Is the 2012 starting staff the Reds' best all time?

[fearofpopvol1]

Please Note: I am not including the bullpen in this topic (if that wasn't already obvious).

If you look at WAR, it looks like they are on pace to be the 2nd best of all time. Obviously, they have to keep up the current pace. And if they keep pitching like they have as of late, maybe they will be the best!

The best Reds starting rotation, according to Fangraphs WAR, was the 1982 staff. The 2012 staff is on pace to be just a little bit better than the 1992 staff, which is ranked 2nd all time currently.

Needless to say, it's looking like this staff is one of the best the Reds have had in a very very long time. And can you imagine if Latos comes around and pitches like we hope he will?

Anyway, thoughts?

[AtomicDumpling]

It is definitely the best since I have been a serious observer (since the mid 90's). I am loving it.

[RedsBaron]

"All Time" takes in a lot of territory.
The 1923 Reds had a pretty decent starting staff. Doll Luque won 27 games with a 1.93 ERA and 201 ERA+; Eppa Rixey won 20 with 2.80 and 139; Pete Donohoe won 21 with 3.38 and 115; and Rube Benton won 14 with 3.66 and 106.
The 1940 World Champion Reds also had a deep starting staff. Bucky Walters won 22 with a 2.29 ERA and 170 ERA+; Paul Derringer won 20 with 3.06 and 124; Junior Thompson won 16 with 3.32 and 115; and Jim Turner won 14 with 2.89 and 132.

[Big Klu]

1982 was the best? That's enough to convince me to ignore Fangraphs WAR forever.

Mario Soto was much better than his 14-13 record would indicate, but Tom Seaver, Bruce Berenyi, Frank Pastore, Greg Harris, Charlie Leibrandt, and Bob Shirley were bad.

[RANDY IN INDY]

The 1962 starting staff was pretty formidable.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by Big Klu

1982 was the best? That's enough to convince me to ignore Fangraphs WAR forever.

Mario Soto was much better than his 14-13 record would indicate, but Tom Seaver, Bruce Berenyi, Frank Pastore, Greg Harris, Charlie Leibrandt, and Bob Shirley were bad.

This

The 20's had the most formidable staff in my eyes

[cumberlandreds]

Originally Posted by Big Klu

1982 was the best? That's enough to convince me to ignore Fangraphs WAR forever.

Mario Soto was much better than his 14-13 record would indicate, but Tom Seaver, Bruce Berenyi, Frank Pastore, Greg Harris, Charlie Leibrandt, and Bob Shirley were bad.

Same for me. Stats don't always tell the story. That was worst Reds team of all time. Pitching was equally as bad as the hitting. If the pitching was that good then that team would have lost far fewer than 101 games.

[mdccclxix]

I really liked the staffs in 94 and 95 with Shourek, Smiley, Portugal, Rijo, Wells, etc. Especially, 1995.

[wolfboy]

Originally Posted by Big Klu

1982 was the best? That's enough to convince me to ignore Fangraphs WAR forever.

I don't even see fWAR data for guys in the 60s, not to mention the 20s. I don't think the problem is with fWAR.

[RedlegJake]

The staffs of the 20s and the 39-40-41 staffs and the 61-62 staffs were very, very good. I don;t know that his staff is in that territory yet although I think it could be. That fangraphs calls the 82 staff better than any of these is laughable.

[wolfboy]

Originally Posted by RedlegJake

The staffs of the 20s and the 39-40-41 staffs and the 61-62 staffs were very, very good. I don;t know that his staff is in that territory yet although I think it could be. That fangraphs calls the 82 staff better than any of these is laughable.

Fangraphs does not say anything of the sort. fWAR only goes back to 1974; therefore, you are unable to compare 1982 staff to any staff before 1974 using fWAR.

This statement by the original poster is wrong:

The best Reds starting rotation, according to Fangraphs WAR, was the 1982 staff.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by Big Klu

1982 was the best? That's enough to convince me to ignore Fangraphs WAR forever.

Mario Soto was much better than his 14-13 record would indicate, but Tom Seaver, Bruce Berenyi, Frank Pastore, Greg Harris, Charlie Leibrandt, and Bob Shirley were bad.

Yeah, I find this incredibly hard to believe. That's simply GOT to be a typo or something. That's not even CLOSE to the best.

[Nathan]

I'm not too familiar with WAR calculations, so I don't post too much about it, but, curious as to why they consider that staff the best as far as WAR is concerned. What goes into the calculations? That might explain a lot.

[nate]

fWAR includes staying on the field or, in the case of pitching, IP.

As a ruler, the 2010 playoff team SP had a FIP of 4.24 with 965 IP.

The 1982 SP had a FIP of 3.44 while pitching 1004 innings. That's the 9th most since 1974 and we haven't seen any amount close to that since 1992 (1008.1.)

Their peripherals broke down thusly:

K/9: 6.38
BB/9: 3.25
HR/9: 0.70

The current staff has a FIP of 3.92 with 595.2 IP.

Their peripherals:

K/9: 6.81
BB/9: 2.15
HR/9: 1.07

You can look at this table here.

Although it's common to talk about K/9 being an important pitching peripheral, note that HR have quite a bit of weight in FIP. That's because it's the only event entirely controlled by the pitcher that leads to run(s) (and the average home run typically yields more than a single run.)

xFIP, which normalizes FB-rate isn't available for the '82 staff but it would be an interesting comparison.

[westofyou]

1982 was heinous

No matter how the numbers play out

I hated that season, thank gawd I was in SF and got to watch the Giants ruin the Dodgers year

Thank you Mr Morgan