The recent Aaron Harang discussions have left me trying to figure out a way to best weigh recent results versus year to date overall stats versus career norms.
In my mind, statistics are most useful and interesting when we take the numbers and attempt to project for the next start, rest of the season or next season etc...
For instance; here are Harang's numbers/start;
Career; 6.17 IP/Start, 4.30 ERA, 1.334 WHIP, 7.49 K/9
Year to Date: 5.91 IP/Start, 5.02 ERA, 1.455 WHIP, 6.75 K/9
Last 2 months: 6.02 IP/Start, 4.21 era, 1.413 WHIP, 6.73 K/9
Last 1 month: 5.7 IP/Start, 4.15 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, 6.05 K/9
Last Start: 6.1 IP, 3 ER,(4.26 ERA), 1.475 WHIP, 5 Ks(7.11 K/9)
Essentially I'm asking for the best way to weigh recent results versus the sample size, and at what point do recent results reach a large enough sample that they are more relevant than say a larger sample size?
My question is not specific to Aaron Harang, you could make this about any number of less controversial subjects like Drew Stubbs or Nick Masset or Edwin Encarnacion.