Posted by bad_luck on 12/6/2012 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):It should be ignored.
"I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be ignored."
Do you realize that if you had reworded that statement as follows, this thread would have died 18 pages ago?
"I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be regarded with low weight."
Fine, ignore it. And then be confused why the best pitcher award is called the "Cy Young Award." And I know you don't this, because you ignore W/L record, but Young had the most wins in baseball history.
The ironic part about this is that I'm a pretty big "statnerd." I love all the advanced stats, secondary stats, etc. I recognize that W/L record isn't something to put a lot of stock in. Had I been an unbiased voter for the NL Cy Young, I'd probably vote in Kershaw. But I don't just ignore what I see in a baseball game. I can watch a game and tell you "This pitcher got unlucky...pitched his *** off and lost a 2-1 game" or "Nice win for this pitcher...dialed it up when he was in trouble, got out of jams and won a 6-4 game." I recognize there is a skill in getting a win.
I promise you that most pitchers will be happy at the end of the day when they get a win, regardless of they allowed 4 runs or 1 run. They aren't happy if they lose 2-1. The goal is to win, not to have the best ERA possible.