Do you think the stats I presented are not realisitc?

It's a hypothetical question.  Ficticious players A and B based on real players X and Y.  Realistic stats.

Your unwillingness to answer the question because I am not presenting you additional information which is completely irrelevant to the question at hand is inexplicable.  One can only assume that you're just throwing up a smokescreen as a delay tactic, or that you have no confidence in your ability to present a valid argument to back up your answer, so you're trying to deflect the question. 

Posted by eschwartz67 on 2/28/2012 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):
So if the stat isn't controllable and tells us very little, why would we want to use a stat (WHIP) that relies heavily on BABIP?

You shouldn't rely solely on any one statistic.  Nor even a huge pile of them.  Liars.  Damned Liars.  Those who use statistics.

However, using a complete set of data and statistics in conjunction with having watched the players and having a decent understanding of the game allows for a much better conclusion than any one aspect on it's own.

That being said....  WHIP is a decent START to a pitcher's effectiveness.  It's obvious to me (at least I think it is) that Hunter had a higher ERA and a lower ERA+ even though he allowed fewer baserunners than did Carlton because he stranded fewer runners with whiffs than did Carlton, and he allowed homers at a much higher rate than did Carlton.

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 11:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by eschwartz67 on 2/28/2012 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):
So if the stat isn't controllable and tells us very little, why would we want to use a stat (WHIP) that relies heavily on BABIP?

You shouldn't rely solely on any one statistic.  Nor even a huge pile of them.  Liars.  Damned Liars.  Those who use statistics.

However, using a complete set of data and statistics in conjunction with having watched the players and having a decent understanding of the game allows for a much better conclusion than any one aspect on it's own.

That being said....  WHIP is a decent START to a pitcher's effectiveness.  It's obvious to me (at least I think it is) that Hunter had a higher ERA and a lower ERA+ even though he allowed fewer baserunners than did Carlton because he stranded fewer runners with whiffs than did Carlton, and he allowed homers at a much higher rate than did Carlton.

I'm not asking anyone to rely on just one stat.  Especially not WHIP.  If pitchers have little to no control over their BABIP, then BABIP doesn't tell us much about the skill of the pitcher.

If BABIP doesn't tell us much about the skill of the pitcher, and half the numerator of WHIP is largely derived from BABIP, then WHIP is a bad stat to use to evaluate pitchers.

i want to make sure i am reading this right.  are you saying that pitchers shouldn't be judged by their ability to not give up hits?

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 10:49:00 PM (view original):
Look dude, you're the one trying to get me to play this hypothetical game.  If you want me to answer, then tell me.  If not, f*ck off.

Posted by mrbubble on 2/29/2012 6:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 11:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by eschwartz67 on 2/28/2012 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 2/28/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):
So if the stat isn't controllable and tells us very little, why would we want to use a stat (WHIP) that relies heavily on BABIP?

You shouldn't rely solely on any one statistic.  Nor even a huge pile of them.  Liars.  Damned Liars.  Those who use statistics.

However, using a complete set of data and statistics in conjunction with having watched the players and having a decent understanding of the game allows for a much better conclusion than any one aspect on it's own.

That being said....  WHIP is a decent START to a pitcher's effectiveness.  It's obvious to me (at least I think it is) that Hunter had a higher ERA and a lower ERA+ even though he allowed fewer baserunners than did Carlton because he stranded fewer runners with whiffs than did Carlton, and he allowed homers at a much higher rate than did Carlton.

I'm not asking anyone to rely on just one stat.  Especially not WHIP.  If pitchers have little to no control over their BABIP, then BABIP doesn't tell us much about the skill of the pitcher.

If BABIP doesn't tell us much about the skill of the pitcher, and half the numerator of WHIP is largely derived from BABIP, then WHIP is a bad stat to use to evaluate pitchers.

i want to make sure i am reading this right.  are you saying that pitchers shouldn't be judged by their ability to not give up hits?

It's obvious to everyone that pitchers only control HR, BB and K.   Haven't you been paying attention?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/29/2012 9:29:00 AM (view original):

It's obvious to everyone that pitchers only control HR, BB and K.   Haven't you been paying attention?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/29/2012 9:27:00 AM (view original):
Have you read the entire thread?  If so, you'd know he does not understand baseball at all.