Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Matt Harvey

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

  • Strawman
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • ipitch
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shea Knight
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Strawman
    replied
    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).

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by filihok View Post
    Yay! Pitcher win/loss records!

    Matt Harvey is still perfect, even though he's not.

    Matt Harvey's 'pitching stats' get a boost because his team got some some hits.
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by Shea Knight View Post
    Not his best, but still, no loss, as it's 4-4 now, so he remains unbeaten.
    Yay! Pitcher win/loss records!

    Matt Harvey is still perfect, even though he's not.

    Matt Harvey's 'pitching stats' get a boost because his team got some some hits.
    Last edited by filihok; 05-22-2013, 12:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    The Red are a very good hitting team and they lit up Harvey pretty good today. 9 hits and 3 BB in 6.1 IP. Not a good performance at home.
    Well all things even out in baseball over time. He wasnt going to pitch to 1.50 ERA all year. He isnt going to pitch to a 2.00 ERA all year either. The Reds can hit so giving up 4 isnt a disgrace to that team.

    I guess some fans can take the next 4 days off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shea Knight
    replied
    Not his best, but still, no loss, as it's 4-4 now, so he remains unbeaten.

    And 6.1 with 6 K's isn't bad...4 runs is a problem, but that's the first time that's happened, after all.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Argh...

    ...er...sigh....

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    The Red are a very good hitting team and they lit up Harvey pretty good today. 9 hits and 3 BB in 6.1 IP. Not a good performance at home.
    Batted Ball FIP, which attempts to strip away the affects of luck, defense, park, etc, says that Harvey's pitching today was indicative of a pitcher who gives up about 4.7 runs per 9 innings.

    Prior to this game, BBFIP had him giving up an expected 1.7 runs per 9 innings.

    So, yeah, this wasn't his best performance.

    Leave a comment:


  • GiambiJuice
    replied
    Originally posted by ipitch View Post
    Has anyone noticed that he still hasn't faced a good hitting team yet?

    SDP - 12th in the NL (ranked by OPS)
    PHI - 13th in the NL
    MIN - 14th in the AL
    WASH - 14th in the NL
    LAD - 10th in the NL
    MIA - 15th in the NL
    CHI - 15th in the AL
    The Red are a very good hitting team and they lit up Harvey pretty good today. 9 hits and 3 BB in 6.1 IP. Not a good performance at home.

    Leave a comment:


  • GiambiJuice
    replied
    Today should be fun. Harvey faces the Reds and Mat Latos, who is having an excellent season in his own right (4-0, 2.91).

    The Reds have a good offense, they're 2nd in the NL in scoring. Votto and Choo are the two most difficult NL players for pitchers to retire so far in 2013.

    Hopefully Harvey is up to the task.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by rjsallstars View Post
    Good days. We should enjoy Harveys dominance for as long as we can. Seaver was the #1 reason for a big walkup crowd. I still remember going up to the ticket window and my father asking the guy at the ticket window for two good seats I have my kid with me. The ticket guy would look through his stack of tickets and pick out two good ones. No computer spitting out the best available. As bad as this team is we may get to witness a player have one of the best individual seasons in Met history. If a lifelong Met fan cannot enjoy that than why ever bother watching?
    Did anyone say don't enjoy watching?

    The point was its a shame that one player is all that is actually worth watching and it will only happen on 30 days of the season.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X