Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
If PitName = "Jack Morris" then TRUE else FALSE
You look at hockey, and yes the goalie gets credited with the win, but you rarely see analysts quoting a goalies won/loss record ahead of goals against average.
including the much superior yet mocked stat, quality start.
People get so up in arms about it being a 4.50 ERA at the bad end that they don't realize it correlates very very well.
I don't understand why this has never become a much more widely used statistic. It's easy to understand, you can calculate it in your head without the aid of a computer and it is directly assignable to the pitcher (to the extent that any stat is). People get so up in arms about it being a 4.50 ERA at the bad end that they don't realize it correlates very very well.
My only fault with it, is that you can earn a quality start, then lose it in the 7th or 8th inning. I think that it's perfect if it is earned regardless of what happens after the 6th inning.
Huh? A quality start is >= 6 IP and <= 3 ER. If you don't meet both of these, you don't get a "quality start". E.g., 2 runs through 6 then give up 4 in the 7th is not a quality start, because total ER is >3.
Up by a bunch, I can see giving up a solo homer run when you are behind on the count because you are supposed to challenge a hitter behind on the count but really, how often does that happen in a game? So you give up a run, you don't go from a 6-0 lead to a 6-4 lead because you are pitching to the score.
If a guy got pulled each time he gave up a base to the first guy batting in the 6th inning, starters' ERA would be way lower.
That assumes the bullpen is effective at keeping the run off the board. It isn't a given.
Yeah but I think any stat can be tweaked just a bit. I like the idea of a useful stat that I can pick up my newspaper, look at the boxscore and quickly determine what happened.
Please point out the other sport of a single player in such control of the game that isn't giving 100% all the time. Imagine a hockey or soccer goalie with his team up 5-0 giving up a goal just because he isn't properly focused.
I believe that pitcher wins are currently properly valued.
Who would be the leader in wins by position (1B, 2B, etc.)
'Pitches to the score', LOL. Please point out the other sport of a single player in such control of the game that isn't giving 100% all the time. Imagine a hockey or soccer goalie with his team up 5-0 giving up a goal just because he isn't properly focused. I mean, at some point during a long season, all goalie aren't focused 100% of the time but it isn't due to the score! To get to that level of play, personal pride demands effort all the time. Now, in Harold's defense, the only thing in baseball which differentiates itself from other sports is the walk. Up by a bunch, I can see giving up a solo homer run when you are behind on the count because you are supposed to challenge a hitter behind on the count but really, how often does that happen in a game? So you give up a run, you don't go from a 6-0 lead to a 6-4 lead because you are pitching to the score.
I think wins are a particularly good stat given enough time. The top-10 guys in Wins over a 5 year period probably gives you as good a list of the best pitchers in baseball as any other stat that's easily accessible.
I love the MLB Network, and I'm sure they're struggling to find ways to fill 24 hours a day talking only about baseball. But this is as bad as any of those putrid ESPN talk shows where people shout at each other for no apparent reason.
I mind that they seem to be making it their signature show.
They don't need to dress it up by having Kevin Millar scream "got... HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEM" like he's some kind of coyote suck in a bear trap.
If it doesn't affect air time or quality of other shows, why mind?
With full acknowledgment that you were just spitballing here, I'd be quite surprised if Morgan beats Eddie Collins. The other guesses look good.
'Pitches to the score', LOL. Please point out the other sport of a single player in such control of the game that isn't giving 100% all the time.
I liken it to what happened over at ESPN in the mid-1990s. It was just Berman who acted like a goofball with the nicknames and everything on Sportscenter, and then a couple of others picked it up, and then you couldn't tune in without Stuart Scott shouting "Booyah!" every 10 seconds. Every anchor suddenly had his own catchphrase, his own mannerisms, as they all tried to outdo each other, and the show became essentially unwatchable claptrap.
Blow out basketball games are pretty much 'playing to the score'.
I liked it that first season when they'd have long, extended highlights using local radio/tv broadcasts. Now, it's shorter highlights with their banal analysis, pretty much the opposite of what I enjoy. And, as we all know, my tastes and preferences should be acknowledged and catered to.
But his team positions itself differently in football you have the "prevent" defense, in hockey(if you have the misfortune of having Keenan as your GM) you clear the puck(and play more up the middle) in basketball you hold onto the ball longer...and I guess in soccer you stop watering the grass you are watching grow.
Average distance covered by a player per game:
American Football 1.2m
Baseball - only sport you can actually get away with watering the grass
It shouldn't have any effect on your overall run prevention figures, only the distribution of runs. Since baseball isn't a timed game, if it were actually elevating your runs allowed, it would be a foolish tactic.
No it wouldn't.
If you could turn on your 'pitch to the score' ability any time you were ahead by five runs or more and increase your chances of giving up one or two runs while decreasing your chances of giving up five or more runs, even if your overall RA went up from 4.00 when pitching normally to 4.50 when pitching to the score, you'd do it.
September 4, 2007
Prospectus Hit and Run
by Jay Jaffe
From the You Learn Something New Every Day files... I'm not sure how many times over the years that I've referred to the quality start stat as a Bill James invention. Apparently, I'm mistaken. Coming across an old Rob Neyer column behind ESPN's subscription wall the other day, I was clued into the fact that the stat was defined by John Lowe of the Philadelphia Inquirer (now of the Detroit Free Press). James helped spread it to the masses via his Baseball Abstract series, which is where I first encountered it, but in this instance, he's overshadowed somebody else's worthy contribution. My apologies to Mr. Lowe for any failure to properly credit him in the past and to my readers for spreading such misinformation. Score that E-6.
As defined by Lowe, a quality start is one in which a pitcher goes at least six innings and allows no more than three earned runs. It's a simple and elegant stat that suggests a pitcher did a reasonable job of keeping his team in the ballgame. And while it's possible for a pitcher to earn a quality start with a game ERA of 4.50, such instances are rare. In the aforementioned ESPN column, Neyer found that in 2005, the average quality start featured a game ERA of 2.04, a non-quality start 7.70--that's not a misprint, it's Boeing's next jet--and the 6 inning/3 earned run/4.50 case constituted just 9.2 percent of all quality starts.
It was a joke. I grew up playing soccer, but the sport is a boring sport to watch on tv.
It's always fun to piss the soccer fans on here off.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (8 members)
Page rendered in 0.4647 seconds, 74 querie(s) executed