Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 1:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 12:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/19/2017 11:58:00 AM (view original):
Most of us were watching baseball in both 2000 and 2016, and most of us (except for BL) seem to understand that 2016 Scherzer >>>>> 2000 Radke. Despite what somebody's precious little numbers might say.

Which is why it's important to watch the games.

BL's grandson, 50 years from now, may look back at 2000 Radke's and 2016 Scherzer's WAR and conclude "Hmm, looks like they were equally effective pitchers despite their vastly different stats." And BL's grandson would be very, very wrong.

Which is why context is important.

And also why BL cannot understand why Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame.

I'd take Scherzer over Radke. bWAR is just one stat. Every other stat goes in Scherzer's favor.

My point, again, is that it isn't out of line to argue that they had equal value based on runs allowed. Because when you account for the context of when and where they pitched, the gap closes significantly. If they switched places, Scherzer would have given up more runs and Radke would have given up less.

Do you know what you basically just said with this reply?

"Scherzer was better. WAR is the only stat that says he wasn't. But I'm going to argue just for the sake of arguing."

You just admitted WAR is ****. Thank you.

But that's the point I'm arguing. WAR isn't **** because it gives an unexpected result.

Both can be true:

Scherzer was better by most measures
There's a reasonable argument that Radke's value approached (or equaled) Scherzer's when taken in the context of league run scoring/ballpark/etc.

There's a reasonable argument that Radke's value approached (or equaled) Scherzer's when taken in the context of league run scoring/ballpark/etc.

What you don't say here is the 'context' is a formula or logic. And that 'context' is flawed.

BL is incapable of blaspheming his favorite stat. He'll defend it to the bitter end, no matter how retarded its results are.

This really isn't that hard. WAR compares runs allowed in context. It doesn't consider strikeouts or WHIP or any other stat. If it only confirmed what we already know by looking at ERA, WHIP, Ks, etc., it wouldn't have any use.

As is, it provides context that isn't readily apparent with other stats. It takes into account more context than ERA+ and gives it a volume component.

There are plenty of reasonable criticisms with how it makes its adjustments, but the ideas behind it are solid and it's a stat that works as a broad strokes comparison tool. Anything beyond a big picture view requires additional information, just like every other stat on earth.

It's got so much context that even numbers' nerds can't decide how to calculate it.
If something gets calculated more than one way, it can't even be called a stat.

"It's a stat that works as a broad strokes comparison tool. Anything beyond a big picture view requires additional information, just like every other stat on earth."

And yet you beat it to death like it's gospel. If it's a "big picture" comparison tool, that means looking at it on it's own, it's possible for it to have flaws, right? It's possible that it can get the value of a certain player or a certain season wrong, right?

According to B-R, Radke was second in pitcher WAR in 2000 to Pedro Martinez. Are you going to sit here and tell us he was more valuable that season than Mussina? Clemens? Hudson? Wells?

40+ pitchers had a lower ERA than Radke in 2000. 30+ pitchers allowed fewer baserunners per 9 innings than Radke in 2000. If WAR doesn't take that into account, then that just further reinforces what a bullshit metric WAR is.

Radke's 2000 season was so great the he didn't even get a single Cy Young vote that year.

For once in your life, just stop arguing and admit you've gone full retard in this debate.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 5:07:00 PM (view original):
According to B-R, Radke was second in pitcher WAR in 2000 to Pedro Martinez. Are you going to sit here and tell us he was more valuable that season than Mussina? Clemens? Hudson? Wells?

40+ pitchers had a lower ERA than Radke in 2000. 30+ pitchers allowed fewer baserunners per 9 innings than Radke in 2000. If WAR doesn't take that into account, then that just further reinforces what a bullshit metric WAR is.

Radke's 2000 season was so great the he didn't even get a single Cy Young vote that year.

For once in your life, just stop arguing and admit you've gone full retard in this debate.

He was 5th in baseball in 2000. Kris Benson was 7th. Chan Ho Park was 9th. Jeff D'Amico was 11th.

Pull any year and you're going to see weird names near the top. It doesn't mean they were great pitchers, it means they had great years. This is the case with ERA and WHIP too. Jeff D'Amico had a better ERA than Maddux, Glavine, Clemens, Mussina, and Schilling in 2000. Are you going to sit here and tell us that D'Amico was better than those pitchers?

Radke's WAR in 2000 was boosted by a terrible defense and a huge park factor. It's as simple as that. He allowed a lot of runs in a vacuum, but if you placed an average pitcher in the same ballpark and in front of the same defense, the average pitcher would have allowed more runs--about 40 more over the course of the season.

I didn't ask if Radke was better than those pitchers. Another smokescreen by you.

I asked if Radke was better than those pitchers THAT SEASON. And he wasn't. Radke wasn't even a Top 10 pitcher in baseball in 2000. It may even be a stretch to say he was Top 20. To suggest his ballpark and defense were to blame for ~35% of the runs he allowed is ridiculous.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/19/2017 5:28:00 PM (view original):
I didn't ask if Radke was better than those pitchers. Another smokescreen by you.

I asked if Radke was better than those pitchers THAT SEASON. And he wasn't. Radke wasn't even a Top 10 pitcher in baseball in 2000. It may even be a stretch to say he was Top 20. To suggest his ballpark and defense were to blame for ~35% of the runs he allowed is ridiculous.

Where did you get 35%? Why is it ridiculous to account for park factors and defense?

Of the AL pitchers who threw at least 220 innings, Radke was 3rd in ERA+ at 116. He had a good year.

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.

Posted by all3 on 7/19/2017 4:52:00 PM (view original):
It's got so much context that even numbers' nerds can't decide how to calculate it.
If something gets calculated more than one way, it can't even be called a stat.

^^^ This

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.

Yeah isn't that Mussina guy a BL HOFer?

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.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/19/2017 4:48:00 PM (view original):
This really isn't that hard. WAR compares runs allowed in context. It doesn't consider strikeouts or WHIP or any other stat. If it only confirmed what we already know by looking at ERA, WHIP, Ks, etc., it wouldn't have any use.

As is, it provides context that isn't readily apparent with other stats. It takes into account more context than ERA+ and gives it a volume component.

There are plenty of reasonable criticisms with how it makes its adjustments, but the ideas behind it are solid and it's a stat that works as a broad strokes comparison tool. Anything beyond a big picture view requires additional information, just like every other stat on earth.

Again, the way WAR is constructed - not considering Ks, WHIP - considering defense and ballpark factors, etc, at least for Baseball Reference may be deeply flawed.

Brad Radke proves that. Why?
1. Martinez • BOS 11.7
2. Radke • MIN 6.2
3. Mussina • BAL 5.6
4. Rogers • TEX 5.0
5. Colon • CLE 4.8
6. Wells • TOR 4.8
7. Clemens • NYY 4.6
8. Finley • CLE 4.5
9. Helling • TEX 4.2
10. Hudson • OAK 4.0

Based on this (as it was pointed out earler), Brad Radke was a more effective AL pitcher every pitcher in 2000 except for Pedro Martinez. Add the NL in, and he was only surpassed by Martinez, Randy Johnson, and Kevin Brown. That means better than Tim Hudson, Andy Pettite, David Wells, and I am probably missing others. Thats ludicrous.

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.