Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2012 5:37:00 PM (view original):
Batters can guarantee a hit?  Or a well-struck ball?

I never said that.  Batters have more control than pitchers over how well a ball is struck.  This is reflected in the WIS simulation engine.  I think someone posted the decision tree in the SLB forums a while ago; it shows the batter having more influence over whether or not he gets a hit.

Posted by jm1618 on 2/25/2012 5:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2012 5:37:00 PM (view original):
Batters can guarantee a hit?  Or a well-struck ball?

I never said that.  Batters have more control than pitchers over how well a ball is struck.  This is reflected in the WIS simulation engine.  I think someone posted the decision tree in the SLB forums a while ago; it shows the batter having more influence over whether or not he gets a hit.

So you're getting your info on baseball from the WifS sim engine?

Posted by tecwrg on 2/25/2012 5:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/25/2012 5:16:00 PM (view original):
how come there is two tec's in here? is that to confused jrd even more?

Is that even possible?

Says the guy who thinks Clemens for 8 years was a better pitcher than Clemens for those 8 plus another 5 very good years.

I'm sure you've seen charts like this before(well, maybe not if you're getting your info from the WifS sim engine):



Who do you think was responsible for those low outside pitches that kept Williams in the low .200s?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2012 5:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jm1618 on 2/25/2012 5:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2012 5:37:00 PM (view original):
Batters can guarantee a hit?  Or a well-struck ball?

I never said that.  Batters have more control than pitchers over how well a ball is struck.  This is reflected in the WIS simulation engine.  I think someone posted the decision tree in the SLB forums a while ago; it shows the batter having more influence over whether or not he gets a hit.

So you're getting your info on baseball from the WifS sim engine?

No, it comes from common sense.

I really don't care about convincing anyone of this.  None of us are ever going to budge.

Salesmen must have a field day with you jrd.

"I can sell you this Corvette for $20,000 OR you can have the Corvette AND this awesome used Ford Fiesta for $25,000!!"

Is the Fiesta as good as the Corvette? Does the Corvette somehow become a better car in the second scenario because you're getting something additional with it?

Here's the thing.  Every team has charts like that on every batter.    Why would anyone throw Williams anything but low and away?   Because A) you can't throw the ball with enough velocity/break to pinpoint it every time and B) the great hitters would eventually adjust.     But NO ONE tries to groove one.  When they do, it was a mistake.   But you know who controlled where it went?  The pitcher.

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/25/2012 5:52:00 PM (view original):
Salesmen must have a field day with you jrd.

"I can sell you this Corvette for $20,000 OR you can have the Corvette AND this awesome used Ford Fiesta for $25,000!!"

Is the Fiesta as good as the Corvette? Does the Corvette somehow become a better car in the second scenario because you're getting something additional with it?

Honestly, I'm surprised you can even read.

Saying Carlton was the better pitcher doesn't cost anything.

The pitcher who had the better career is the better pitcher.

Yes, but you always go back to longevity. The additional 1800 innings. Point is, the second scenario above is Carlton's career. 15 great years, with a bonus thrown in (and 5 of those years were average at best).  The first scenario is Hunter's career.  The Corvette (or the 1st 15 years of each player's career) is the same. Throwing in the extra with Scenario 2 doesn't change that.

Carlton's extra innings don't change the fact that he and Hunter were the same pitcher. Carlton's health just allowed him to do it for longer.

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/25/2012 6:00:00 PM (view original):
Yes, but you always go back to longevity. The additional 1800 innings. Point is, the second scenario above is Carlton's career. 15 great years, with a bonus thrown in (and 5 of those years were average at best).  The first scenario is Hunter's career.  The Corvette (or the 1st 15 years of each player's career) is the same. Throwing in the extra with Scenario 2 doesn't change that.

Carlton's extra innings don't change the fact that he and Hunter were the same pitcher. Carlton's health just allowed him to do it for longer.

Carlton was better for 3400 innings.  Then Hunter retired and Carlton kept pitching (well enough that his ERA, ERA+, and FIP never fell behind Hunter) for another 1800 innings.  Those innings have value.  That additional value in addition to what he did for the first 3400 innings makes him the better pitcher by far.

He wasn't better than Hunter for 3,400 IP.  Hunter was better at keeping runners off the basepaths. Pretty important for a pitcher, I'd say. In fact, I'd argue it's the most important attribute for a pitcher.

You obviously don't understand FIP.

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/25/2012 6:11:00 PM (view original):
He wasn't better than Hunter for 3,400 IP.  Hunter was better at keeping runners off the basepaths. Pretty important for a pitcher, I'd say. In fact, I'd argue it's the most important attribute for a pitcher.

You could argue that but you'd be wrong.

Why do you think we've been talking about BABIP for half these pages?  Hunter's ability to keep 0.1 less runner off the basebaths had a lot to do with his BABIP, which is largely a product of defense and luck.

Carlton had a better FIP, which is a much better stat than WHIP because is removes the noise from defense and luck.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2012 6:14:00 PM (view original):
You obviously don't understand FIP.

Exactly.

Carlton was also better by a significant margin according to BR's WAR.  His best seasons were significantly better than Hunter's by that measure.