Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

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.

Here is the answer.. solve for X.  Sheldon on left side and Ducey on right side.


(Wins above replacement over 200 innings) = (Wins above replacement over 200 innings) + (Wins above replacement over X innings)

Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

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.

I just used ERA in the question.

How much better K/9 BB/9 or HRA/9 would make the difference?

Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

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.

Of course you're ignoring two important facts:

1) We don't know if FIP applies in HBD because we don't know if splits and pitches have more effect than defense.

2) If FIP does apply, then you're deciding to ignore luck completely.  If we had all of the data, it would most likely show that Sheldon's HR/FB rate was way above league average this season while Ducey's was a little below (my estimations are Sheldon - 14% and Ducey - 9%).

Also FIP is a fairly new stat.
It certainly isn't known by many (probably a majority) of HBD owners. There is no FIP in the stat columns. So basically you are expecting 32 owners to do a math formula for 5 guys, when half of them don't even take the time to vote blindly. 

I'd have voted for Ducey, but it is certainly understandable that Sheldon won.

Not sure what JFerg will say but IMO you cant use those stats in a vortex.  You have to look at WAR.  WAR/IP will give you a Win rater per inning pitch.  Figure that out for each pitcher and you can figure out where the break-even rate it.

The idea would be to compare the 200 innings of the Honolulu pitchers + 80 some innings of a Replacement level player  vs. 280 some innings of the Nashville level pitcher.  I hope that kinda makes sense.  I'd really recommend reading on sites such as FanGraphs/Baseball Prospectus and Baseball Reference if you really want to know where I'm coming from.  At the very worst you'll see some new stuff that gets you to look at the numbers differently.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Also FIP is a fairly new stat.
It certainly isn't known by many (probably a majority) of HBD owners. There is no FIP in the stat columns. So basically you are expecting 32 owners to do a math formula for 5 guys, when half of them don't even take the time to vote blindly. 

I'd have voted for Ducey, but it is certainly understandable that Sheldon won.

I just don't like ERA leaders winning all the time.  It shouldn't always be the case though of course sometimes it is.

Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

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.

Virtually identical defensive numbers.

Sheldon vastly superior on the road. 

What's your point again?

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Not sure what JFerg will say but IMO you cant use those stats in a vortex.  You have to look at WAR.  WAR/IP will give you a Win rater per inning pitch.  Figure that out for each pitcher and you can figure out where the break-even rate it.

That's what I am saying.

You won't even give an answer, just a couple of formulas. So it isn't a very obvious answer. Of course Sheldon is going to split votes with Ducey.

Why not work out all of the formulas you find to be relevant, and give us some tangible numbers?

It would be interesting to see just how much better Ducey turns out to be.

Sample size is really the answer here.  I mean Ducey was better at home then on the road, PROVING the numbers don't always make sense when you want to bring up home/road splits.  Come on dude, come up with something better.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 2:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oriolemagic on 2/20/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Not sure what JFerg will say but IMO you cant use those stats in a vortex.  You have to look at WAR.  WAR/IP will give you a Win rater per inning pitch.  Figure that out for each pitcher and you can figure out where the break-even rate it.

That's what I am saying.

You won't even give an answer, just a couple of formulas. So it isn't a very obvious answer. Of course Sheldon is going to split votes with Ducey.

Why not work out all of the formulas you find to be relevant, and give us some tangible numbers?

It would be interesting to see just how much better Ducey turns out to be.

You all underestimate the HRA part of it.  I'm actually thinking for Sheldon to be BETTER then Ducey he'd have to be the one with more innings.  This is strictly using FIP though.  Which MikeT does not like.  Though he stupidly brought up Rob Deer and Kingman forgetting that strikeouts are bad for a hitter.

Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Sample size is really the answer here.  I mean Ducey was better at home then on the road, PROVING the numbers don't always make sense when you want to bring up home/road splits.  Come on dude, come up with something better.

???  So now you've discounted the fact that Sheldon had a better ERA/WHIP/K/9& BB/9 because of his home park and discounted the fact that Sheldon's numbers were better on the road than Ducey's... the only things that matter, for your Cy Young vote, are IP and HR/9? 
Is half of a season that much smaller of a sample size than an entire season?  We probably ought to discount all of the numbers and just pick which is the better pitcher.  What are their respective ratings?  We can determine the Cy Young from which should be better.

The formula I want to use is WAR, and you are right it is a big time formula.  Which is a good thing cause it's trying to account for everything it possibly can to evaluate a person on one number, we can argue all day.  You have to read some to understand where I'm coming from, I read what you read.  I use to love RBI's and Runs, and Batting Average and counting stats, but in the end it's not the best way to evaluate a player. 

Posted by kcden on 2/20/2012 2:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Sample size is really the answer here.  I mean Ducey was better at home then on the road, PROVING the numbers don't always make sense when you want to bring up home/road splits.  Come on dude, come up with something better.

???  So now you've discounted the fact that Sheldon had a better ERA/WHIP/K/9& BB/9 because of his home park and discounted the fact that Sheldon's numbers were better on the road than Ducey's... the only things that matter, for your Cy Young vote, are IP and HR/9? 
Is half of a season that much smaller of a sample size than an entire season?  We probably ought to discount all of the numbers and just pick which is the better pitcher.  What are their respective ratings?  We can determine the Cy Young from which should be better.

K9 and BB/9 were very close.  So it's not just 1 point for this guy cause he won this category thing.  You have to value everything as a whole, what are you not getting?

A HR is automatic runs.  It's the worst thing to give up as a pitcher.  Do we not all agree with that?