Which on for Cy Young Topic

mchalesarmy
Posts: 1123 (0)
Veteran
20
Prospect
Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):
205 is plenty
It's not 286.  Do not belittle the value of 286 innings.  It's more.  I mean where do we cut off then?  150 innings?  200 innings?  Nashville was able to pitch more then Honululu.  You do not evaluate 205 innings and 286 innings the same, that's stupid.
OK.
Flip the question.

How much worse can the P with 286 ip be than the guy with 205, and still be considered "better"?
2/20/2012 1:43 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I don't think it matters a whole lot if you give up a solo homer or two doubles.   Both result in a run for the opposition.    Often, you'll find the pitcher giving up the homers is the one giving up more runs.  That's not the case here.

Sheldon didn't allow baserunners.   So, when he gave up a homer, it didn't damage his RA like you'd expect.    Just saying "He gave up more homers" without looking at what sort of homers(vastly better ERA than the Nashville guy) is kind of dumb.
2/20/2012 1:46 PM
JFerg
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
9 1 2 4 13
Prospect

So now you are giving Sheldon pts for being on a weaker staff?!  Come on now.

2/20/2012 1:46 PM
JFerg
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
9 1 2 4 13
Prospect
Also strikeouts are bad for hitters.  So high strikeout hitters have harder times of being successfull.  Hence a reason why Kingman/Deer weren't great players
2/20/2012 1:50 PM (edited)
mchalesarmy
Posts: 1123 (0)
Veteran
20
Prospect
I guess Tanana should be in the HOF
2/20/2012 1:47 PM
oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
Both are interesting questions and as curious as I am to hear opinions on them you really cant answer those questions without using a statistical model to evaluate, whichs is where FIP comes into play, which is where Nashville pitcher is better.
2/20/2012 1:47 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I'm giving Sheldon points for being a more dominant pitcher.
2/20/2012 1:47 PM
kcden
Posts: 1635 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 58 368 177
Prospect
It must be black magic that the Honolulu pitcher gave up over a half run less per game yet allowed ~1/3 more HR per game... or maybe it's that he is and was that much better of a pitcher in the other facets of the game.
If you want to make the argument that a pitcher should be dinged for pitching in a pitcher's park vs. another pitcher, you damn well better be able to show that the other pitcher was at least comparable on the road.  The pitcher's park pitcher even had a "tougher" ballpark road schedule, based on the fact that he replaces 5 team games at Honolulu with 5 team games at Nashville.
2/20/2012 1:48 PM
JFerg
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
9 1 2 4 13
Prospect

Well switch Sheldon and Ducey then.  Whats your argument there then?

2/20/2012 1:48 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 1:48:00 PM (view original):
Also strikeouts are bad for hitters.  So high strikeout hitters have harder times of being successfull.
Well, if it matters, Sheldon had a better K/9 and BB/9.   So, really, you're hanging your hat on HR/9.

With an ERA more than half a run less, that HR/9 is rather unimportant.
2/20/2012 1:50 PM
JFerg
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
9 1 2 4 13
Prospect

Barely was he better then those numbers to make up for the HR/9 which is a large difference as well as the innings pitched. 

2/20/2012 1:50 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

More than half a run in ERA.   Like it or not, his HRA didn't hurt him.    He was just better at everything else.

2/20/2012 1:51 PM
JFerg
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
9 1 2 4 13
Prospect
Posted by kcden on 2/20/2012 1:50:00 PM (view original):
It must be black magic that the Honolulu pitcher gave up over a half run less per game yet allowed ~1/3 more HR per game... or maybe it's that he is and was that much better of a pitcher in the other facets of the game.
If you want to make the argument that a pitcher should be dinged for pitching in a pitcher's park vs. another pitcher, you damn well better be able to show that the other pitcher was at least comparable on the road.  The pitcher's park pitcher even had a "tougher" ballpark road schedule, based on the fact that he replaces 5 team games at Honolulu with 5 team games at Nashville.
DO YOU NOT ACCOUNT FOR DEFENSE IN ANYWAY? 
2/20/2012 1:53 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
And, again, defenses were very similar.   The only argument is parks and innings.   Sheldon was vastly superior on the road.    So, really, the only argument is innings.   If you think the extra 81 innings makes him the better pitcher, that's fine.  
2/20/2012 1:54 PM
oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by JFerg on 2/20/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by mchalesarmy on 2/20/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):
205 is plenty
It's not 286.  Do not belittle the value of 286 innings.  It's more.  I mean where do we cut off then?  150 innings?  200 innings?  Nashville was able to pitch more then Honululu.  You do not evaluate 205 innings and 286 innings the same, that's stupid.
OK.
Flip the question.

How much worse can the P with 286 ip be than the guy with 205, and still be considered "better"?
Actually use the bb/9, k/9, hr/9 over those additional 81 innings pitched... 

Nashville Pitcher over those 81 innings gives up 6 HRS, 22 BBs, 69 Ks
Honolulu Pitcher over those 81 innings gives up 9 HRS, 21 BBs, 72 Ks

So would you rather have +3 HRs, -1 BB, -3 Ks 
or -3 HRS, +1 BB, +3 ks


2/20/2012 1:54 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5...24 Next ▸
Which on for Cy Young Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.