Josh Hancock more like Josh Hansuck am I right
Josh Hancock more like Josh Hansuck am I right
Tom Servo (08-30-2013)
Since 1970, only 9 teams not in Colorado, have had an ERA vs. the league of more then -.4 (Milton's was -.43 last year) while still having a winning record. And the most wins of all of those teams was 85.
Code:ERA <= -.4 vs. the league average WINS displayed only--not a sorting criteria WINNING PERCENTAGE >= .500 ERA YEAR ERA ERA W PCT 1 Redsox 1972 3.50 -.43 85 .548 2 Phillies 1981 4.05 -.56 59 .551 3 Phillies 1979 4.16 -.42 84 .519 4 Giants 1970 4.50 -.44 86 .531 5 Tigers 1991 4.52 -.42 84 .519 6 A's 1991 4.57 -.47 84 .519 7 Indians 1986 4.63 -.44 84 .519 8 Rockies 1995 4.97 -.78 77 .535 9 Royals 2003 5.07 -.54 83 .512
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
I don't see anywhere that I've said that MWM.Originally Posted by MWM
You know, the more I think about it, the weirder the whole concept of pitcher's wins is.
Think about it. How does a team win a ballgame?
It scores more runs than the opposition.
What are the main components to doing that?
Scoring runs and preventing runs.
How do runs get prevented?
Pitching and defense.
So pitching has nothing to do with half of what gets a team a win and it's not even the whole ball of wax on the run prevention side. Bill James figures it to be roughly 35% of how wins happen.
And these days starting pitchers only average roughly 6 IP a start. So a starting pitcher, on average, only holds about 25% of the responsibility for any game he wins. Plus, if the starting pitcher doesn't get the win, it then gets awarded to a reliever based on when the team scored the go-ahead run. What does that have to do with pitching?
When you think back to the birth of the wins statistic, the pitcher was one guy. He went out to the mound and threw a complete game. Relief appearances were an extreme rarity. For instance, the 1891 Reds had 13 relief appearance over 138 games and in no game was more than one reliever used. You could claim the pitcher earned the win because he was THE pitcher. Ten years earlier clubs only carried two or three pitchers for the entire season. Your best pitcher in those days was your star player, the main difference between winning and losing. Old Hoss Radbourn could go out and win a title pretty much single-handedly.
You've got to wonder if the game 130 years ago was played like the modern game if the pitcher's win would have been considered a meaningful measure of something. My guess is common sense would have dictated that wins were a team statistic and that no single pitcher does enough to earn credit for those wins. Yet now we've got the statistic built into the vocabulary of the game.
It amazes me how decision made in the 1870s based on what was a very different game gets passed along generation to generation without a second thought even though the rationale for it has long since evaporated.
Last edited by M2; 12-30-2004 at 02:09 AM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Great post, M2. I think you have the makings of a great article there. Have you thought about taking that idea and making it a little more robust and submitting it to BP?
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
Thanks. It just popped into my head tonight. Had to exorcise the demon otherwise I wouldn't be able to sleep.Originally Posted by MWM
Last edited by M2; 12-30-2004 at 10:19 AM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Very interesting M2, and very well written. Thanks for the insight. I have to say, it holds some water and makes a lot of sense. :gac:Originally Posted by M2
Batting average says hi.It amazes me how decision made in the 1870s based on what was a very different game gets passed along generation to generation without a second thought even though the rationale for it has long since evaporated
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |