Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
interesting stats article
Author Message
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #1
 
<a href='http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=schwarz_alan&id=1713520' target='_blank'>http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...alan&id=1713520</a>

interesting article. I'd like Gdawgs to take a look at #7.
01-21-2004 08:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #2
 
At the end of the day, I'd take a 9-8 win over a 1-0 loss. Winning is what it's all about.
01-21-2004 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #3
 
GDawgs88 Wrote:At the end of the day, I'd take a 9-8 win over a 1-0 loss. Winning is what it's all about.
of course winning is more important. But you're missing the point. he says ERA is a better indicator of a pitcher than wins and losses.
01-21-2004 09:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #4
 
That's tough to say. ERA is an important stat, but as we all know, one game where you give up 7 or 8 runs can turn a great ERA into an only good ERA. Wins and losses are a better indication of how you pitch all year.
01-21-2004 09:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cbfranchise3 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,348
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #5
 
Great article.

If you were starting a franchise, and could have a 21-6 guy with a 5.65 ERA, or a 11-11 guy with a 1.69 ERA, who do you take? Its obvious.

Wins can determine who had a good year, but not who is the better overall pitcher. It is all ERA and WHIP.
01-21-2004 09:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tysramm1 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 576
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
 
i still would want the guy with more wins, even if he has a higher era, some pitchers just do what they have to do to win
01-21-2004 10:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

cbfranchise3 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,348
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #7
 
tysramm1 Wrote:i still would want the guy with more wins, even if he has a higher era, some pitchers just do what they have to do to win
That makes no sense. The pitchers don't do what it takes, the hitters do.
01-21-2004 10:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #8
 
cbfranchise3 Wrote:
tysramm1 Wrote:i still would want the guy with more wins, even if he has a higher era, some pitchers just do what they have to do to win
That makes no sense. The pitchers don't do what it takes, the hitters do.
i second that
01-21-2004 11:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #9
 
cbfranchise3 Wrote:If you were starting a franchise, and could have a 21-6 guy with a 5.65 ERA, or a 11-11 guy with a 1.69 ERA, who do you take? Its obvious.
You're right, it is obvious. You take the guy who went 21-6. That's the guy who's winning games, which is what counts.
01-22-2004 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tysramm1 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 576
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #10
 
era isnt always the measure, maybe the pitcher with the higher era gave up more runs in the high scoring games, but he consistently helped his team win high and low scoring games. There are some players that just help a team win, and since winning is all that matters, that is very important
01-22-2004 08:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #11
 
tysramm1 Wrote:era isnt always the measure, maybe the pitcher with the higher era gave up more runs in the high scoring games, but he consistently helped his team win high and low scoring games. There are some players that just help a team win, and since winning is all that matters, that is very important
or maybe you and Gdawgs don't recognize that he won the games because of the run support he got. it's just so totally obvious. You have no proof that he won the high and low scoring games. The fact is, if i started a franchise i'd take the guy who pitched better. Which is the guy with the low ERA. You might not know this, but when Gibson had his famous 1.12 ERA, he lost 7 games! Why? because his team couldn't score.
01-22-2004 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

jrhessey Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,386
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Cleveland
Location:

SkunkworksNCAAbbs LUG
Post: #12
 
So if you take the guy with the 5.65 (6) ERA and you score the AVG amount of runs when he pitches, 4.7 (5), how many games do you win?

The minute that pitcher doesn't get his run support, he's screwed, and there aren't too many teams that can go out and put 7+ runs on the board eveytime someone pitches... alos remember that, that ERA is usually only for around 6 innings, so you'd better hope your bullpen can hold them the last 2(home) - 3 (away) innings everytime that guys pitches too.
01-23-2004 11:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cbfranchise3 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,348
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #13
 
tysramm1 Wrote:era isnt always the measure, maybe the pitcher with the higher era gave up more runs in the high scoring games, but he consistently helped his team win high and low scoring games. There are some players that just help a team win, and since winning is all that matters, that is very important
The key word there is maybe. The fact is, if you give up less runs, you ive your team a better shot to win. The rest is up to the offense.
01-23-2004 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #14
 
Let me use Russ Ortiz as an example here...

A lot of people thought he won 21 games last year because he got great run support. That's just ignorant. In all 21 of his wins, he gave up 4 runs or less. He wasn't going out there and winning 12-11 type games. The only reason his ERA (3.81) wasn't great was because of a few bad starts.
01-23-2004 06:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #15
 
so are you saying that you'd rather have ortiz than schmidt, hudson, wood or Nomo? accorinding to your reasoning you would.
01-23-2004 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cbfranchise3 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,348
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #16
 
What if you bring up a player that went 11-11, and in all eleven losses he gave up less than 4 runs?
01-23-2004 09:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #17
 
flyingswoosh Wrote:so are you saying that you'd rather have ortiz than schmidt, hudson, wood or Nomo? accorinding to your reasoning you would.
Yeah, I would.
01-23-2004 10:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #18
 
cbfranchise3 Wrote:What if you bring up a player that went 11-11, and in all eleven losses he gave up less than 4 runs?
Well, then that guy's had some hard luck.
01-23-2004 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
flyingswoosh Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,753
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #19
 
GDawgs88 Wrote:
flyingswoosh Wrote:so are you saying that you'd rather have ortiz than schmidt, hudson, wood or Nomo?&nbsp; accorinding to your reasoning you would.
Yeah, I would.
????

Now you're just being irrational. Those guys are much better than ortiz.
01-23-2004 11:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GDawgs88 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,930
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:

Crappies
Post: #20
 
Schmidt and Hudson, maybe. But Nomo and Wood? Those guys define the word overrated.
01-24-2004 03:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.