Baseball: EV of rules

[RocketManJames]

In blackjack, changing the rules of the game alter the EV. So, after watching today's game, I was thinking about this totally hypothetical question... what if, before the game, each team must choose one of the following when they are at-bat? Which is best EV and would knowing what the opponent chose affect your own decision if you are to maximize EV?

1) Normal rules.
2) 4 outs in your inning instead of 3, but you only get 2 strikes and it takes 5 balls to walk.
3) 2 outs for your inning, but fouls don't count as strikes and 3 balls to walk.
4) 1 out only, but you get a man on 2nd at the start of your at-bats.

Which is provides you with the greatest EV, and does it matter what your opponent chose?

-RMJ

[Neil Stevens]

Depends on the skills of the players of a particular team.

It also depends on if it's a one-game affair, meaning the value of a game is 1 for a win or 0 for a loss, or if it's a series, in which the value of a win can be diminished if, say, your pitching staff is completely exhausted.

Or when you say EV do you really mean the expected number of runs per game?

[bisonbison]

I imagine if you e-mailed this to baseball prospectus, you'd actually get some interesting answers.

[NotMitch]

My guess is in order the EV would be 2,1,3,4.

[jdl22]

One that I've thought about (and probably every kid first being explained the rules of baseball) is what if you were out on any foul ball with two strikes?

How many outs would you need for the expected number of runs to be the same? My guess is that you would score the same number of runs with 7 or 8 outs per inning if a foul with two strikes were an out.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
Or when you say EV do you really mean the expected number of runs per game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well... I would think EV would be expected number of runs that you would score, but maybe you would have to account for less tired/more tired opponents if you had them fielding longer/less due to rules change.

But, maybe it's better to say, EV would be equal to expected number of wins you'd get.

-RMJ

[Neil Stevens]

Just a thought: with four outs, you can sacrifice a guy from first to home.

So the four out option is great if you think that kind of baseball works. Otherwise I'd think that the loss of a strike would hurt. As the rules are now, batting averages go way down when batters have two strikes against them. Extrapolate that, and batters in the four out option would get in big trouble fast because they would be in trouble on the first strike.

Bring on the small ball arguments for and against!

[Senor Choppy]

#3 is best by a wide margin. With a team of guys that could bunt into foul territory at will, you'd be able to outscore your opponents walking in runs alone.

It would take some amazing location pitchers to be able to throw enough strikes to get people out, and their pitch counts would be through the roof after a few innings.

The 4 outs option is good, but it isn't totally abusive and thus not nearly as good.