Only because the sample size was too small. Flip a coin a million times you will get heads half the time. Flip a coin a handful of times and even though the odds are the same it wouldn't be unusual to have different results because of the small sample size.
True. Still it was interesting to see how the game changed after the computer geeks started crunching the numbers. At least some of the "conventional wisdom" changed after they saw it didn't hold up statistically.
IIRC, they found there was no such thing as a "clutch hitter." The people they thought were clutch hitters were no more likely (statistically) to deliver a hit in a clutch situation than anyone else. They also found that at least in baseball, the chances of success for stealing didn't justify taking the chance. In our game that might be different due to shorter bases.
Saw your comment about as long as the hitter can handle being 0-1. How about coaches that come up with these ideas and set their hitters in an 0-2 hole? Tough to dig out of those.