Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Matt Harvey

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

  • Originally posted by filihok View Post
    Did he get out-pitched or did The Cardinals out hit the Mets? I think that those are two different things.

    Batted Ball FIP, which estimates the expected number of runs scored based on K's, BB's and batted balls, says that:
    Adam Wainwright would be expected to give up 2.94 runs per 9 innings pitching as he did today. It says that Harvey would be expected to give up .5 runs per 9 innings pitching as he did today. Plenty of evidence that Harvey out-pitched Wainwright, but will still take the loss.
    Fair enough...I was just saying "outpitched" on a simplistic level (i.e. Harvey gave up a run and Wainwright didn't).
    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 GiambiJuice View Post
      Fair enough...I was just saying "outpitched" on a simplistic level (i.e. Harvey gave up a run and Wainwright didn't).
      Harvey was out pitched. Wainwright gave up zero runs. Hard to outpitch someone when they shut you out.

      Saying the Mets were out hit is like saying the sun is coming up tomorrow.

      Either way its a loss.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by filihok View Post
        Did he get out-pitched or did The Cardinals out hit the Mets? I think that those are two different things.

        Batted Ball FIP, which estimates the expected number of runs scored based on K's, BB's and batted balls, says that:
        Adam Wainwright would be expected to give up 2.94 runs per 9 innings pitching as he did today. It says that Harvey would be expected to give up .5 runs per 9 innings pitching as he did today. Plenty of evidence that Harvey out-pitched Wainwright, but will still take the loss.
        Yeah that other key statistical barometer MOE* shows that it was dead on accurate - Wainwright was better than Harvey today by a run.

        * My Own Eyes
        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 that other key statistical barometer MOE* shows that it was dead on accurate - Wainwright was better than Harvey today by a run.

          * My Own Eyes
          The Cardinals may have been a run better than the Mets but Harvey had more K's, less walks, more ground balls, less outfield fly balls, more infield fly balls, and less line drives against a better line up than Wainwright did.

          I don't see how Wainwright pitched better.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by filihok View Post
            The Cardinals may have been a run better than the Mets but Harvey had more K's, less walks, more ground balls, less outfield fly balls, more infield fly balls, and less line drives against a better line up than Wainwright did.

            I don't see how Wainwright pitched better.
            0 < 1

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
              0 < 1
              Thanks.

              Matt Harvey and Adam Wainwright were the only two players responsible for those number are they?

              Measuring things that the pitchers are most responsible for, Harvey was slightly better than Wainwright

              Comment


              • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                Thanks.

                Matt Harvey and Adam Wainwright were the only two players responsible for those number are they?

                Measuring things that the pitchers are most responsible for, Harvey was slightly better than Wainwright
                I understand what your saying, but man o' man do I wish Wainwright slightly outpitched Harvey and the Mets win.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                  The Cardinals may have been a run better than the Mets but Harvey had more K's, less walks, more ground balls, less outfield fly balls, more infield fly balls, and less line drives against a better line up than Wainwright did.

                  I don't see how Wainwright pitched better.
                  Did somebody pitch a shut out? Shutouts can't be beat. As Lombardi said "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing".

                  By the way, I may have missed this stat......did you ever play competitive sports, even at a HS or College intramural level? Or higher? Just asking.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by mandrake View Post
                    Did somebody pitch a shut out?
                    No.

                    Who would you say pitched better?
                    Justin Verlander going 9 innings giving up 9 hits, 1 run, 3 walks and 9 K's against the Baseball-Fever All-Stars with the AL Gold Glover winners playing defense behind him
                    or
                    CC Sabathia going 9 innings giving up 9 hits, 1 runs, 3 walks and 9 K's against the NL All-Stars with another group of Baseball-Fever All-Stars playing defense behind him?

                    As noted above, Harvey and Wainwright weren't the only players responsible for the final score in that game. So, simply saying that Wainwright was better than Harvey because the Cardinals beat the Mets doesn't really make any sense.
                    Last edited by filihok; 06-13-2013, 05:01 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                      The Cardinals may have been a run better than the Mets but Harvey had more K's, less walks, more ground balls, less outfield fly balls, more infield fly balls, and less line drives against a better line up than Wainwright did.

                      I don't see how Wainwright pitched better.
                      It doesn't really matter, does it? Whether Harvey out pitched Wainwright or the other way around. It just doesn't matter. Whether you measure MOEs or the BB Flip per 9 innings.

                      Pfft.

                      All that matters today is that the Mets lost, and the Cards won.

                      Some much effort is put into finding a new-fangled stat to show who is the best and who is better than another or the best. Getting to the point where you guys are running out of acronyms for all of your different formulas. How long before someone finds a way to measure the percentage of line drives that were fractions of an inch from being a fly ball or a ground out or vice versa. I mean, you talk about walks and K's but other websites will show how many of the balls should have been strikes if the ump was calling by the correct strike zone and next thing you'll be telling me that if the ump had called the true strike zone then the pitcher would have had 1.2 more K's per 9 and .67 fewer walks per 9, which undoubtedly will prompt some quick-minded statistical major to develop the eBatted Ball FIP or the aBatted Ball FIP.

                      Ever think maybe there is no "true" "estimated" or "adjusted" statistical measure of the game of baseball?

                      Maybe?
                      Last edited by EasilyFound; 06-13-2013, 08:26 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by EasilyFound View Post
                        It doesn't really matter, does it? Whether Harvey out pitched Wainwright or the other way around. It just doesn't matter. Whether you measure MOEs or the BB Flip per 9 innings.

                        Pfft.

                        All that matters today is that the Mets lost, and the Cards won.
                        AMEN !!!!! ALL that matters is win or losses.

                        "Statistics are for losers” 1960 credited to University of Tennessee football coach Robert Neyland (1892-1962).

                        "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. " Mark Twain

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by mandrake View Post
                          AMEN !!!!! ALL that matters is win or losses.

                          "Statistics are for losers” 1960 credited to University of Tennessee football coach Robert Neyland (1892-1962).

                          "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. " Mark Twain
                          Aren't Wins and Losses statistics? And are they not subject to the same contextual issues that warranted those famous quotes?
                          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 EasilyFound View Post
                            Some much effort is put into finding a new-fangled stat to show who is the best and who is better than another or the best. Getting to the point where you guys are running out of acronyms for all of your different formulas. How long before someone finds a way to measure the percentage of line drives that were fractions of an inch from being a fly ball or a ground out or vice versa.
                            Sabermetricaly speaking, this is a good point. Much of game-to-game pitcher LD rate is nothing more than random fluctuation. So using in-game LD rate to judge a pitcher is not very sabermetricaly at all.
                            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 EasilyFound View Post
                              It doesn't really matter, does it?
                              In the grand scheme of things baseball doesn't really matter, does it?

                              To most people baseball doesn't matter at all.
                              On a website geared towards people who want to discuss baseball, baseball probably matters more.
                              To some people whether or not the Mets won may matter.
                              To other people it may matter which pitcher pitched better.

                              It doesn't matter to me
                              But I do find it interesting

                              Ever think maybe there is no "true" "estimated" or "adjusted" statistical measure of the game of baseball?

                              Maybe?
                              No. Because there absolutely is.


                              Originally posted by mandrake View Post
                              AMEN !!!!! ALL that matters is win or losses.
                              You don't even believe that.
                              I'd be willing to wager that you discuss individual players: compare them, consider how much they contribute to helping a team to win. You probably even use (gasp) statistics to do so.

                              "Statistics are for losers” 1960 credited to University of Tennessee football coach Robert Neyland (1892-1962).

                              "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. " Mark Twain
                              A witty saying proves nothing - Voltaire
                              Last edited by filihok; 06-13-2013, 11:14 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Matthew C. View Post
                                Originally posted by EasilyFound View Post
                                Some much effort is put into finding a new-fangled stat to show who is the best and who is better than another or the best. Getting to the point where you guys are running out of acronyms for all of your different formulas. How long before someone finds a way to measure the percentage of line drives that were fractions of an inch from being a fly ball or a ground out or vice versa. I mean, you talk about walks and K's but other websites will show how many of the balls should have been strikes if the ump was calling by the correct strike zone and next thing you'll be telling me that if the ump had called the true strike zone then the pitcher would have had 1.2 more K's per 9 and .67 fewer walks per 9, which undoubtedly will prompt some quick-minded statistical major to develop the eBatted Ball FIP or the aBatted Ball FIP.
                                Sabermetricaly speaking, this is a good point. Much of game-to-game pitcher LD rate is nothing more than random fluctuation. So using in-game LD rate to judge a pitcher is not very sabermetricaly at all.
                                Hit f/x is basically what EF described.


                                I also recently posted this, which is in a similar vein.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X