The Sox are now 11-17 in one-run games (they've played the second-most one-run games in MLB, with PIT playing the most). When the Orioles went 29-9 in one-run games in 2012, it was dismissed as luck and they were predicted to decline the next year, which they did. If the Sox were .500 in one-run games, they would be one game below .500 overall and there'd still be great hope for a run that could vault them into contention.
When the Orioles had such a great 1-run record, their bullpen was cited as a reason. But the Sox bullpen has great numbers, so you can't really say that their record in one-run games indicates a bullpen issue (though it could perhaps indicate a misuse issue -- the wrong guys getting high-leverage appearances).
Can we say this team is better than they look and just getting unlucky thus far? Or is the fact that they'd be a game below .500 even if they were .500 in one-run games mean that they are what they are -- a team that's just not very good this year, and getting unlucky on top of it? Or is trying to draw any conclusion from 28 1-run games just SSS cherry-picking that doesn't really tell us anything at all?
When the Orioles had such a great 1-run record, their bullpen was cited as a reason. But the Sox bullpen has great numbers, so you can't really say that their record in one-run games indicates a bullpen issue (though it could perhaps indicate a misuse issue -- the wrong guys getting high-leverage appearances).
Can we say this team is better than they look and just getting unlucky thus far? Or is the fact that they'd be a game below .500 even if they were .500 in one-run games mean that they are what they are -- a team that's just not very good this year, and getting unlucky on top of it? Or is trying to draw any conclusion from 28 1-run games just SSS cherry-picking that doesn't really tell us anything at all?