[b:e9ec02b935]Steel[/b:e9ec02b935]:
Good post. In a low scoring environment, most games are going to be close ones. Winning the close ones then will obviously be very important.
What I meant by analysis in hindsight was to distinguish between forecasting and results reading. It's one thing to say "built for a pitcher's park" before the season starts and then "hey! we finished third in home runs" after the season. The second implies that you meant to be successful in a pitcher's park by hitting home runs, when this wasn't the forecasted goal.
I was just curious if you were saying your results were what you set out to achieve. Maybe I just read too much into your posts (and maybe [b:e9ec02b935]Geoff[/b:e9ec02b935]'s posts as well).
As an aside, someone once called to my attention the inordinate results average teams can produce with two very strong relievers. For a counter-aside, there are plenty of teams that overachieve with practically no bullpen. In a "one-run game" aside, the division winner in my first 2009 league went 40-25 in one run games (like your team, I consider this extremely high), but he did it with four S7/S6 SPs getting 1250 of 1400 innings!
Like [b:e9ec02b935]Geoff[/b:e9ec02b935] said in his post, it would be interesting if this idea could be isolated out somehow for testing. Looks like there's an edge in there trying to call attention to itself!
Nice job with your team and thanks for posting it -
:D