Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    Zac and Bob, fair enough about the 300 win pitcher, though for me, Wins for a pitcher is still a pretty worthless stat.  If I'm going to assess the talent or value of a pitcher, Wins is the last stat I'm going to look at.

    I realize that all stats have their flaws, but they at least will give me some information about the pitcher's performance.  I agree Saves is a deeply flawed stat (don't even get me started on Holds), but even that tells me more than Wins does. 

     

     

    I'm talkin bout kids getting trophies for just showing up ;-) 

    Touche' Zac

     

     

    "Just because the new stats give more refined information is no reason to throw away the old stats. A lot of people like them and think they're fun and think they mean something. I don't see a problem. "

     

    That's the problem Bob.  Everyone knows the main goal of the new stats is to take all the fun and enjoyment out of baseball for the old schoolers.  ;-)

     



    Kimmi, what you new stats folks need to do is come up with a way of computing a pitcher's 'true W-L record' based on his stats and average run support.  Sort of the same idea as the Pythagorean W-L record for teams.  That would be fun wouldn't it? :-)

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:


    Kimmi, what you new stats folks need to do is come up with a way of computing a pitcher's 'true W-L record' based on his stats and average run support. Sort of the same idea as the Pythagorean W-L record for teams. That would be fun wouldn't it? :-)




    Bob!!!

    I did a little research, thinking the stat geeks have to have done this already, and lo and behold, they have!

    The stat is called Support Neutral Wins (SNW), which is a pitcher's expected number of wins based on league average run support.

    It's still not perfect, but better than Wins. I've been beside myself with excitement all morning. :-) It's interesting to do a quick comparison of Wins versus SNW for each pitcher.

    For instance, Cliff Lee had an ERA of 3.16, a K/BB of 207/28, and pitched 211 innings and only got 6 wins. In 5 games, he gave up 0 or 1 run and didn't get a win in any of those games. His actual # wins was 6. His expected # of wins was 14.4.

    It also tells us that the Yankees pitchers weren't as good as their W-L records. ;-)  They were helped out by their offense.

     

    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1091258

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:


    Kimmi, what you new stats folks need to do is come up with a way of computing a pitcher's 'true W-L record' based on his stats and average run support. Sort of the same idea as the Pythagorean W-L record for teams. That would be fun wouldn't it? :-)

     

     




    Bob!!!

     

    I did a little research, thinking the stat geeks have to have done this already, and lo and behold, they have!

    The stat is called Support Neutral Wins (SNW), which is a pitcher's expected number of wins based on league average run support.

    It's still not perfect, but better than Wins. I've been beside myself with excitement all morning. :-) It's interesting to do a quick comparison of Wins versus SNW for each pitcher.

    For instance, Cliff Lee had an ERA of 3.16, a K/BB of 207/28, and pitched 211 innings and only got 6 wins. In 5 games, he gave up 0 or 1 run and didn't get a win in any of those games. His actual # wins was 6. His expected # of wins was 14.4.

    It also tells us that the Yankees pitchers weren't as good as their W-L records. ;-)  They were helped out by their offense.

     

    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1091258

     



    Alright!  I'm excited too.  :-)

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:


    Kimmi, what you new stats folks need to do is come up with a way of computing a pitcher's 'true W-L record' based on his stats and average run support. Sort of the same idea as the Pythagorean W-L record for teams. That would be fun wouldn't it? :-)

     

     




    Bob!!!

     

    I did a little research, thinking the stat geeks have to have done this already, and lo and behold, they have!

    The stat is called Support Neutral Wins (SNW), which is a pitcher's expected number of wins based on league average run support.

    It's still not perfect, but better than Wins. I've been beside myself with excitement all morning. :-) It's interesting to do a quick comparison of Wins versus SNW for each pitcher.

    For instance, Cliff Lee had an ERA of 3.16, a K/BB of 207/28, and pitched 211 innings and only got 6 wins. In 5 games, he gave up 0 or 1 run and didn't get a win in any of those games. His actual # wins was 6. His expected # of wins was 14.4.

    It also tells us that the Yankees pitchers weren't as good as their W-L records. ;-)  They were helped out by their offense.

     

    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1091258

     



    How about something as simple as the SP's game-by-game ERA v the league RPG.  The NL scored 4.22.  Lee allowed less than 4.22 in 19 games, so he has a theoretical W/L of 19-11, which is exactly what I'd expect with his ERA.

    But it still way short of variance.  Once a team has a 5-0 lead, most pitchers probably refuse to walk a guy, meaning that they are going to give the hitter more to hit.  There are going to be way too many factors to predict hypothetical W/L.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    thanks 4 the read mef

    while the writer clearly supports your  point

    he also in a very small way  supported my point

    when I charged you with  going 2 far

     at least he admitted  '' Like almost any flawed statistic,

     win-loss records can be vaguely useful at the margins''


    I have only a little problem  with us disagreeing on how much value  the stat has

    but have more of a  problem with anyone calling it totally useless

    no worries i'll get over it ;-)



    FWIW worth I usually look in this order

    1) whip
    2) K/BB   
    3) W & W %
    4) inns
    5) K/9 BB/9


    this could explain my shortcomings in FB ;-)


    mef I'm thinking  we could throw any stat out there and then

    we could  find flaws with it

    many with the  same  ''team stat '' flaw



    If I were you, I'd add in FB/GB as #3.  You get away with a lot more if you can keep the ball on the ground.

    For Rotisserie, I am big on your top two categories, especially if you have an innings cap.  #5, which looks a lot like #2, is very underrated.  I am very much a K/W person, but if the K/9 slips too much, it begins difficult to sustain any success.  Kind of like Cook last year.  When those guys get behind 3-0, they are out of options.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

     


    1) whip
    2) K/BB   
    3) W & W %

    Wow Zac, we're making progress.  It was not so long ago that you ranked "Wins" #2.

    And it only took us four years to get to this point, but we both know how slow you are.  ;-)

      



    Amazing how these things evolve.  I spent 2-3 arguing with Pumpsie in Sept '11, that we'd be favored over the NYY in the playoffs because our top-3 was better than their top three, assuming Buchholz would be back.  He insisted on comparing total team ERA.  Now I find out, 1.5 years later, that he is a fan of the top-3 philosophy.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    The stat is called Support Neutral Wins (SNW), which is a pitcher's expected number of wins based on league average run support.

    my gawd!!  redsox kimmi U R amazing

    if I had a favorite stat geek

    there could be no other  but

    as far as I'm concern U R all mean people

    just trying to ruin BB debates for those of us

    who actually wach the games ;-)

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:



    If I were you, I'd add in FB/GB as #3.  You get away with a lot more if you can keep the ball on the ground.

    thanks 4 the tip JB

    makes sense especially in the stadium

    then again we have jeter at SS ;-)

     




     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    How about something as simple as the SP's game-by-game ERA v the league RPG.  The NL scored 4.22.  Lee allowed less than 4.22 in 19 games, so he has a theoretical W/L of 19-11, which is exactly what I'd expect with his ERA.


    But it still way short of variance.  Once a team has a 5-0 lead, most pitchers probably refuse to walk a guy, meaning that they are going to give the hitter more to hit.  There are going to be way too many factors to predict hypothetical W/L.




    That would work too Joe.  It would definitely be more indicative of how a pitcher pitched than W/L record.  As you said, there are going to be too many variables involved, but the more you can isolate that are out of the pitcher's control, the better. 

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:


    Amazing how these things evolve.  I spent 2-3 arguing with Pumpsie in Sept '11, that we'd be favored over the NYY in the playoffs because our top-3 was better than their top three, assuming Buchholz would be back.  He insisted on comparing total team ERA.  Now I find out, 1.5 years later, that he is a fan of the top-3 philosophy.




    I remember the debate all too well Joey.   At least he's coming around.   ;-)

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Holy **** John Lackey is skinny

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    The stat is called Support Neutral Wins (SNW), which is a pitcher's expected number of wins based on league average run support.

    my gawd!!  redsox kimmi U R amazing

    if I had a favorite stat geek

    there could be no other  but

    as far as I'm concern U R all mean people

    just trying to ruin BB debates for those of us

    who actually wach the games ;-)




    LOL Zac

    FWIW, my dad is as pig-headed and slow old school as you are when it comes to stats.

    I'm not sure if he even knows what OPS is.  LOL

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share