This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
We're finally starting to see the new wave of younger writers (voters) who realize that wins are not the be-all, end-all statistic of how well a pitcher performed.Bout time.
I'm not a baseball nut or statistics nut so this may be a dumb question, but how is ERA the least important statistic? Imo it should be wins. Greinke even had a better ERA than Hernandez, so if that's the be all end all according to Greeny why the hell did Greeny think Hernandez was more deserving.
Because ERA is less of an inclusive statistic. For example a pitcher could walk a guy then get two outs, then give up a hit and then see his 2Bman commit an error which is a subjective determination. Next guy up hits a grandslam, O ER, his WHIP however is 3 for the inning showing the true nature of what happened. If there was no error and the last batter had hit a 3 run HR then his ERA for the inning would be 27. Over the course of a season a pitcher is going to have several bad innings, but if he maintains a WHIP closer to 1 than his counterparts he will likely have more success. Relievers are notorious for blowing up in one appearance and then it takes them weeks to get it below 4. They could be 21 for 21 in hold ops and have a 5 ERA because of two mop-up innings and people will think they stink. They don't stink, they are being dragged down by two 4 run innings in 25 games and we aren't considering the 21 most important appearances. ERA also is dependant on fielders, ballpark factors, and altitude. WHIP is the better statistic and should be the baseline calculation for determining effectivness over the course of a season. OAV should be next, then K/BB, then K/9, BB/9, and then ERA. Wins are also subjective because they are dependant on the 24 other guys on the team but they also count heavily in Cy Young becuase in the end the W's are what baseball is all about. In 240 innings the difference between a 2.50 ERA and a 3.50 ERA is about 17 runs. Over 35 games .5 runs per game rarely makes a difference.
Very possible but this is an extreme circumstance. Theres no one in the world that doesn't know how bad Kansas City sucks.Michael Brown said:
I believe this happened to John Smoltz in his first full season as a closer. If memory serves right, he gave up something like 7 runs in an inning to the Mets in a non-save situation. Took him the rest of the year to get it right, and even his final numbers didn't really reflect just how dominant he was after that blow-up.ETA: It was in 2002, and he gave up 8 ER in 0.2 IP in his second appearance of the season. He entered in the 9th inning of a 2-2 tie and proceeded to get lit up. His ERA after that game was 43.20. He went on to give up 21 ER the rest of the way in his other 73 appearances to give him a 3.25 mark for the year. Aside from that one performance, his ERA was 2.37 in all other games. His WHIP for the year was 1.03 (0.94 in all other games besides the blowup).Notice his WHIP, which was outrageously good at 0.94, is still great at 1.03...however, the ERA drops from outstanding at 2.37 to middling (for a closer) at 3.25. Giving up 8 ER was far more damaging to his ERA than putting on 8 guys was to his WHIP...it's a more easily correctable category if you pitch great the rest of the way, which like you said is really the true indicator of how good a guy is.
Porcello not wining the ROY is worth #####ing about. Verlander had a great year and might have won it most years but Grienke just pulled away from the pack at the end of August. Verlander deserved 3rd, and he finished 3rd.
Wins are much worse than ERA. ERA is dependent upon fielders, Wins are dependent upon fielders and batters. WHIP should not be the baseline statistic. It does not include strikeouts or FB/GB or hit batters. And why are you looking at K/BB, K/9 and BB/9 - they are obviously not independent of one another. I guess you mean Opponents Average with OAV, which atleast is independent of the BBs and Ks, but not WHIP. There are several options out there for metrics that try to isolate the pitcher's effect on a game, removing defense, offense and ballparks as best they can - WHIP is not one of those metrics. And half a run a game over 162 games is 81 runs. The difference this year between the Phils 4th ranked in MLB and Baltimore's 16th ranked O was 79. Baltimore to SF (26th) was 84 runs. So yeah, half a run per game is highly significant.
Thanks for this.
