Posted by tecwrg on 1/22/2016 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
Well, I'm not wrong here, so I'm not sure what your point is.

I'll just add that to the list of things you're unsure about.

I don't think you know what your point is either.

I understand baseball so, yeah, I do.

Explain your point to me, then.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2016 12:25:00 PM (view original):
Explain your point to me, then.

You can't figure out why there would be a problem in comparing ERAs between relievers who tend to pitch complete innings (i.e. the ninth inning closer) and relief pitcher who tend to pitch only partial innings (come in with men already on base, or are replaced with runners on base) in determining effectiveness?

I understand your hypothesis. I'm saying it doesn't matter. Good set up guys allow essentially the same amount of unearned runs as closers.

A set-up (or anyone that comes in mid-inning) might come into a game with the bases-loaded, give up a triple to clear the bases, and strike out the next three guys.

ERA of 0.00, Whip of 1.00, K/9 = 27.00, OAV = .250

And his team loses.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2016 12:51:00 PM (view original):
I understand your hypothesis. I'm saying it doesn't matter. Good set up guys allow essentially the same amount of unearned runs as closers.

Who's talking about unearned runs?

Posted by toddcommish on 1/22/2016 12:57:00 PM (view original):
A set-up (or anyone that comes in mid-inning) might come into a game with the bases-loaded, give up a triple to clear the bases, and strike out the next three guys.

ERA of 0.00, Whip of 1.00, K/9 = 27.00, OAV = .250

And his team loses.

Some people might say "that doesn't matter".

And anyway, you seem to take it as gospel that most set up guys throw partial innings at a higher rate than closers. Maybe. I grabbed the Pirates' set up closer combo and found this:

Watson 77 games 75.1 IP
Melancon 78 games 76.2 IP

Yankees:

Betances 74 games 84 IP
Miller 60 games 61.2 IP

Those are just two examples but they get right to dahs' point. Those pitchers are all high level guys. In general, it's probably a good idea to use your best reliever in the highest leverage situation, but in the case of those two teams, it might make more sense to leave them in the roles they are comfortable in. It's not like there is much drop off in the quality of the pitchers.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/22/2016 12:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2016 12:51:00 PM (view original):
I understand your hypothesis. I'm saying it doesn't matter. Good set up guys allow essentially the same amount of unearned runs as closers.

Who's talking about unearned runs?

You are, when you linked the ERA study.

If a reliever comes in and allows an inherited run to score, it still counts in his RA9.

I shouldn't have used "unearned," I should have said runs allowed.

The difference between RA9 and ERA is essentially the same between set up guys and closers.

Posted by toddcommish on 1/22/2016 12:57:00 PM (view original):
A set-up (or anyone that comes in mid-inning) might come into a game with the bases-loaded, give up a triple to clear the bases, and strike out the next three guys.

ERA of 0.00, Whip of 1.00, K/9 = 27.00, OAV = .250

And his team loses.

But his RA9 would be significantly higher.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2016 1:04:00 PM (view original):
If a reliever comes in and allows an inherited run to score, it still counts in his RA9.

I don't think this is true...