Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

I see your problem.   Sheldon got 17 votes, Ducey got 9.    Seems like a lot of people didn't see the same value in your pitcher as you do.  It happens.

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

Depends on how my staff is constructed.    Between the two, if I were building a staff from scratch, I take Sheldon and work around his 200 IP.

No, people are obviously dumb, because  Alex Nunez got 3 votes.

I doubt all 32 owners voted.   Those might be SIMMY votes.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):
I see your problem.   Sheldon got 17 votes, Ducey got 9.    Seems like a lot of people didn't see the same value in your pitcher as you do.  It happens.

Doesn't mean the masses are correct either.  Which is evident by yourself and the voting.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

Depends on how my staff is constructed.    Between the two, if I were building a staff from scratch, I take Sheldon and work around his 200 IP.

Thats a whole different argument.  You arent taking into account the value Ducey gives you in short playoff series being able to pitch an extra game.

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

Depends on how my staff is constructed.    Between the two, if I were building a staff from scratch, I take Sheldon and work around his 200 IP.

Thats a whole different argument.  You arent taking into account the value Ducey gives you in short playoff series being able to pitch an extra game.

Incorrect.   I almost always use three SP in the playoffs.   I don't think I've ever had a 280 inning pitcher.   Depends on PC.    And that falls back on "how my staff is constructed".

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

Depends on how my staff is constructed.    Between the two, if I were building a staff from scratch, I take Sheldon and work around his 200 IP.

Thats a whole different argument.  You arent taking into account the value Ducey gives you in short playoff series being able to pitch an extra game.

And the extra 81 innings he brings during the season, more value through and through.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/20/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Over 9 complete games, I wouldn't get too worked up over 3 homers or 3 strikeouts.

So then do you want the pitcher who gives you 9 more games or not?  If, statistically the difference in those values are irrelevant to you, you obviously want the extra 81 innings.

Depends on how my staff is constructed.    Between the two, if I were building a staff from scratch, I take Sheldon and work around his 200 IP.

Thats a whole different argument.  You arent taking into account the value Ducey gives you in short playoff series being able to pitch an extra game.

Incorrect.   I almost always use three SP in the playoffs.   I don't think I've ever had a 280 inning pitcher.   Depends on PC.    And that falls back on "how my staff is constructed".

Using 3 pitchers and getting your ace to pitch in game 1, 3 and 5 is a different argument.  In a 5 game series being able to pitch Ducey 3 times is insanely valuable, you cant do that on a 3 staff rotation.

Plus Sheldons health doesn't compare to Duceys if you are actually going to construct a staff.

My question was, at what point do the results outweigh the number of IP?

Most of you seem content to give up the extra 1/2 run per game for the additional 81 ip.
How much worse does the guy have to be before he isn't "better" due to sheer ip difference?
1 FULL run? 1 1/2? 2?

What's the point that 286 isn't better than 205?

Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 2:11:00 PM (view original):
My question was, at what point do the results outweigh the number of IP?

Most of you seem content to give up the extra 1/2 run per game for the additional 81 ip.
How much worse does the guy have to be before he isn't "better" due to sheer ip difference?
1 FULL run? 1 1/2? 2?

What's the point that 286 isn't better than 205?

It'a an interesting question for sure, I dont think you can answer it without doing a statistical model and including more then just runs.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 2:11:00 PM (view original):
My question was, at what point do the results outweigh the number of IP?

Most of you seem content to give up the extra 1/2 run per game for the additional 81 ip.
How much worse does the guy have to be before he isn't "better" due to sheer ip difference?
1 FULL run? 1 1/2? 2?

What's the point that 286 isn't better than 205?

There are plenty of times where results outweight number of IP.  In this case the IP number puts the Nashville pitcher over the top.  You are also only looking at ERA, if you are blinded by the ERA number then you'll just never agree with me.  Just remember ERA is dependent upon stadium and defense factors as well.  I like how you all assume that defense doesn't matter that only the pitchers skill gives him that low ERA.