Karma For Lackey?

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

    Karma For Lackey?

    How ironic is it for John. First of all, I again will reiterate that I never thought he would get back to his form when he was with Angels. He's been terrific all year long. But it's almost a sick joke that he somehow won 12 games last year (1.6 WHIP) with the worst earned runs allowed in the AL, and then won 14 the year before with a poor 4.40 ERA and a poor 1.4 WHIP. Now he has his best WHIP of his career I believe and he has just 7 wins to show for it. That's why I don't take into account too much the win-loss record of starting pitchers the way I might have during the 1980s/1990s. He simply is getting no offense, and he had a plethora of offense his other 2 seasons. He is not a 7-9 pitcher. This was not meant to slam Lackey either, just that he continues to have bizarro win-loss records that don't show his worth. 

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    How ironic is it for John. First of all, I again will reiterate that I never thought he would get back to his form when he was with Angels. He's been terrific all year long. But it's almost a sick joke that he somehow won 12 games last year (1.6 WHIP) with the worst earned runs allowed in the AL, and then won 14 the year before with a poor 4.40 ERA and a poor 1.4 WHIP. Now he has his best WHIP of his career I believe and he has just 7 wins to show for it. That's why I don't take into account too much the win-loss record of starting pitchers the way I might have during the 1980s/1990s. He simply is getting no offense, and he had a plethora of offense his other 2 seasons. He is not a 7-9 pitcher. This was not meant to slam Lackey either, just that he continues to have bizarro win-loss records that don't show his worth. 



    show me someone who places value in the W/L stat for a pitcher and i will show you someone who has yet to enter the 21st century.....

    by far the worst stat in the game. the type of underwear a pitcher wears during his leisure time is a more valuable stat than W/L for pitchers.

    good news though, Topps is adding WAR to the back of their baseball cards. Hopefully soon they will do away with the W/L stat on them too!

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    The W/L guys, the BA guys, ad nauseum....it's a bit sad that some people aren't able to accept change and embrace new ideas.....

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    The W/L guys, the BA guys, ad nauseum....it's a bit sad that some people aren't able to accept change and embrace new ideas.....

     



    well at least BA has some merit to it. there is absolutely none with the W/L stat.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?


    As I slammed him mercilessly his first 3 years with the Sox, I have to say that this is a SHAME!  If anybody deserves to get run support after turning things around so dramatically, Lackey would be at the top of the list.  With his stats, & quality starts, he should be one of the lead leaders in W/L with this relatively high powered offense (except when he pitches).  Douby is getting similar run support.

    Not sure I'd say Karma? As that implies having bad things happen after screwing others (IMO). 

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    Karma in the sense that he was often showing a poor attitude on the hill and was linked to the chickengate scandal, things like that...maybe it's more bad luck after too much good luck.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to mef429's comment:

    well at least BA has some merit to it. there is absolutely none with the W/L stat.

     

    I think you guys are going to far the other way

    IMO W&L stats still have merit

    agreed no where near as much as we once thought

    but they still have merit

    when a guy wins 20 or 300 games it tells me something

    aren't all stats flawed

    era and whip are effected by run support too

    not only do pitchers pitch to the scoreboard

    managers manage to the scoreboard

    which effects whether they pull that pitcher sooner

    or leave him in to give up a few runs to get out of an inning

    how good that reliever does also effects era

     

     

    but you might be right about

     

    yet to enter the 21st century..... ;-)

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    The Red Sox are in first place,and John Lackey is pitching like the pitcher they paid for, so who cares about his won/loss record?  Boo Hoo.

    Good karma for the Red Sox though.  They seem to have made peace with and placated the Baseball Gods after praying to the Golden Chicken and Amber Beer Idols.  

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    The W/L guys, the BA guys, ad nauseum....it's a bit sad that some people aren't able to accept change and embrace new ideas.....

     



    What is sad that you just equated Batting average with W/l record.

    The guys that hit 300 are better hitters than the guys that hit 200.

    There is no argument about this. At all.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

     

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    The W/L guys, the BA guys, ad nauseum....it's a bit sad that some people aren't able to accept change and embrace new ideas.....

     

     



    Really? So one cannot look at wins and then look at era and some other stats to judge how good a pitcher can be? So w's offer nothing? Yeah okay Mr. Modern.

     

     




     

    I'd say W-L records might be able to tell you something, but it's a lot less than many people think. Sure, the odds are a guy with a 22-4 record probably had a pretty good season, but the guy with a 13-12 record might have been even better (see King Felix in 2010)...so what do their win totals really tell you? When taking into account the big picture of all of a pitcher's stats, W-L as a judge of performance becomes virtually meaningless.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    W-L means something over an extended period of time, as the vagaries of run support, bullpen support etc. tend to even out over the years.  It doesn't have much use over a short time frame, or even a few years. 

     

    It also had more meaning many years ago, when pitchers tended to either finish what they started or at the very least routinely pitch far deeper into games than they do now.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    But got to look at some of his last many losses, he had to face against opponent's best team pitcher such as Kuroda of Yankees, Tilman of Orioles, Weaver of Angels, etc as well seven of his losses are on the road.

    Dont think it have to do with bad karma.  He just cant win games on the road!!

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    Agree with above Poster, how can you put W-L record for Pitcher to Batting Average to Hitter? BA also has a lot of merit to it.

    As great as Nolan Ryan was, his career record is not that much above .500. 324 wins 292 losses.

    One of those years for Lackey, just tough breaks. Also with Pitch counts the Starters in todays Baseball has to leave it up to another Pitcher or Pitchers to finish games.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    Luck of the draw.  If you go up against a pretty good starter, your own chances of winning are lessened.  They Sox have a pretty good offense this year, but the Monday night loss to the lowly Astros showed once again that good pitching will beat good hitting.

    One of the Globe writers did a piece on how bad the Sox defense was in that game--six SB's by Houston, the suicide squeeze, etc.  But in fact none of the steals hurt because Lackey usually countered with a K or two when needed.  He was charged with the second run but Tazawa was on the mound for the suicide squeeze. 

    Lackey sprained his ankle fielding a bunt, but kept pitching, apparently with some discomfort.  The Astros aren't a good hitting team, but that's relative.  On a given night, they can score, and they do use the bunt effectively. 

    All in all, Lackey is looking pretty good even though he too can have bad games. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from illinoisredsox. Show illinoisredsox's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    The post about Ryan reminded me that none other than Cy Young holds the record for most career losses with 316.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    Karma in the sense that he was often showing a poor attitude on the hill and was linked to the chickengate scandal, things like that...maybe it's more bad luck after too much good luck.



    The problem I have with this theory is that you say he had a poor attitude on the hill, thus the karma. He was pitching with a fried elbow and should have elbow surgery back then. So why is it hard to think that the poor attitude was because of pitching through pain and struggling. And beyond that, shouldn't he get some credit in the karma department for pitching hurt like he did.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to 37stories' comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    The W/L guys, the BA guys, ad nauseum....it's a bit sad that some people aren't able to accept change and embrace new ideas.....

     

     



    What is sad that you just equated Batting average with W/l record.

     

    The guys that hit 300 are better hitters than the guys that hit 200.

    There is no argument about this. At all.



    Maybe technically, but what if the guy hitting .300 has half his hits as bloopers and broken bat hits and hardly ever walks, while the guy hitting .200 has 50 Hrs in 500 PAs and 125 BBs giving him a .450 OBP?

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    In response to royf19's comment:

    In response to dannycater's comment:

     

    Karma in the sense that he was often showing a poor attitude on the hill and was linked to the chickengate scandal, things like that...maybe it's more bad luck after too much good luck.

     



    The problem I have with this theory is that you say he had a poor attitude on the hill, thus the karma. He was pitching with a fried elbow and should have elbow surgery back then. So why is it hard to think that the poor attitude was because of pitching through pain and struggling. And beyond that, shouldn't he get some credit in the karma department for pitching hurt like he did.

     



    No, he was paid 82 million to step in and pitch well, so no.

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

    Re: Karma For Lackey?

    If I'm damaged goods like Crawford and Lackey, I don't get a complete free pass for being damaged goods...

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share