Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Yeah. Do you?

Would it be higher? Prob. Appreciably higher? Doubtful. I think he would have tore up most of those lineups like he does now.

2000 AL r/g was about a run higher than 2016 r/g. It was easier for a pitcher to prevent runs in 2016 than it was in 2000.

And there's for one of your major flaws is. You think Scherzer would not adjust. He's a much better picture than Radke and he would.

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 3:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Yeah. Do you?

Would it be higher? Prob. Appreciably higher? Doubtful. I think he would have tore up most of those lineups like he does now.

2000 AL r/g was about a run higher than 2016 r/g. It was easier for a pitcher to prevent runs in 2016 than it was in 2000.

And there's for one of your major flaws is. You think Scherzer would not adjust. He's a much better picture than Radke and he would.

What do you mean? How would he adjust to having to face better offenses?

Pedro's WAR was 86 (career) and Phil Niekro's was 97... I think Pedro was better.

I agree. Niekro has a higher WAR because he had a much longer career.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 3:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 3:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/27/2017 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Yeah. Do you?

Would it be higher? Prob. Appreciably higher? Doubtful. I think he would have tore up most of those lineups like he does now.

2000 AL r/g was about a run higher than 2016 r/g. It was easier for a pitcher to prevent runs in 2016 than it was in 2000.

And there's for one of your major flaws is. You think Scherzer would not adjust. He's a much better picture than Radke and he would.

What do you mean? How would he adjust to having to face better offenses?

He would pitch differently than he does now and would attack those offenses differently. For god sakes. How many different pitchers back then do you think we're better than Scherzer anyway?

See BL your problem is you think that if a pitcher pitched in a different era, he'd pitch the same way, and have a relative adjustment in stats. A guy like Scherzer would be a top pitcher in any era. Radke? Not so much.

Radke would be good in a pitchers park like Petco as he pitched to contact.

I think Scherzer would be great in any era. I also think his ERA would fluctuate based on the era. If he pitched in the 60s and 70s it would be lower than it is today. If he threw in the late 90s and early 2000s, it would be higher.

I'm not saying Radke was as goodb or better than Scherzer. I'm saying it's not unreasonable to think that a good pitching year in 2000 would look different than a good pitching year in 2016.

Barring injury, I'm fairly certain that Scherzer would put up a better WAR in 2000 that Brad Radke. That right there makes the WAR vs WAR comparison here ridiculous.

Maybe. Replacement level for a pitcher was really low in 2000. If Scherzer came anywaywhere at all close to his 2016 numbers, he'd have a higher WAR.

If the point is that WAR can compare performance across Eras, here I think it fails.

Posted by sjpoker on 6/27/2017 8:25:00 PM (view original):
If the point is that WAR can compare performance across Eras, here I think it fails.

You aren't going to like this.

I get your argument. How could you look at the year Scherzer had--tons of innings, 143 ERA+, sub-1 WHIP, tons of K's, Cy Young, etc.--and say it was just as valuable as Brad Radke's 2000 season? It doesn't make sense.

But WAR doesn't look at those stats. It looks at the pitcher's runs allowed and considers what a league average pitcher would do against the same opponents, in front of the same defense, in the same ballpark.

In 2000 Radke allowed 4.73 runs per 9. An average pitcher in the same situation allows 6.40. Over 226 innings, he was 41 runs better than average.
In 2016 Scherzer allowed 3.04 runs per 9. An average pitcher in the same situation allows 4.51. Over 228 innings, he was 39 runs better than average.

Scale both of those to replacement instead of average and you get the same WAR.

So basically what you're saying is that WAR is a ****** stat.

Thanks for confirming what the rest of us already know.

What's ****** about it?

WAR says that 2000 Radke and 2016 Scherzer provided the same value as pitchers.

2016 Scherzer was clearly a much better pitcher than 2000 Radke.

Therefore, WAR is for ****.