a member of the 1950 Red Sox team mentioned above. I just found it interesting that 7 teams have done something in the last 100+ years and somehow that translates to 100+ wins.

I know the runs to wins converter a lot of folks like to use is 10 to 11, which means 1000 runs would equate to 91 to 100 wins, but how does this take pitching into affect at all?

Based on the lineups on teams in the AL, I would expect the lead run scoring teams to be the Red Sox and Rangers. I do not think anyone else will be in their league and that they will be followed by the Yankees, White Sox, Tigers, Twins and Orioles (not an exact order). In the NL I think the Brewers, Phillies, and Braves will lead the league in runs scored.

I thought he was just using a little hyperbole, and wasn't really serious.

[backwardsk]

If the Red Sox score 1000 runs this year, does that mean the Rangers will score 2250? :laughlol:

[Nigel Tufnel]

Gonzalez may put up those numbers, but if so it will be because he's playing his home games at Fenway instead of at Petco.

[BaltimoreTerp]

They were talking about AGonz and said that his numbers would go up from the

.300-30-100 type of player his is to someehing like .300-35-125. Orel Hershiser goes on to say that his numbers would be better that because the Red Sox would score 1,000 runs and that should equate to about 100 wins. That was kind of crazy so I decided to look it up.

Since 1900 only 7 teams have scored 1000 or more runs.

1004- 1930 Cardinals

1062- 1930 Yankees

1067- 1931 Yankees

1002- 1932 Yankees

1065- 1936 Yankees

1027- 1950 Red Sox

1009- 1999 Indians

We all know about the awesome lineup the Yankees ran out in the late 20's through the mid 30's. We also know the awesome lineup the 1999 Indians ran out on the field. Ted Williams was a member of the 1950 Red Sox team mentioned above. I just found it interesting that 7 teams have done something in the last 100+ years and somehow that translates to 100+ wins.

I know the runs to wins converter a lot of folks like to use is 10 to 11, which means 1000 runs would equate to 91 to 100 wins, but how does this take pitching into affect at all?

Based on the lineups on teams in the AL, I would expect the lead run scoring teams to be the Red Sox and Rangers. I do not think anyone else will be in their league and that they will be followed by the Yankees, White Sox, Tigers, Twins and Orioles (not an exact order). In the NL I think the Brewers, Phillies, and Braves will lead the league in runs scored.

If he was using the conversion, than he was using it incorrectly. It's runs above replacement that converts. So whatever a "replacement" team would score (probably ~550-600 runs off the top of my head) subtracted from the total runs scored would give you something to go on for offensive WAR.

And as you mention, that wouldn't take into account defense or pitching, which would add to or subtract from that total to give you WAR.