And also. the defense behind Mussina in 2000 was bad, but no where near as bad as Minnesota's. Mussina also pitched in a pitcher's park and against slightly less potent offenses.

Jesusfuckingchrist. You can't say "WAR is a good, single value number to compare players across eras/seasons" then say "Well, not in this case."

I didn't say not in this case. I said on a player vs player one season comparison, we always need more than just WAR. Just like we need more than just ERA or WHIP.

Well, in this specific case, do you think it works?

Do you think concrete evidence of actual Trump campaign collusion with Russia will be problematic for Trump?

Are you refusing to answer simple yes/no questions again, bad_pussy?

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/19/2017 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Are you refusing to answer simple yes/no questions again, bad_pussy?

Just like you.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):
I didn't say not in this case. I said on a player vs player one season comparison, we always need more than just WAR. Just like we need more than just ERA or WHIP.

DUDE! I pretty much said WAR cannot be reliably used for a player vs player comparison across Eras. You just confirmed that. Why did it take you two weeks in a thousand posts to admit that?

b_l, is WAR more or less accurate than political polls?

Posted by sjpoker on 7/19/2017 7:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):
I didn't say not in this case. I said on a player vs player one season comparison, we always need more than just WAR. Just like we need more than just ERA or WHIP.

DUDE! I pretty much said WAR cannot be reliably used for a player vs player comparison across Eras. You just confirmed that. Why did it take you two weeks in a thousand posts to admit that?

I guess I should have unblocked you earlier. WAR is actually great for across era comparisons. Most stats lack any context whatsoever. A 3.00 is a 3.00 ERA in 1908 or 1999 yet we know that a 3.00 is much more valuable in 1999.

When doing any sort of comparison you should use several stats. If you're going to use WAR on its own, it's good for a big picture view.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 6:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 5:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 5:43:00 PM (view original):
You said an average pitcher would give up 40 more runs in Radke's situation. That implies that around 40 of his 119 runs allowed weren't his fault. Which is dumb.

And again, you've admitted WAR is limited in that it focuses on runs allowed and doesn't factor in baserunners or strikeouts. A pitcher like Mussina or Clemens (or Scherzer) would've done better in Radke's environment because they rely less on their defense to make outs. Strikeouts are a valuable weapon.

Mussina was better than Radke in every possible way in 2000. And pitched in a much tougher division. With a below average D behind him.

Um...you've got that wrong. An average pitcher in Radke's situation would have allowed 40 more runs.

Expanding on this, an average pitcher would have allowed 160 runs in Radke's situation (119 + 41).

He was 41 runs above average which equates to about 6 wins above replacement in 2000.

Lol...do you ever sit back and read the bullshit you post? This is hilarious stuff.

Radke's season in 2000 was SO AWESOME that not a single one of the 28 writers voting for the Cy Young award gave him a Top 3 vote. Either you're the most enlightened individual on the planet, or you're a complete moron. I'll go with the latter.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 6:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 5:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 5:43:00 PM (view original):
You said an average pitcher would give up 40 more runs in Radke's situation. That implies that around 40 of his 119 runs allowed weren't his fault. Which is dumb.

And again, you've admitted WAR is limited in that it focuses on runs allowed and doesn't factor in baserunners or strikeouts. A pitcher like Mussina or Clemens (or Scherzer) would've done better in Radke's environment because they rely less on their defense to make outs. Strikeouts are a valuable weapon.

Mussina was better than Radke in every possible way in 2000. And pitched in a much tougher division. With a below average D behind him.

Um...you've got that wrong. An average pitcher in Radke's situation would have allowed 40 more runs.

Expanding on this, an average pitcher would have allowed 160 runs in Radke's situation (119 + 41).

He was 41 runs above average which equates to about 6 wins above replacement in 2000.

Lol...do you ever sit back and read the bullshit you post? This is hilarious stuff.

Radke's season in 2000 was SO AWESOME that not a single one of the 28 writers voting for the Cy Young award gave him a vote. Either you're the most enlightened individual on the planet, or you're a complete moron. I'll go with the latter.

WAR wasn't widely used in 2000 and his unadjusted stats are just above average.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 8:21:00 PM (view original):
WAR wasn't widely used in 2000 and his unadjusted stats are just above average.

So if we had WAR back then, he would've gotten Cy votes?

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 8:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 8:21:00 PM (view original):
WAR wasn't widely used in 2000 and his unadjusted stats are just above average.

So if we had WAR back then, he would've gotten Cy votes?

Maybe