also, doesn't a cacther's pitch calling play a part in this? 

I've always been a fan of pitchers without any eye-catching flaws or pitchers with one overwhelming attribute, whatever it might be.

I've had a guy win a CY with nothing other than stamina above 73: http://www.whatifsports.com/hbd/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=219385

I've had a guy throw a perfect game with splits in the high 50s and one 90-something pitch (can't find him to link... FoD is rolling over, I guess?).

Other than the true aces, you have to see what works.

Posted by skidmark on 7/13/2010 5:15:00 PM (view original):
also, doesn't a cacther's pitch calling play a part in this? 

I was counting that as "defense" but, yes, it does.

I love the low 50/60 type split guys with two good to great pitches.  I have found they are very undervalued on the market.  I can usually make a great bullpen arm or solid starter out of these types when many other people just ignore them because of the low splits.

Posted by skidmark on 7/13/2010 5:15:00 PM (view original):
also, doesn't a cacther's pitch calling play a part in this? 

To a very minimal extent. The difference in cumulative ERA for a catcher with 60 PC to a catcher with 95 PC is probably less than half of a point, which could be a big game changer, but at the same time won't make or break a pitcher who has got the talent in the first place.

I prefer solid pitching over anything else, and it's been my experience that any pitcher who doesn't have at least 1 80+ pitch or 2 70+ pitches will not fit into my rotation, regardless of his splits. However, I've been relatively lenient on splits with decent results (aside from my rookies). I'll always take pitches over splits, though I think a balance of the two is important - I'd take a 70/70 splits with 72/70/64/55 guy over a 57/65 splits with 81/77/68/54 guy any day.

I've done correlations between all pitch ratings and Era,Whip,K/9,BB/9 and have found that by far the biggest factor has been Control and Splits, with vs R a little higher than vs L. The only other factor that has had a positive correlation was Pitch 1 on Whip, but still at something like <.05

Posted by opie100 on 7/11/2010 9:49:00 AM (view original):
What is the relationship between splits and pitches?  I've assumed that good pitches can make up for mediocre splits and vice-versa.  Is one more important than the other?  Is a 60/65 (l/r) with 70/60/60 (pitches) as good as a 70/75 with 60/50/50?

To be honest, this example is difficult to evaluate because both of these pitchers stink. The first guy has meh splits and crappy pitches, while the second guy has good splits but the worst pitches I’ve ever seen at the ML level.

If you asked would I take a 60/65 guys with 90/70/60 pitches vs a 70/75 guy with 80/60/50, I’d be pretty indifferent to be honest. The first guy will get more Ks but the second guy will have a lower Oavg; ultimately their overall performance would be similar.

Posted by lccooler on 7/16/2010 7:23:00 PM (view original):
I've done correlations between all pitch ratings and Era,Whip,K/9,BB/9 and have found that by far the biggest factor has been Control and Splits, with vs R a little higher than vs L. The only other factor that has had a positive correlation was Pitch 1 on Whip, but still at something like <.05

you have to take some sort of aggregate of the pitch rankings i think. the individual pitch ratings don't seem to be correlated too much, e.g. i have a guy with 98 pitch 1 and a 27 pitch 3. i've seen others with like a 75 pitch 1 and 100 pitch 2, yet it's rare to see someone with L & R that differ by more than 20 points.

if what i said is true (maybe it's not, it does seem that way to me though) it could be that splits are equally important as pitches, which would mean that R is something like 2x important as P1; yet running a statistical analysis would overstate that difference because R is also correlated with the L.

Yeah, what he said.

As MikeT23 says, there are a helluva lot of variables to consider in evaluating pitching, and there's no simple "splits over pitches" statement that can be generalized. I do believe, however, that good defense (especially range and glove) will help pitchers with low splits more than pitchers with low pitch ratings. I tend to value control over everything else, but Brian Nickle has put together seven solid years (career 3.55 ERA in 1100 IP), overcoming a 43 vR with 97 CTL and a 97 P1 in a hitter's park (Montgomery).

Posted by rtconnelly on 7/17/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lccooler on 7/16/2010 7:23:00 PM (view original):
I've done correlations between all pitch ratings and Era,Whip,K/9,BB/9 and have found that by far the biggest factor has been Control and Splits, with vs R a little higher than vs L. The only other factor that has had a positive correlation was Pitch 1 on Whip, but still at something like <.05

you have to take some sort of aggregate of the pitch rankings i think. the individual pitch ratings don't seem to be correlated too much, e.g. i have a guy with 98 pitch 1 and a 27 pitch 3. i've seen others with like a 75 pitch 1 and 100 pitch 2, yet it's rare to see someone with L & R that differ by more than 20 points.

if what i said is true (maybe it's not, it does seem that way to me though) it could be that splits are equally important as pitches, which would mean that R is something like 2x important as P1; yet running a statistical analysis would overstate that difference because R is also correlated with the L.

Just some rough numbers but, when it comes to WHIP:  vsL:.31, vsR:.50 while P1:.10 and P2:.13 P3:.09 while 4/5 are low. 
This is just from qualified starts from 6 leagues who just completed and are in the playoffs.

So it would seem that when it comes to whip, having three + pitches are somewhat important, but vsR is WAY more important.