All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Wins and Losses
12/5/2012 11:14 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2012 1:49:00 AM (view original):
You can't tell people to kill themselves and then expect them to remember/care about anything else you said.  You and bad_luck can yell and scream all day that wins and losses don't give any indication of pitching performance, and I'm guessing that means you've never pitched.  Stat guys - and I'm pretty much of a stat guy - tend to work off the belief that every plate appearance can basically be taken in a vacuum and the same statistical probabilities of events should exist.  This just isn't true.  You and bl constantly ignore or insult the people who have repeatedly mentioned that certain elite pitchers are capable of throttling back when their teams put together decent leads, at which point 6 innings of 3 or 4-run ball might be more valuable than 4 innings of shutout ball.  Nevertheless, this is an absolute fact, and can, in fact, be statistically proven.  You say pitching performance consists 100% of preventing runs.  To an extent this is true, but only to the extent to which it maintains a lead or at least an opportunity to win a game.  Let's go right back to the example I alluded to but didn't specifically outline above.  Say your team scores 6 runs in the bottom of the third.  Now all of a sudden it's better for your team if your starting pitcher finishes the game and gives up 4 runs, saving your entire bullpen, than if he gives up no runs but only gets through the 6th or 7th inning.  So now pitching performance isn't just about preventing runs, it's also about eating innings and saving your own and your teammates' arms.  You can pretend Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee and CC Sabathia don't pitch to contact more when they have a 4+ run lead, but statistically it's true.  If you don't believe me, you can work through their stats and watch their K and BB rates as a function of lead/defecit - both go down as the lead gets bigger, in either direction actually.  If you're probably going to lose the game anyway it's also better to just try to finish some innings.  You can also look at ERA as a function of team lead and you will find that the 3 I mentioned, as well as a number of other pitchers both modern and historic, give up more runs when their teams score more runs.  There is a meaningful correlation between runs allowed and run support on a game-by-game basis on a yearly and career basis if you pick innings-eating aces.  You can ignore these numbers forever if you want to, but when other people aren't willing to and you shout how stupid they are and that they should kill themselves, it's not them that wind up looking like idiots.
How does W/L record tell you any of that?

Pitcher A went 14-9. Pitcher B went 15-11. Which one gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score? Which one saved bullpen arms? Which one pitched better in high leverage situations?


12/5/2012 11:50 AM
I would guess the pitcher who went 14-9 is better than the one who went 15-11.  If you dove into all the numbers after that, I bet more than half the time, I'm right.

I would guess the pitcher who had a 4.25 ERA was better than the one who had a 4.30 ERA.  If you dove into all the numbers after that, I bet more than half the time, I'm right.
12/5/2012 12:01 PM
But you're guessing. That 14-9 pitcher could be 2011 Rick Porcello and you'd be wrong. Or he could be 2012 Clayton Kershaw and you'd be right.

The 15-11 guy could be 2011 Ricky Romero or 2008 Bronson Arroyo.

The W/L record isn't telling you anything about how well they pitched, if they saved bullpen arms, if they did well in high leverage situations, or any of the other back story BS that you've brought up. If W/L record isn't telling you anything useful, why not ignore it?


12/5/2012 12:02 PM
This thread has more straw men than a corn field.

Could all the people arguing against W/L record STOP ASKING US TO JUDGE PLAYERS BY W/L RECORD ALONE? Nobody EVER claimed that it was valuable to tell two similar pitchers apart out of context.

I think I've read about 15 times in this thread "who's better, 14-8 or 13-10?". ******* STOP IT!



You have some things to learn about dialogue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gricean_maxims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
12/5/2012 12:06 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 12:01:00 PM (view original):
But you're guessing. That 14-9 pitcher could be 2011 Rick Porcello and you'd be wrong. Or he could be 2012 Clayton Kershaw and you'd be right.

The 15-11 guy could be 2011 Ricky Romero or 2008 Bronson Arroyo.

The W/L record isn't telling you anything about how well they pitched, if they saved bullpen arms, if they did well in high leverage situations, or any of the other back story BS that you've brought up. If W/L record isn't telling you anything useful, why not ignore it?


I'd be guessing, yes.  I'd also be guessing with ERA as well, as shown by a previous example.

There isn't enough information one way or the other.  But W/L record shows some information, shown by numerous examples by me and others throughout this thread.  You acknowledge these scenarios are possible, about immediately dismiss them, without giving any rational reason why.

12/5/2012 12:07 PM
Posted by mfahie on 12/5/2012 12:02:00 PM (view original):
This thread has more straw men than a corn field.

Could all the people arguing against W/L record STOP ASKING US TO JUDGE PLAYERS BY W/L RECORD ALONE? Nobody EVER claimed that it was valuable to tell two similar pitchers apart out of context.

I think I've read about 15 times in this thread "who's better, 14-8 or 13-10?". ******* STOP IT!



You have some things to learn about dialogue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gricean_maxims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
It's not a straw man. Pro-W/L posters are arguing that W/L tells gives us something worth paying attention to. WHAT THE **** DOES IT TELL US?

If you tell me a starting pitcher had a 3.40 ERA, I can safely assume he had a solid year. If I tell you that a starting pitcher went 14-9, you have no ******* idea what kind of year he had.
12/5/2012 12:08 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/5/2012 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 12:01:00 PM (view original):
But you're guessing. That 14-9 pitcher could be 2011 Rick Porcello and you'd be wrong. Or he could be 2012 Clayton Kershaw and you'd be right.

The 15-11 guy could be 2011 Ricky Romero or 2008 Bronson Arroyo.

The W/L record isn't telling you anything about how well they pitched, if they saved bullpen arms, if they did well in high leverage situations, or any of the other back story BS that you've brought up. If W/L record isn't telling you anything useful, why not ignore it?


I'd be guessing, yes.  I'd also be guessing with ERA as well, as shown by a previous example.

There isn't enough information one way or the other.  But W/L record shows some information, shown by numerous examples by me and others throughout this thread.  You acknowledge these scenarios are possible, about immediately dismiss them, without giving any rational reason why.

What does a 14-9 record tell us about a starting pitcher's year?
12/5/2012 12:10 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 11:14:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2012 1:49:00 AM (view original):
You can't tell people to kill themselves and then expect them to remember/care about anything else you said.  You and bad_luck can yell and scream all day that wins and losses don't give any indication of pitching performance, and I'm guessing that means you've never pitched.  Stat guys - and I'm pretty much of a stat guy - tend to work off the belief that every plate appearance can basically be taken in a vacuum and the same statistical probabilities of events should exist.  This just isn't true.  You and bl constantly ignore or insult the people who have repeatedly mentioned that certain elite pitchers are capable of throttling back when their teams put together decent leads, at which point 6 innings of 3 or 4-run ball might be more valuable than 4 innings of shutout ball.  Nevertheless, this is an absolute fact, and can, in fact, be statistically proven.  You say pitching performance consists 100% of preventing runs.  To an extent this is true, but only to the extent to which it maintains a lead or at least an opportunity to win a game.  Let's go right back to the example I alluded to but didn't specifically outline above.  Say your team scores 6 runs in the bottom of the third.  Now all of a sudden it's better for your team if your starting pitcher finishes the game and gives up 4 runs, saving your entire bullpen, than if he gives up no runs but only gets through the 6th or 7th inning.  So now pitching performance isn't just about preventing runs, it's also about eating innings and saving your own and your teammates' arms.  You can pretend Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee and CC Sabathia don't pitch to contact more when they have a 4+ run lead, but statistically it's true.  If you don't believe me, you can work through their stats and watch their K and BB rates as a function of lead/defecit - both go down as the lead gets bigger, in either direction actually.  If you're probably going to lose the game anyway it's also better to just try to finish some innings.  You can also look at ERA as a function of team lead and you will find that the 3 I mentioned, as well as a number of other pitchers both modern and historic, give up more runs when their teams score more runs.  There is a meaningful correlation between runs allowed and run support on a game-by-game basis on a yearly and career basis if you pick innings-eating aces.  You can ignore these numbers forever if you want to, but when other people aren't willing to and you shout how stupid they are and that they should kill themselves, it's not them that wind up looking like idiots.
How does W/L record tell you any of that?

Pitcher A went 14-9. Pitcher B went 15-11. Which one gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score? Which one saved bullpen arms? Which one pitched better in high leverage situations?


Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score"?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who saved bullpen arms" on a night when the bullpen was gassed?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you who pitches better in high-leverage situations?

Or maybe, JUST MAYBE, you need to watch the games to understand the context of performance, rather than reviewing numbers in the boxscore after the game?
12/5/2012 12:10 PM
He likely had a pretty good year.

(I should have replied...this in response to bl)

12/5/2012 12:12 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/5/2012 8:35:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2012 9:15:00 PM (view original):
The entire point is that you have other stats available. If you had to pick a pitching staff using one stat of your choice, you sure as **** wouldn't pick W/L.
No.  The entire point is that W/L is not COMPLETELY WORTHLESS as someone has claimed. 
This.
12/5/2012 12:13 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/5/2012 12:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 11:14:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2012 1:49:00 AM (view original):
You can't tell people to kill themselves and then expect them to remember/care about anything else you said.  You and bad_luck can yell and scream all day that wins and losses don't give any indication of pitching performance, and I'm guessing that means you've never pitched.  Stat guys - and I'm pretty much of a stat guy - tend to work off the belief that every plate appearance can basically be taken in a vacuum and the same statistical probabilities of events should exist.  This just isn't true.  You and bl constantly ignore or insult the people who have repeatedly mentioned that certain elite pitchers are capable of throttling back when their teams put together decent leads, at which point 6 innings of 3 or 4-run ball might be more valuable than 4 innings of shutout ball.  Nevertheless, this is an absolute fact, and can, in fact, be statistically proven.  You say pitching performance consists 100% of preventing runs.  To an extent this is true, but only to the extent to which it maintains a lead or at least an opportunity to win a game.  Let's go right back to the example I alluded to but didn't specifically outline above.  Say your team scores 6 runs in the bottom of the third.  Now all of a sudden it's better for your team if your starting pitcher finishes the game and gives up 4 runs, saving your entire bullpen, than if he gives up no runs but only gets through the 6th or 7th inning.  So now pitching performance isn't just about preventing runs, it's also about eating innings and saving your own and your teammates' arms.  You can pretend Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee and CC Sabathia don't pitch to contact more when they have a 4+ run lead, but statistically it's true.  If you don't believe me, you can work through their stats and watch their K and BB rates as a function of lead/defecit - both go down as the lead gets bigger, in either direction actually.  If you're probably going to lose the game anyway it's also better to just try to finish some innings.  You can also look at ERA as a function of team lead and you will find that the 3 I mentioned, as well as a number of other pitchers both modern and historic, give up more runs when their teams score more runs.  There is a meaningful correlation between runs allowed and run support on a game-by-game basis on a yearly and career basis if you pick innings-eating aces.  You can ignore these numbers forever if you want to, but when other people aren't willing to and you shout how stupid they are and that they should kill themselves, it's not them that wind up looking like idiots.
How does W/L record tell you any of that?

Pitcher A went 14-9. Pitcher B went 15-11. Which one gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score? Which one saved bullpen arms? Which one pitched better in high leverage situations?


Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score"?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who saved bullpen arms" on a night when the bullpen was gassed?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you who pitches better in high-leverage situations?

Or maybe, JUST MAYBE, you need to watch the games to understand the context of performance, rather than reviewing numbers in the boxscore after the game?
Yes.  Everything can't be told in numbers.  They just can't.  I could give examples about how even the most advanced statistics, the ones that statnerds like me love, don't always tell the whole story about a player and how they preformed.  
12/5/2012 12:14 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 12:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/5/2012 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 12:01:00 PM (view original):
But you're guessing. That 14-9 pitcher could be 2011 Rick Porcello and you'd be wrong. Or he could be 2012 Clayton Kershaw and you'd be right.

The 15-11 guy could be 2011 Ricky Romero or 2008 Bronson Arroyo.

The W/L record isn't telling you anything about how well they pitched, if they saved bullpen arms, if they did well in high leverage situations, or any of the other back story BS that you've brought up. If W/L record isn't telling you anything useful, why not ignore it?


I'd be guessing, yes.  I'd also be guessing with ERA as well, as shown by a previous example.

There isn't enough information one way or the other.  But W/L record shows some information, shown by numerous examples by me and others throughout this thread.  You acknowledge these scenarios are possible, about immediately dismiss them, without giving any rational reason why.

What does a 14-9 record tell us about a starting pitcher's year?
It tells you that he held the opposition to fewer runs than his own team scored at least 14 times.  Which, untimately, is the goal of baseball.  Winning games.

Here's a question for you: a pitcher throws 200 IP's with an ERA of 3.25,  How many of his starts did his team win?
12/5/2012 12:17 PM
If you want to tell me which of these guys, let's just say top 100, are ****** pitchers, I'd be willing to listen to your argument.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/W_career.shtml

Also, if you have time, take a look around that site.   It's pretty decent for looking up baseball stats. 
12/5/2012 12:17 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/5/2012 12:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/5/2012 12:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2012 11:14:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2012 1:49:00 AM (view original):
You can't tell people to kill themselves and then expect them to remember/care about anything else you said.  You and bad_luck can yell and scream all day that wins and losses don't give any indication of pitching performance, and I'm guessing that means you've never pitched.  Stat guys - and I'm pretty much of a stat guy - tend to work off the belief that every plate appearance can basically be taken in a vacuum and the same statistical probabilities of events should exist.  This just isn't true.  You and bl constantly ignore or insult the people who have repeatedly mentioned that certain elite pitchers are capable of throttling back when their teams put together decent leads, at which point 6 innings of 3 or 4-run ball might be more valuable than 4 innings of shutout ball.  Nevertheless, this is an absolute fact, and can, in fact, be statistically proven.  You say pitching performance consists 100% of preventing runs.  To an extent this is true, but only to the extent to which it maintains a lead or at least an opportunity to win a game.  Let's go right back to the example I alluded to but didn't specifically outline above.  Say your team scores 6 runs in the bottom of the third.  Now all of a sudden it's better for your team if your starting pitcher finishes the game and gives up 4 runs, saving your entire bullpen, than if he gives up no runs but only gets through the 6th or 7th inning.  So now pitching performance isn't just about preventing runs, it's also about eating innings and saving your own and your teammates' arms.  You can pretend Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee and CC Sabathia don't pitch to contact more when they have a 4+ run lead, but statistically it's true.  If you don't believe me, you can work through their stats and watch their K and BB rates as a function of lead/defecit - both go down as the lead gets bigger, in either direction actually.  If you're probably going to lose the game anyway it's also better to just try to finish some innings.  You can also look at ERA as a function of team lead and you will find that the 3 I mentioned, as well as a number of other pitchers both modern and historic, give up more runs when their teams score more runs.  There is a meaningful correlation between runs allowed and run support on a game-by-game basis on a yearly and career basis if you pick innings-eating aces.  You can ignore these numbers forever if you want to, but when other people aren't willing to and you shout how stupid they are and that they should kill themselves, it's not them that wind up looking like idiots.
How does W/L record tell you any of that?

Pitcher A went 14-9. Pitcher B went 15-11. Which one gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score? Which one saved bullpen arms? Which one pitched better in high leverage situations?


Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who gutted out the extra innings his team needed and pitched to the score"?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you "who saved bullpen arms" on a night when the bullpen was gassed?

Which advanced statistic specifically tells you who pitches better in high-leverage situations?

Or maybe, JUST MAYBE, you need to watch the games to understand the context of performance, rather than reviewing numbers in the boxscore after the game?
Yes.  Everything can't be told in numbers.  They just can't.  I could give examples about how even the most advanced statistics, the ones that statnerds like me love, don't always tell the whole story about a player and how they preformed.  
JESUS ******* CHRIST. I'm not arguing that everything can be told in numbers. I'm arguing that the pitcher win/loss STATISTIC doesn't tell you any of that back story bullshit.
12/5/2012 12:20 PM
"any of that back story bullshit" - im assuming you mean the whole "pitching to the score, managing games, etc." I know.  You've said that.  I think you're wrong.  

You've also given no evidence that says I'm wrong.  And I've seen, by watching games, pitchers that dial it up to 95 in big situations where they need outs...you know, up 2-1 with men on in late innings...and dial it back when they're up 7-1 in the 4th.  You can't tell me I didn't see that.
of 28
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Wins and Losses

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.