More random result: 3-2 or 10-9?

Is the objective to determine which team is better or which happened to score the most?

Consider two World Series in which the winning team scored in the bottom of the 9th inning of game seven. The final scores:
3-2
10-9

In the low scoring game the winning team scored 50% more runs. In the high scoring game the winning team scored 11% more. For the team scoring 10 runs to have a comparable percentage advantage the score would have to be 10-5.

The real life examples: 1960 and 2001. The Yankees lost both. There is some bias in that the 1960 World Series is the classic example of randomness in baseball. The Yankees outscored the winning Pittsburgh Pirates 55-27. It's difficult to think of the Pirates as the better team.

The same could be said of the 2001 Yankees, who were outscored by the Arizona Diamondbacks 37-14. And the 2001 Yankees were lucky to have even reached a game seven; the Yanks won the three middle games in Yankee Stadium in improbable fashion: all three by one run and two in extra innings.

Pitching duel or slugfest? Sunday, July 28, 2013

Let's consider game seven of two World Series each of which was decided by one run in the bottom of the ninth: 1960 and 2001...

Thursday, October 13, 1960, Forbes Field ...

Sunday, November 4, 2001, Bank One Ballpark
_______________________

What does extra innings prove? Tuesday, February 27, 2018