Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 1:37:00 PM (view original):
ERA+ and WAR are not the same thing.

I know. WAR is subjective.

If you know they aren't the same, why are you bringing up ERA+ as if they are?

You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:42:00 PM (view original):
You're putting together a fantasy league team. You have to choose between 2000 Brad Radke and 2016 Max Scherzer for a spot on your pitching rotation.

Al: Scherzer
Bob: Scherzer
Carl: Scherzer
Dave: Scherzer
Ed: Scherzer
Frank: Scherzer
Greg: Scherzer
Hal: Scherzer
Iggy: Scherzer
Jake: Scherzer
Keith: Scherzer
Larry: Scherzer
Mike: Scherzer
Ned: Scherzer
Ollie: Scherzer
Pete: Scherzer
Quentin: Scherzer
Ray: Scherzer
Steve: Scherzer
Tom: Scherzer
Ullyses: Scherzer
Vic: Scherzer
Walt: Scherzer
Xavier: Scherzer
Yosef: Scherzer
Zach: Scherzer

and finally, BL: Hmmm . . . .

Obviously, for a fantasy team, you pick Scherzer because WAR isn't a category. I know you're dumb, but are you really this dumb?

It's funny when YOU try to call other people dumb in baseball discussions.

It's that lack of self-awareness thing. It kills you every time.

BL is at it again! Just loves to lift the cat butt up and expose it for abuse!

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

They are two different stats.

If WAR was the same as ERA+, we wouldn't need one or the other.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:42:00 PM (view original):
You're putting together a fantasy league team. You have to choose between 2000 Brad Radke and 2016 Max Scherzer for a spot on your pitching rotation.

Al: Scherzer
Bob: Scherzer
Carl: Scherzer
Dave: Scherzer
Ed: Scherzer
Frank: Scherzer
Greg: Scherzer
Hal: Scherzer
Iggy: Scherzer
Jake: Scherzer
Keith: Scherzer
Larry: Scherzer
Mike: Scherzer
Ned: Scherzer
Ollie: Scherzer
Pete: Scherzer
Quentin: Scherzer
Ray: Scherzer
Steve: Scherzer
Tom: Scherzer
Ullyses: Scherzer
Vic: Scherzer
Walt: Scherzer
Xavier: Scherzer
Yosef: Scherzer
Zach: Scherzer

and finally, BL: Hmmm . . . .

Obviously, for a fantasy team, you pick Scherzer because WAR isn't a category. I know you're dumb, but are you really this dumb?

It's funny when YOU try to call other people dumb in baseball discussions.

It's that lack of self-awareness thing. It kills you every time.

Have you ever played fantasy baseball before?

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

Also, how effective was Hunter at preventing runs?

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:42:00 PM (view original):
You're putting together a fantasy league team. You have to choose between 2000 Brad Radke and 2016 Max Scherzer for a spot on your pitching rotation.

Al: Scherzer
Bob: Scherzer
Carl: Scherzer
Dave: Scherzer
Ed: Scherzer
Frank: Scherzer
Greg: Scherzer
Hal: Scherzer
Iggy: Scherzer
Jake: Scherzer
Keith: Scherzer
Larry: Scherzer
Mike: Scherzer
Ned: Scherzer
Ollie: Scherzer
Pete: Scherzer
Quentin: Scherzer
Ray: Scherzer
Steve: Scherzer
Tom: Scherzer
Ullyses: Scherzer
Vic: Scherzer
Walt: Scherzer
Xavier: Scherzer
Yosef: Scherzer
Zach: Scherzer

and finally, BL: Hmmm . . . .

Obviously, for a fantasy team, you pick Scherzer because WAR isn't a category. I know you're dumb, but are you really this dumb?

It's funny when YOU try to call other people dumb in baseball discussions.

It's that lack of self-awareness thing. It kills you every time.

Have you ever played fantasy baseball before?

Are you missing the point that you've tried to equate Radke/Scherzer as being equally effective?

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 2:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 1:42:00 PM (view original):
You're putting together a fantasy league team. You have to choose between 2000 Brad Radke and 2016 Max Scherzer for a spot on your pitching rotation.

Al: Scherzer
Bob: Scherzer
Carl: Scherzer
Dave: Scherzer
Ed: Scherzer
Frank: Scherzer
Greg: Scherzer
Hal: Scherzer
Iggy: Scherzer
Jake: Scherzer
Keith: Scherzer
Larry: Scherzer
Mike: Scherzer
Ned: Scherzer
Ollie: Scherzer
Pete: Scherzer
Quentin: Scherzer
Ray: Scherzer
Steve: Scherzer
Tom: Scherzer
Ullyses: Scherzer
Vic: Scherzer
Walt: Scherzer
Xavier: Scherzer
Yosef: Scherzer
Zach: Scherzer

and finally, BL: Hmmm . . . .

Obviously, for a fantasy team, you pick Scherzer because WAR isn't a category. I know you're dumb, but are you really this dumb?

It's funny when YOU try to call other people dumb in baseball discussions.

It's that lack of self-awareness thing. It kills you every time.

Have you ever played fantasy baseball before?

Are you missing the point that you've tried to equate Radke/Scherzer as being equally effective?

Are you going to answer the question?

Way to attempt deflection.

No, I do not play fantasy baseball. It was a misstated analogy.

I was attempting to point out the idiocy of trying to equate 2000 Brad Radke to 2016 Max Scherzer in terms of being equally valuable pitchers.

Don't you agree that would be idiotic, to say they were equally valuable pitchers?

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

They are two different stats.

If WAR was the same as ERA+, we wouldn't need one or the other.

WAR isn't a stat.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

They are two different stats.

If WAR was the same as ERA+, we wouldn't need one or the other.

WAR isn't a stat.

Um...well...I hate to break it to you, but it is.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/18/2017 2:56:00 PM (view original):
Way to attempt deflection.

No, I do not play fantasy baseball. It was a misstated analogy.

I was attempting to point out the idiocy of trying to equate 2000 Brad Radke to 2016 Max Scherzer in terms of being equally valuable pitchers.

Don't you agree that would be idiotic, to say they were equally valuable pitchers?

In terms of runs allowed better than average, when considering league/ballpark/defense/volume, no, I would not agree.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 4:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

They are two different stats.

If WAR was the same as ERA+, we wouldn't need one or the other.

WAR isn't a stat.

Um...well...I hate to break it to you, but it is.

I hate to break it to you, but it's not. A "stat" isn't calculated differently by different outlets, allowing people to choose the formula/value they want to go with.

To use your Radke/Scherzer example:

Fangraphs: 2000 Radke - 4.2, 2016 Scherzer - 5.6
B-R: 2000 Radke - 6.2, 2016 Scherzer - 6.2

This is why people think WAR is a joke. It's subjective - and it's not a stat.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 4:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/18/2017 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/18/2017 1:48:00 PM (view original):
You mentioned runs allowed. Seems to me ERA+ is a fairly good way to measure how effective pitchers from different eras were at preventing runs. Though it's obvious you only favour the "stats" that support your argument.

They are two different stats.

If WAR was the same as ERA+, we wouldn't need one or the other.

WAR isn't a stat.

Um...well...I hate to break it to you, but it is.

I hate to break it to you, but it's not. A "stat" isn't calculated differently by different outlets, allowing people to choose the formula/value they want to go with.

To use your Radke/Scherzer example:

Fangraphs: 2000 Radke - 4.2, 2016 Scherzer - 5.6
B-R: 2000 Radke - 6.2, 2016 Scherzer - 6.2

This is why people think WAR is a joke. It's subjective - and it's not a stat.

I feel like we've had this discussion before. Think of those as two different stats, fWAR and bWAR. Fangraphs bases their calculation on FIP and BR uses RA. For the purpose of this discussion, we are using the stat from BR.