Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

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

    Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    Sox are last in the league in saves, but first in wins.  I guess it's just a result of walk off wins and larger winning margins.   Still seems like it would be a rare occurrence.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    very interesting.  i think you are dead on regarding blowouts and walk-offs.

    also:  rash of blown saves early season.

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    That is an interesting stat. But of the their 79 wins, 37 have been by at least four runs. Add 11 walk-off wins, and that's at least 48 that were non-save situations. And, as Slasher pointed out, Hanrahan and Bailey blew some saves early.

     

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to LloydDobler's comment:

    That is an interesting stat. But of the their 79 wins, 37 have been by at least four runs. Add 11 walk-off wins, and that's at least 48 that were non-save situations. And, as Slasher pointed out, Hanrahan and Bailey blew some saves early.

     



    This isn't entirely true.  Winning by 4 runs doesn't mean it wasn't a save situation for two reasons.  1. Up by more than 3 with tying run on deck when reliever comes in. 2. Reliever pitches more than one inning and it was a save situation when he came in.

    Blown saves isn't really all that relevant either when comparing team wins and saves.  Whether there was a blown save or not, if you win a game by 3 or less there are four possibilities. Walk off, winning pitcher finished the game, reliever came in to a non save situation and gave up runs but finished game or someone got a save.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    Where do we place in save %?

    Saves/Save opportunities

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Where do we place in save %?

    Saves/Save opportunities

    Sox4ever



    Moon, they are second to last, but please tell me you don't put any stock in this number.  This is a big stats pet peeve of mine because it ignores holds.  For example, you hear about Uehara being 14/17 in save opportunities, but he also has 13 holds.  One of his blown saves came before he was closer in a game that he never was going to get a save, he would have gotten a hold.

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    The Save has always been a meaningless stat.

    Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and John Franco have combined for 6 postseason saves. Yet they are 2,3, and 4 all time in career saves.

    So, as you might guess, teams they played for seldom were in the postseason.

    The only thing stats such as Saves, Holds, and Quality Starts have done for baseball is increase the pitchers bargaining power at contract time.

    Winning ptg. and ERA are still what really tells me that you can get guys out consistently.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Where do we place in save %?

    Saves/Save opportunities

    Sox4ever

     



    Moon, they are second to last, but please tell me you don't put any stock in this number.  This is a big stats pet peeve of mine because it ignores holds.  For example, you hear about Uehara being 14/17 in save opportunities, but he also has 13 holds.  One of his blown saves came before he was closer in a game that he never was going to get a save, he would have gotten a hold.

    [/QUOTE]


    Another example, Tazawa leads the sox in blown saves with 7 with 0 saves.  So he's 0/7 in save opportunities, does that seem right to you?

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    The Save has always been a meaningless stat.

    Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and John Franco have combined for 6 postseason saves. Yet they are 2,3, and 4 al time in career saves.

    So, as you might guess, teams they played for seldom were in the postseason.

    The only thing stats such as Saves, Holds, and Quality Starts have done for baseball is increase the pitchers bargaining power at contract time.

    Winning ptg. and ERA are still what really tells me that you can get guys out consistently.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells


    Clearly being a closer is not an easy thing, so Saving a game is an important Stat, it is just the rules for what is a Save that is silly.....coming in with a 3 run lead in the ninth, it is not a difficult Save situation and one where most closers will seal the deal....coming in with a one run lead or with the tying runs on base is where the pressure seperates the Boys from the ClOSERS...lets keep the Stat and just figure out a better measure.

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to tomnev's comment:

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

    The Save has always been a meaningless stat.

    Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and John Franco have combined for 6 postseason saves. Yet they are 2,3, and 4 al time in career saves.

    So, as you might guess, teams they played for seldom were in the postseason.

    The only thing stats such as Saves, Holds, and Quality Starts have done for baseball is increase the pitchers bargaining power at contract time.

    Winning ptg. and ERA are still what really tells me that you can get guys out consistently.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     


    Clearly being a closer is not an easy thing, so Saving a game is an important Stat, it is just the rules for what is a Save that is silly.....coming in with a 3 run lead in the ninth, it is not a difficult Save situation and one where most closers will seal the deal....coming in with a one run lead or with the tying runs on base is where the pressure seperates the Boys from the ClOSERS...lets keep the Stat and just figure out a better measure.

     



    What role in any of the pro sports is "easy?"

    NFL punter?...backup goalie NHL?...

    ...I am not one of those that includes the role of "closer" as an extremely tough job....by the same token, I don't say it's "easy" either.

    Surely , if any one of us could throw a 97 MPH fastball for strikes we'd prefer this job to what we do now...am I wrong?...work, maybe 3-4 times on a good week,  1 inning at a time.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxDOrtiz. Show RedSoxDOrtiz's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    I think it just shows how much bullpen turmoil this team overcame.  We had an excess of excellent bullpen arms to start the year without a reliable closer until Koji took over.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Where do we place in save %?

    Saves/Save opportunities

    Sox4ever

     



    Moon, they are second to last, but please tell me you don't put any stock in this number.  This is a big stats pet peeve of mine because it ignores holds.  For example, you hear about Uehara being 14/17 in save opportunities, but he also has 13 holds.  One of his blown saves came before he was closer in a game that he never was going to get a save, he would have gotten a hold.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, save% is not a stat I hold in esteem; I was just curious.

    Besides, Hanrahan is not part of this team anymore and Aceves won't be either. Uehara is one of the best closers in baseball since he became one.

    I'm not worried about saves anymore than I was when papelbon was in his prime.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from one-for-the-road. Show one-for-the-road's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    The Save has always been a meaningless stat.

    Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and John Franco have combined for 6 postseason saves. Yet they are 2,3, and 4 all time in career saves.

    So, as you might guess, teams they played for seldom were in the postseason.

    The only thing stats such as Saves, Holds, and Quality Starts have done for baseball is increase the pitchers bargaining power at contract time.

    Winning ptg. and ERA are still what really tells me that you can get guys out consistently.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells



    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?

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

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:

    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?




    I'd have to give andy the edge

    seein how andy, a ground ball pitcher, had the worst SS ever and maddux didn't

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

    This isn't entirely true.  Winning by 4 runs doesn't mean it wasn't a save situation for two reasons.  1. Up by more than 3 with tying run on deck when reliever comes in. 2. Reliever pitches more than one inning and it was a save situation when he came in.

    Blown saves isn't really all that relevant either when comparing team wins and saves.  Whether there was a blown save or not, if you win a game by 3 or less there are four possibilities. Walk off, winning pitcher finished the game, reliever came in to a non save situation and gave up runs but finished game or someone got a save.




    I didn't mean it to be a definitive answer, just an indication.

    Also good point on Tazawa. That he is charged with a blown save when he wouldn't have come back for the 9th is misleading.

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from one-for-the-road. Show one-for-the-road's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?

     




     

    I'd have to give andy the edge

    seein how andy, a ground ball pitcher, had the worst SS ever and maddux didn't

    [/QUOTE]


    Andy better than Greg M? ok, you are not being serious

    maybe the fact that AL is harder than the NL, but I still dont see it

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenwellforpresident. Show greenwellforpresident's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?


     I'd have to give andy the edge

    seein how andy, a ground ball pitcher, had the worst SS ever and maddux didn't

    [/QUOTE]
    Andy better than Greg M? ok, you are not being serious

    maybe the fact that AL is harder than the NL, but I still dont see it

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm pretty sure he's not serious.  Just making a joke in reference to the previous posts on Jeter's defense, a pretty good joke in my opinion.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?

     




     

    I'd have to give andy the edge

    seein how andy, a ground ball pitcher, had the worst SS ever and maddux didn't

    [/QUOTE]

    so true ....

     

     

    hehe

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    Saves and wins as a stat assigned to pitchers have limited value. Pitchers are the one position that get more credit and more blame than they deserve. Wins and losses really belong to teams, not individual pitchers. While some superior pitchers have a great deal to do with the outcome of the game, they are the exception rather than the rule.





    "Hold it fellows, that don't move me. Let's get real, real gone for a change."

    -Elvis Presley

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Interesting pitching stat, but does it mean anything?

    In response to one-for-the-road's comment:

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

    The Save has always been a meaningless stat.

    Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and John Franco have combined for 6 postseason saves. Yet they are 2,3, and 4 all time in career saves.

    So, as you might guess, teams they played for seldom were in the postseason.

    The only thing stats such as Saves, Holds, and Quality Starts have done for baseball is increase the pitchers bargaining power at contract time.

    Winning ptg. and ERA are still what really tells me that you can get guys out consistently.

    "Advertising is legalized lying."- H.G.Wells

     



    winning percentage? so that would mean Lackey sucks...

     

    that is as meaningless as saves%

    era ok, whip ok, etc winning % not ok! Maddux has about the same winning % than Pettite, would you say they were (are) equally good?




    John Lackey has maintained a decent winning percentage throughout most of his career....and his ERA has always been pretty good.

    You must look at the big picture, not the small sample size of 2013. A year in which he maintained a good ERA , but hasn't had run support. Lackey has a lifetime ERA of 4.03 and a lifetime winning percentage of .564 , both more than acceptable for a #3 starter.

    Pettite and Maddux are both good pitchers, comparing stats of these two is irrelavent to my point. If you compared Pedro Martinez to say, Jeff Weaver or some other much less successful pitcher my point would be more relevant to you.

     

Share