Julio Urias Topic

Has anyone claimed wins are "the best indicator"?
5/28/2016 1:59 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 5/28/2016 12:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 12:28:00 PM (view original):
And neither would you. You'd be guessing.
Well, since I understand baseball (unlike you), my "guess" would likely be pretty accurate.
Sure. At the extremes, W/L gives you a rough idea of the season a pitcher had but it doesn't add anything important.

My question to you, pitcher A went 16-9. Pitcher B went 10-11. Literally every other stat was the same. Which pitcher was better?
5/28/2016 2:54 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 2:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/28/2016 12:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 12:28:00 PM (view original):
And neither would you. You'd be guessing.
Well, since I understand baseball (unlike you), my "guess" would likely be pretty accurate.
Sure. At the extremes, W/L gives you a rough idea of the season a pitcher had but it doesn't add anything important.

My question to you, pitcher A went 16-9. Pitcher B went 10-11. Literally every other stat was the same. Which pitcher was better?
That's easy. A. If everything else is virtually identical, and the only difference was W/L record, then the guy with the better W/L record had the better season.
5/28/2016 3:09 PM
I'm asking which pitcher was better. The answer is neither. They were exactly same. Their different records don't reflect their performance.

Imagine you sit down to interview someone. You ask them to tell you about where they live. They answer "United States." That's W/L record. It tells you something. Sort of. You know that they are likely better off than someone that answers the same question with "Sudan." But that's about it.
5/28/2016 3:15 PM
I know you don't understand baseball, so maybe you've never picked up on this . . . the object of a baseball game is to win. If, all else being equal, pitcher A had a better W/L record than pitcher B, then one can assume he contributed to his team winning more games than player B.

Context is important.

Here's a counter-example: Hitter A goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Hitter B goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Who had the better game? You'd say . . . "Duh. They had exactly the same game".

What if I added the following context:

Hitter A's double came with the bases empty and two outs in the fourth inning (the next guy pops out), and his strikeout came with two outs and the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth to end the game.

Hitter B's strikeout came leading off the fourth inning, and his double came with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 8th of a tied game.

Now, who had the better game?
5/28/2016 3:40 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/28/2016 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Has anyone claimed wins are "the best indicator"?
I phrased that wrong. It's 'not really a great indicator' might be better. Wins - can - indicate that a pitcher is good and generally does but if you're gonna argue who's better 'wins' are a lot further down the list of relevant indicators.

So relax, have a beer, and do whatever people do down South on Memorial Day weekend (slap pigs, drink moonshine, burn crosses, fry chicken, etc.)
5/28/2016 3:41 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 5/28/2016 3:41:00 PM (view original):
I know you don't understand baseball, so maybe you've never picked up on this . . . the object of a baseball game is to win. If, all else being equal, pitcher A had a better W/L record than pitcher B, then one can assume he contributed to his team winning more games than player B.

Context is important.

Here's a counter-example: Hitter A goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Hitter B goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Who had the better game? You'd say . . . "Duh. They had exactly the same game".

What if I added the following context:

Hitter A's double came with the bases empty and two outs in the fourth inning (the next guy pops out), and his strikeout came with two outs and the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth to end the game.

Hitter B's strikeout came leading off the fourth inning, and his double came with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 8th of a tied game.

Now, who had the better game?
Pitcher A threw 7 innings and gave up two runs every single start. Pitcher B threw 7 innings and gave up two runs in the same amount of starts. They were the same, regardless of win/loss record.
5/28/2016 3:47 PM
I'll also add that the team's win/loss record was exactly the same in their 30 starts.
5/28/2016 3:57 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/28/2016 3:41:00 PM (view original):
I know you don't understand baseball, so maybe you've never picked up on this . . . the object of a baseball game is to win. If, all else being equal, pitcher A had a better W/L record than pitcher B, then one can assume he contributed to his team winning more games than player B.

Context is important.

Here's a counter-example: Hitter A goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Hitter B goes 1-3 with a double, a fly out and a strikeout. Who had the better game? You'd say . . . "Duh. They had exactly the same game".

What if I added the following context:

Hitter A's double came with the bases empty and two outs in the fourth inning (the next guy pops out), and his strikeout came with two outs and the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth to end the game.

Hitter B's strikeout came leading off the fourth inning, and his double came with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 8th of a tied game.

Now, who had the better game?
Pitcher A threw 7 innings and gave up two runs every single start. Pitcher B threw 7 innings and gave up two runs in the same amount of starts. They were the same, regardless of win/loss record.
Which hitter had the better game?
5/28/2016 4:04 PM
Why are you trying to change the subject?

No one is denying that the timing of hits impacts the runs a team scores. But that is irrelevant to the situation we are talking about. Both pitchers were exactly the same. How exact?

Both made 30 starts.
Every start both gave up 2 solo home runs to start the first inning and then didn't allow another base runner before they came out after the seventh.
They both played for the same team.
The team went 18-12 in each of their 30 starts.
Pitcher A went 16-9.
Pitcher B went 10-11.

Was one better than the other?
5/28/2016 4:33 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 4:33:00 PM (view original):
Why are you trying to change the subject?

No one is denying that the timing of hits impacts the runs a team scores. But that is irrelevant to the situation we are talking about. Both pitchers were exactly the same. How exact?

Both made 30 starts.
Every start both gave up 2 solo home runs to start the first inning and then didn't allow another base runner before they came out after the seventh.
They both played for the same team.
The team went 18-12 in each of their 30 starts.
Pitcher A went 16-9.
Pitcher B went 10-11.

Was one better than the other?
I want to hear Dahs or Taint weigh in here.
5/28/2016 4:52 PM
Posted by sjpoker on 5/28/2016 3:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/28/2016 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Has anyone claimed wins are "the best indicator"?
I phrased that wrong. It's 'not really a great indicator' might be better. Wins - can - indicate that a pitcher is good and generally does but if you're gonna argue who's better 'wins' are a lot further down the list of relevant indicators.

So relax, have a beer, and do whatever people do down South on Memorial Day weekend (slap pigs, drink moonshine, burn crosses, fry chicken, etc.)
You can't burn crosses and fry chicken on the same day, retard. ****.

It's actually a pretty good indicator, there are better, because, as noted, guys with a bunch of wins have pitched enough to get them. My guess, thru the history of baseball, is that there are more 20 win pitchers and 20 loss pitchers. And it's because not many guys get a chance to pitch enough to lose 20. They become long relievers or AAA pitchers.

5/28/2016 5:09 PM
so close to Uranus
5/28/2016 8:46 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/28/2016 4:33:00 PM (view original):
Why are you trying to change the subject?

No one is denying that the timing of hits impacts the runs a team scores. But that is irrelevant to the situation we are talking about. Both pitchers were exactly the same. How exact?

Both made 30 starts.
Every start both gave up 2 solo home runs to start the first inning and then didn't allow another base runner before they came out after the seventh.
They both played for the same team.
The team went 18-12 in each of their 30 starts.
Pitcher A went 16-9.
Pitcher B went 10-11.

Was one better than the other?
In that extreme and unrealistic example, they were both pretty much the same.

Would that be true in most cases where one pitcher went 16-9 and the other went 10-11? Would you look at that alone and assume "Hmm, they're exactly the same"?
5/28/2016 10:47 PM
They weren't "pretty much the same." They were exactly the same. Their win/loss added nothing.

I know this might be difficult for you to understand, but that's true for all other pitchers. Once you have things like games started, innings, ERA, WHIP (and maybe some k/bb/hr rates), pitcher win/loss adds nothing of value. And, if you don't have those other pieces of info, win/loss is too inexact to tell you anything useful, other than maybe the most extreme situations. And in those extreme examples, you're still guessing.

5/28/2016 11:07 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5|6...16 Next ▸
Julio Urias Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.