LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  [ 51 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?

Author Message
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#41

Posted: February 20, 2008, 3:39 PM Post
Posts: 6191
Wins do measure how many times a pitcher pitched 5+ innings and left with the lead. Usually, guys with a lot of quality starts also have a lot of wins, though you will find a hard luck guy in there, usually from a bad team.

I do pay attention to wins over the long haul, but I never look at losses, as if a guy has a good ERA, his L's would go away if he went to a better team, or just had better luck.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#42

Posted: February 20, 2008, 4:09 PM Post
Posts: 12323
rluzinski said:
I think we should start including positional player's win/loss record in our analysis of his performance.
No kidding. I was thinking the same thing. We should trade Braun because we have had a losing record since he came up. He has to go.

Fan is short for fanatic.
I blame Wang.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#43

Posted: February 20, 2008, 5:28 PM Post
Posts: 724
Today's version of bert Blyleven could probably be said to be the White Sox Vazquez. he puts up great stats in about 7-10 categories, but he never seems to win as many games as he should. I can't really blame him or the White Sox bull pen. he just always seems to pitch a quality game and lose. Of all the White Sox starters, I like him the most. i'm not sure why. I just do.

I brought up lee smith because i knew many people would find flaws in his game. But if we were to look at just wins or just saves, we should be thinking of him in great terms. The save for a reliever means about the same as a win for a starter. 300 saves for a reliever is not as easy as some people would lead you to believe. and lee Smith had over 400. but despite that, we still don't think of lee Smith as a great reliever. Some would argue that Dan Plesac was just as good. Sure, saves are easy to come by. but they were just as easy to come by for Sutter as they were for Lee Smith. And it's not like Lee was on many championship or winning teams. Lee Smith was a closer for the Cubs. no game is a safe lead pitching for the Cubs.

But the fact remains, there is more to a pitcher than just wins and saves. however, we also must take into consideration who our audience is. To the casual fan wins are very important- probably the most important stat for a pitcher. however, to a stats geek or a real gm, wins are not as important as quality innings pitched.

What's more important? a pitcher striking out 18 players and throwing 152 pitches in the process? or pitching a 4 hit shut out with 2 kos and throwing only 85 pitches? Greg Maddux used to be able to throw 90 pitch shut outs. randy Johnson would throw 135-140 pitches for his 18 Kos.

what is the most important stat for a pitcher? wins? innings? ERA? pitches per game? Quality starts? complete games? Should one stat be weighted more than another? I remember there used to be a stat where you would compare a pitcher's winning percentage against his team's winning percentage. If the pitcher had a great winning percentage on a lousy team, he was said to be a great pitcher. but if the team's winning % was higher than the pitchers' , that pitcher was said to be lousy. the mark of a truly great pitcher is to be able to win 20+ games for a last place team. Steve Carlton once lost 20 games in one season. he also won 27 games and a Cy young award while pitching for the last place phillies. Carlton was just as good of a pitcher winning 27 games as he was when he lost 20. Well maybe not, but you get the point.

i think wins is an important stat. I think wins is more important than quality starts. i think having 50 shut outs is more important stat than 300 wins. I think having an ERA under 3 is important if it is a career ERA over the course of 15 years. i think all of the stats Jim Palmer produced are vastly over rated. call me crazy, but I thought Dave McNally was the better pitcher.

I think Sheets is a far superior pitcher than Cappy. but who has more wins?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#44

Posted: February 20, 2008, 5:49 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 5493
Judging pitchers solely on wins and losses is how Carl Pavano ends up making $10 million a year. It's fun to look at, but when Chien-Ming Wang is getting Cy Young votes just because he manages to win 18 games with like 6 runs of support every night, it gets a little ridiculous.

"[Baseball]'s a stupid game sometimes." -- Ryan Braun
Twitter


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#45

Posted: February 20, 2008, 7:27 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 1908
dadofandrew said:
Wins do measure how many times a pitcher pitched 5+ innings and left with the lead.

How do SP wins measure that exact scenario when the bullpen blows the lead? They don't.



 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#46

Posted: February 20, 2008, 9:28 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 5141
Big Reed said:
The save for a reliever means about the same as a win for a starter. 300 saves for a reliever is not as easy as some people would lead you to believe. and lee Smith had over 400. but despite that, we still don't think of lee Smith as a great reliever. Some would argue that Dan Plesac was just as good. Sure, saves are easy to come by. but they were just as easy to come by for Sutter as they were for Lee Smith.
This just isn't true.
Lee smith only had 3 seasons in his career where he pitched 100 innings. His first 3 full seasons (one of which was '82 and probably his best year). Sutter's career, he pitched in 661 games, and threw over 1042 innings (admittedly his career was short).Smith threw in 1022 games and pitched only 1289 innings. Their 162 game averages: Sutter: 68 games, 107 innings. Smith: 67 games, only 85 innings.

Anyway, I thought Smith was great, but his career ended at precisely the wrong time: Just after Eckersley and just as he's coming up for the HoF, guys are blowing by his career saves record.

"I wasted so much time in my life hating Juventus or A.C. Milan that I should have spent hating the Cardinals." ~kalle8

Twitter: @MKEHiker
Website: http://www.mkehiker.com


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#47

Posted: February 20, 2008, 11:35 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 243
My initial post added nothing important to the discussion and therefore I deleted it. I do not think wins are an accurate measure of a pitcher's "value" even if taken over an entire career. I think there are many better ways to analyze a pitcher's value. Maybe wins over a career can help predict a pitcher's value if it's assumed that a good pitcher will be recognized and go to high payroll team that can produce consistent run support.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#48

Posted: March 05, 2008, 5:57 AM Post
User avatar

Brewerfan Jedi
Global Moderator
Posts: 20430
Career W totals are a nice testament to longevity... but then again, so are L totals. That's probably the simplest thing you can glean from W-L record - longevity.

Stearns Brewing Co.: Sustainability from farm to plate


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#49

Posted: March 20, 2008, 10:27 PM Post
Posts: 1011
crewcrazy said:
Judging pitchers solely on wins and losses is how Carl Pavano ends up making $10 million a year. It's fun to look at, but when Chien-Ming Wang is getting Cy Young votes just because he manages to win 18 games with like 6 runs of support every night, it gets a little ridiculous.

Wang's a poor example. In the year he finished 2nd in Cy Young voting he had a 2.17 ERA in his wins, so it wasn't that he was getting a lot of run support, it's that he was a great pitcher that year. And in fact, last year when he also got 19 wins his ERA in those wins was 2.19.

And with Carl Pavano he had come off two 200 IP seasons, and in his FA year he threw 223 IP with a 3.00 ERA with a 1.17 whip.

I think that GM's are smart enough to understand that W's and L's only tell part of the story. Have Pavano stayed healthy, you could argue that he'd have been worth 10 million a year.

Bottom line, you can't win 18+ games unless you're a good pitcher, but a good pitcher can have a poor W/L record.



 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#50

Posted: March 20, 2008, 11:58 PM Post
Posts: 10284
Tim Wakefield had 17 wins last year. And a 4.76 ERA.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?
#51

Posted: March 23, 2008, 4:29 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 5472
Wakefield pitched pretty well last year.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  [ 51 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test