Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Matt Harvey

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
    I see what your saying here, and I know your a big sabermetrics guy...as most of are, but I don't think its good when wins/losses get discounted.

    If players were robots then maybe you could, but they aren't. There is something to the fact that pitchers at times can and will pitch to the score. This may hurt their sabermetric stats but still get the win.

    Now I am not saying we should be excited because Harvey didn't get a loss, and my point really isn't applicable in the game Harvey pitched today, but I just wanted to comment on your "pitcher win/loss records" line.

    Despite wins/losses getting discounted by most saber guys I don't fully agree. There is still something about a pitcher getting wins that means something.
    Wins are indicative of great pitching over time. It's a 100% correlation with no exceptions. Every 20-win pitcher had a year that ranged from very good to excellent. Every 300 win pitcher was a great one. Every 200 win pitcher was a fine major leaguer with a very productive career (and some were great).
    Cleon Jones catches a deep fly ball in F. Scott Fitzgerald's Valley of the Ashes, and a second-grader smiles in front of the black and white television.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
      There is something to the fact that pitchers at times can and will pitch to the score.
      Evidence to back up this statement.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by filihok View Post
        Evidence to back up this statement.
        Not evidence so much as hearsay, but that was one of the main defenses I heard of Jack Morris when the MLB Network crew debated (and debated...and debated...and debated) his candidacy for the Hall of Fame, that Morris pitched to the score.

        Granted that was before my time and the only game I've seen him pitch is the 1991 World Series Game 7 epic on DVD (though that'd admittedly seem to be one of the choice games to watch if you were to choose...a 10-inning shutout in Game 7 of the World Series, can't do much better than that) but still.
        "Ya Gotta Believe!" -Tug McGraw ... "How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life." -James T. Kirk ... "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." -Sherlock Holmes ... "It is out of the deepest depth that the highest must come to its height." -Friedrich Nietzsche ... "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet

        Comment


        • As a general rule, in close games, pitchers do change their approaches compared to blowouts. Pitchers usually pitch away from batters more in close games. This leads to more walks (higher OB%), but fewer XBH (lower slugg%). Overall, pitchers tend to pitch slightly better in close games than blowouts, but the affects of limiting HRs is mostly counteracted by more baserunners. Very few pitchers are enough better at pitching in close games to distance themselves from everybody else - esp. without a large sample size of data to look at.

          Now when I look at some guys like Palmer or Glavine, etc. who clearly pitched differently/better in close games than guys like Sutton and Ryan who clearly pitched differently/ better in blowouts, I will concede, that despite sample size, some pitchers can affect career numbers by pitching differently in close games to some degree. I do think these are the exceptions that prove the rule, and there aren't many like them. And even if there are, it is not a huge factor that will skew many pitcher's stats at a career level much at all.

          There is certainly nothing whatsoever in Harvey's short history to suggest he has this ability.

          As far as Morris - his tOPS in pitching situations 4 runs or closer is almost exactly the same (100) as his tOPS in situations greater than 4 runs (101). If that guys exists, it sure isn't Morris.
          1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

          1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

          1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


          The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
          The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Strawman View Post
            Wins are indicative of great pitching over time. It's a 100% correlation with no exceptions. Every 20-win pitcher had a year that ranged from very good to excellent.
            How about Lew Burdette in 1959? 21-15 with an ERA of 4.07 and a ERA+ of 86.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ipitch View Post
              How about Lew Burdette in 1959? 21-15 with an ERA of 4.07 and a ERA+ of 86.
              Put him in any rotation in baseball immediately.
              Cleon Jones catches a deep fly ball in F. Scott Fitzgerald's Valley of the Ashes, and a second-grader smiles in front of the black and white television.

              Comment


              • "He pitches to the score" just might be the worst baseball cliche ever. And there are A LOT of bad baseball cliches.
                My top 10 players:

                1. Babe Ruth
                2. Barry Bonds
                3. Ty Cobb
                4. Ted Williams
                5. Willie Mays
                6. Alex Rodriguez
                7. Hank Aaron
                8. Honus Wagner
                9. Lou Gehrig
                10. Mickey Mantle

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Strawman View Post
                  Put him in any rotation in baseball immediately.
                  Was his season "very good to excellent" like you said? It's looks below average to me.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ipitch View Post
                    was his season "very good to excellent" like you said? It's looks below average to me.
                    but he won 20 GAMEZZ!!!1
                    My top 10 players:

                    1. Babe Ruth
                    2. Barry Bonds
                    3. Ty Cobb
                    4. Ted Williams
                    5. Willie Mays
                    6. Alex Rodriguez
                    7. Hank Aaron
                    8. Honus Wagner
                    9. Lou Gehrig
                    10. Mickey Mantle

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ipitch View Post
                      Was his season "very good to excellent" like you said? It's looks below average to me.
                      Yeah he probably doesn't start the All Star game, but yeah it's a good year. Got any more examples?

                      How about 200-game winners - any who really blow?
                      Cleon Jones catches a deep fly ball in F. Scott Fitzgerald's Valley of the Ashes, and a second-grader smiles in front of the black and white television.

                      Comment


                      • ERA+ and wins have a .6-.7 correlation. Not terrible at all. The issue is, run support and wins correlates at around .5. So wins without much more information should never be enough to put all of one's assumption eggs into one's player-evaluation basket.

                        But before we go any further - is there anybody here who would say that there is zero correlation between quality pitching and wins?

                        Didn't think so - moving on. Of course people who win 200 games are guaranteed to not "blow" guys who "blow" do not stay in the majors long enough to accumulate enough starts to win 200 games. It is just that we have other information that is better and influenced less by outside forces.

                        Nobody is saying Wins have no predictive or evaluative value. if they do - it is hyperbole. Given no other information, nobody would bet money that a 5-15 pitcher was better one season than a pitcher who was 15-5, even though it does happen sometimes. Speaking of strawman...
                        Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 05-23-2013, 10:08 AM.
                        1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                        1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                        1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                        The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                        The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Matthew C. View Post
                          ERA+ and wins have a .6-.7 correlation. Not terrible at all. The issue is, run support and wins correlates at around .5. So wins without much more information should never be enough to put all of one's assumption eggs into one's player-evaluation basket.

                          But before we go any further - is there anybody here who would say that there is zero correlation between quality pitching and wins?

                          Didn't think so - moving on. Of course people who win 200 games are guaranteed to not "blow" guys who "blow" do not stay in the majors long enough to accumulate enough starts to win 200 games. It is just that we have other information that is better and influenced less by outside forces.

                          Nobody is saying Wins have no predictive or evaluative value. Speaking of strawman...
                          I'm saying that wins - over the long term - have the highest correlation of any pitching stat in the game. Wins and losses are the gold standard for a pitcher's career. Even a hair better than ERA and WHIP, in my view.

                          Now short term, sure - wins can be way off, very misleading. We've all seen 5-0 pitchers we know aren't all that great. (Mets have had their share).
                          Cleon Jones catches a deep fly ball in F. Scott Fitzgerald's Valley of the Ashes, and a second-grader smiles in front of the black and white television.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Strawman View Post
                            Yeah he probably doesn't start the All Star game, but yeah it's a good year. Got any more examples?

                            How about 200-game winners - any who really blow?
                            The same question can be asked for 200-game losers. Or hitters who've made 8,000 outs, etc..
                            My top 10 players:

                            1. Babe Ruth
                            2. Barry Bonds
                            3. Ty Cobb
                            4. Ted Williams
                            5. Willie Mays
                            6. Alex Rodriguez
                            7. Hank Aaron
                            8. Honus Wagner
                            9. Lou Gehrig
                            10. Mickey Mantle

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Strawman View Post
                              Yeah he probably doesn't start the All Star game, but yeah it's a good year. Got any more examples?
                              So, basically you're saying 21-15 is good no matter what. What if his ERA was the same but his run support was terrible, and his record was 7-29? Do you send him down to the minors? Or, his run support was outstanding and his record was 33-3? Give him the Cy Young?

                              The fact that a pitcher with a 13-12 record won the Cy Young over a pitcher with a 21-7 record in 2010 shows you what people think of wins and losses these days.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                                Evidence to back up this statement.
                                Originally posted by Shea Knight View Post
                                Not evidence so much as hearsay, but that was one of the main defenses I heard of Jack Morris when the MLB Network crew debated (and debated...and debated...and debated) his candidacy for the Hall of Fame, that Morris pitched to the score.

                                Granted that was before my time and the only game I've seen him pitch is the 1991 World Series Game 7 epic on DVD (though that'd admittedly seem to be one of the choice games to watch if you were to choose...a 10-inning shutout in Game 7 of the World Series, can't do much better than that) but still.
                                You must be kidding? Do you watch games or just look at baseballreference.com?

                                If a pitcher is up big and falls behind some batters dont you think he is more likely to throw the hitter a cookie instead of walking him? These pitches may get smoked and hurt the pitchers stats, but he is still up big.

                                I am all for stats....in fact I love the stats especially the saber stats, but what many fail to remember is that human beings are on the field and although we can expect a certain stat line in a given year from players they can vary based upon game score, game conditions amongst a thousand other factors.

                                I am not sure if you ever played ball before but if you did you would know what I mean.

                                When you go to work do you perform the same everyday? Dont you have better days and worse days? Dont somethings in your personal have a positive or negative effect on your work day?

                                The game is not a computer program as much as some would like it to be.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X