Assesment on Hill, so far?

[Chocolate Milk]

I've always thought that when a pitcher makes the error, the following unearned runs should really be charged as earned runs.

 

well, they aren't. era is a measure of a guy's pitching ability, not his fielding ability. i don't really understand why everyone gripes about this rule. the reasoning behind it is pretty obvious. you don't subtract points from a fielder's batting average because he makes an error.

 

hill's hot start had me thinking he had a shot at the ASG...but his w/l record is likely to keep him out of it. a couple of his patented 13-14 strikeout games would help his cause.

Well, I'm probably in the minority but I feel that when the pitcher commits the error, he "earns" the run. Either way, it's just my opinion.

 

As for the bolded part... patented? He's never done that before in the majors. I'd let him do it at least a few times (heck, even once) before we start calling it patented.

 

geez...how about 10 strikeouts? he's done that a few times...will that work for you?

 

I'll take a couple of those.

[Exile on Waveland]

I've always thought that when a pitcher makes the error, the following unearned runs should really be charged as earned runs.

 

Someone mentioned this in the game thread. I think ERA is and should be a pitching statistic, not pitching + fielding.

 

While I agree with that, is there a stat for pitchers that combines ERA, pitcher errors and pitcher offensive output? I don't know how it would be done, but it could be interesting.

 

If that doesn't make sense, I'm trying to ask if Pitcher A puts up a 4.00 era but hits 6 homeruns, is he more effective than Pitcher B that has a 3.75 era but no hits all season or Pitcher C with a 3.75 era but tons of errors?

 

I don't know, I think it would be interesting and could be a nice way of measuring overall effectiveness as a baseball player, not necessarily as a pitcher.

 

I think the problem with that is that by far the most important thing a pitcher does is pitch. Pitching is 80% or more of what a pitcher does while defense and offense make up the other 20%. A pitcher may have 3 or 4 ABs in a game at most and an average of 2 or 3 defensive chances per game, while he throws to probably 80+ pitches to 20+ batters. The difference in pitchers offensively and defensively is not going to make up much of any difference in them in pitching.

 

Yes, I agree. Pitching may be even more than 80% importance. But if we're truly looking for who helps a team win -- and that should be the goal, not just who pitches better -- little things could make up a small difference in ERA. I just wonder how much pitcher offense/defense can make up for pitching.

[imb]

I've always thought that when a pitcher makes the error, the following unearned runs should really be charged as earned runs.

 

Someone mentioned this in the game thread. I think ERA is and should be a pitching statistic, not pitching + fielding.

 

While I agree with that, is there a stat for pitchers that combines ERA, pitcher errors and pitcher offensive output? I don't know how it would be done, but it could be interesting.

 

If that doesn't make sense, I'm trying to ask if Pitcher A puts up a 4.00 era but hits 6 homeruns, is he more effective than Pitcher B that has a 3.75 era but no hits all season or Pitcher C with a 3.75 era but tons of errors?

 

I don't know, I think it would be interesting and could be a nice way of measuring overall effectiveness as a baseball player, not necessarily as a pitcher.

 

I think the problem with that is that by far the most important thing a pitcher does is pitch. Pitching is 80% or more of what a pitcher does while defense and offense make up the other 20%. A pitcher may have 3 or 4 ABs in a game at most and an average of 2 or 3 defensive chances per game, while he throws to probably 80+ pitches to 20+ batters. The difference in pitchers offensively and defensively is not going to make up much of any difference in them in pitching.

 

Yes, I agree. Pitching may be even more than 80% importance. But if we're truly looking for who helps a team win -- and that should be the goal, not just who pitches better -- little things could make up a small difference in ERA. I just wonder how much pitcher offense/defense can make up for pitching.

 

BP did a study about that recently. I can't remember the final tally, but someone with a bat like Marquis subtracted a significant number off his ERA.

[Jon]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

[Exile on Waveland]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

 

I agree. I just wondered about a separate stat.

[Exile on Waveland]

I've always thought that when a pitcher makes the error, the following unearned runs should really be charged as earned runs.

 

Someone mentioned this in the game thread. I think ERA is and should be a pitching statistic, not pitching + fielding.

 

While I agree with that, is there a stat for pitchers that combines ERA, pitcher errors and pitcher offensive output? I don't know how it would be done, but it could be interesting.

 

If that doesn't make sense, I'm trying to ask if Pitcher A puts up a 4.00 era but hits 6 homeruns, is he more effective than Pitcher B that has a 3.75 era but no hits all season or Pitcher C with a 3.75 era but tons of errors?

 

I don't know, I think it would be interesting and could be a nice way of measuring overall effectiveness as a baseball player, not necessarily as a pitcher.

 

I think the problem with that is that by far the most important thing a pitcher does is pitch. Pitching is 80% or more of what a pitcher does while defense and offense make up the other 20%. A pitcher may have 3 or 4 ABs in a game at most and an average of 2 or 3 defensive chances per game, while he throws to probably 80+ pitches to 20+ batters. The difference in pitchers offensively and defensively is not going to make up much of any difference in them in pitching.

 

Yes, I agree. Pitching may be even more than 80% importance. But if we're truly looking for who helps a team win -- and that should be the goal, not just who pitches better -- little things could make up a small difference in ERA. I just wonder how much pitcher offense/defense can make up for pitching.

 

BP did a study about that recently. I can't remember the final tally, but someone with a bat like Marquis subtracted a significant number off his ERA.

 

Thanks, I'll have to look that up. When you're signing a pitcher, you are signing the full package -- not just the pitches he hurls towards the plate.

[Jon]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

 

I agree. I just wondered about a separate stat.

The problem with a stat combining everything is that in order to include fielding, you can't just look at errors, since that's just a part of fielding. You'd have to look at a lot more when fielding statistics still leave a bit to be desired. And in order to combine that with pitching, you'd have to figure out how much of the defensive game is pitching and how much of it is fielding in order to weight it properly.

 

Of course, a pitcher's offensive output would only apply to half of the pitchers in the majors. I'm not sure there has been a stat that has been NL-only before.

[Exile on Waveland]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

 

I agree. I just wondered about a separate stat.

The problem with a stat combining everything is that in order to include fielding, you can't just look at errors, since that's just a part of fielding. You'd have to look at a lot more when fielding statistics still leave a bit to be desired. And in order to combine that with pitching, you'd have to figure out how much of the defensive game is pitching and how much of it is fielding in order to weight it properly.

 

Of course, a pitcher's offensive output would only apply to half of the pitchers in the majors. I'm not sure there has been a stat that has been NL-only before.

 

There would be many difficulties with combining defense -- mainly because defensive stats already leave something to be desired. Though, I suppose you could simply just add back on unearned runs resulting from pitcher errors. That would be way less than perfect, though.

 

I think the offensive output add-back would be easier to deal with and more informing. And, obviously, it wouldn't really mean much for AL teams/pitchers.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Another thing to consider is there's a chicken-egg relationship between pitchers and defense, since the pitcher is completely responsible for the type of balls he receives in the field.

[Jon]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

 

I agree. I just wondered about a separate stat.

The problem with a stat combining everything is that in order to include fielding, you can't just look at errors, since that's just a part of fielding. You'd have to look at a lot more when fielding statistics still leave a bit to be desired. And in order to combine that with pitching, you'd have to figure out how much of the defensive game is pitching and how much of it is fielding in order to weight it properly.

 

Of course, a pitcher's offensive output would only apply to half of the pitchers in the majors. I'm not sure there has been a stat that has been NL-only before.

 

There would be many difficulties with combining defense -- mainly because defensive stats already leave something to be desired. Though, I suppose you could simply just add back on unearned runs resulting from pitcher errors. That would be way less than perfect, though.

 

I think the offensive output add-back would be easier to deal with and more informing. And, obviously, it wouldn't really mean much for AL teams/pitchers.

Hopefully one day they'll have the tools to really be able to accurately quantify defensive value, but the more I think about it, the more I think it would be ridiculously complicated to combine pitching and defensive value. You wouldn't be able to just add back in pitchers' errors since that would mean you're only holding them accountable for their bad plays and not crediting them for their good plays. But beyond that, you would not only have to figure out what percentage of fielding a pitcher is responsible for, you'd really have to calculate the level of defensive responsibility on a pitcher by pitcher basis. As T_T alluded to, a fly ball pitcher will likely have less of a defensive role than a ground ball pitcher. And much of what a pitcher is responsible for comes in the form of sacrifice bunts, which are more common (I'd imagine) in the NL than in the AL.

 

I'm not sure trying to calculate all of that would be fair to the computer.

[Exile on Waveland]

The purpose of a stat like ERA should never be to judge a pitcher's total value (including fielding and hitting). It should only be used to look his pitching.

 

I agree. I just wondered about a separate stat.

The problem with a stat combining everything is that in order to include fielding, you can't just look at errors, since that's just a part of fielding. You'd have to look at a lot more when fielding statistics still leave a bit to be desired. And in order to combine that with pitching, you'd have to figure out how much of the defensive game is pitching and how much of it is fielding in order to weight it properly.

 

Of course, a pitcher's offensive output would only apply to half of the pitchers in the majors. I'm not sure there has been a stat that has been NL-only before.

 

There would be many difficulties with combining defense -- mainly because defensive stats already leave something to be desired. Though, I suppose you could simply just add back on unearned runs resulting from pitcher errors. That would be way less than perfect, though.

 

I think the offensive output add-back would be easier to deal with and more informing. And, obviously, it wouldn't really mean much for AL teams/pitchers.

Hopefully one day they'll have the tools to really be able to accurately quantify defensive value, but the more I think about it, the more I think it would be ridiculously complicated to combine pitching and defensive value. You wouldn't be able to just add back in pitchers' errors since that would mean you're only holding them accountable for their bad plays and not crediting them for their good plays. But beyond that, you would not only have to figure out what percentage of fielding a pitcher is responsible for, you'd really have to calculate the level of defensive responsibility on a pitcher by pitcher basis. As T_T alluded to, a fly ball pitcher will likely have less of a defensive role than a ground ball pitcher. And much of what a pitcher is responsible for comes in the form of sacrifice bunts, which are more common (I'd imagine) in the NL than in the AL.

 

I'm not sure trying to calculate all of that would be fair to the computer.

 

Ha ha, maybe not. We're gonna need a bigger computer.

[davearm]

Hopefully one day they'll have the tools to really be able to accurately quantify defensive value, but the more I think about it, the more I think it would be ridiculously complicated to combine pitching and defensive value. You wouldn't be able to just add back in pitchers' errors since that would mean you're only holding them accountable for their bad plays and not crediting them for their good plays. But beyond that, you would not only have to figure out what percentage of fielding a pitcher is responsible for, you'd really have to calculate the level of defensive responsibility on a pitcher by pitcher basis. As T_T alluded to, a fly ball pitcher will likely have less of a defensive role than a ground ball pitcher. And much of what a pitcher is responsible for comes in the form of sacrifice bunts, which are more common (I'd imagine) in the NL than in the AL.

 

I'm not sure trying to calculate all of that would be fair to the computer.

I don't think it'd be nearly as difficult as you say. Once the pitch is delivered, the pitcher is just another fielder.

 

Therefore in theory, you should be able to measure a pitcher's defensive value in the same way you'd measure a shortstop's, or a left fielder's.

 

Now granted that alone is a challenge, but the pitcher part doesn't seem to complicate things any further.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

Rich Hill owns the Braves.

 

23 innings, 11 hits, 2 ER, 24 K/5 BB in three starts this year.

Edited June 8, 2007 by Locke's Eye Scar

[MPC]

i'm glad to see him get back to his early season form. hopefully he continues to dominate like he did on thursday night.

[Prior4CyYoung]

what did his era drop to after today?

[Lockes Eye Scar]

2.71

[Prior4CyYoung]

nice another good start or 2 and he might be all-star bound.

[nolanwood]

nice another good start or 2 and he might be all-star bound.

 

He should already be all-star bound. His #'s rank him in the top 5 pitchers in the NL

[IWU_CUBS_FAN]

nice another good start or 2 and he might be all-star bound.

 

He should already be all-star bound. His #'s rank him in the top 5 pitchers in the NL

 

wait...this isn't a thread about Koyie Hill...damn, i'm in the wrong place.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

In other news, the Cubs have scored a total of 10 runs in Hill's last 6 starts.

[soccer10k]

nice another good start or 2 and he might be all-star bound.

 

He should already be all-star bound. His #'s rank him in the top 5 pitchers in the NL

 

He needs to get more wins - I'm not saying that wins determine how good a player is but that's what the people/person who selects the pitchers will look at.

[soccer10k]

In Hill's starts this year the Cubs have scored:

 

1 run: 4 times

2 runs: 3 times

3 runs: 2 times

5 runs: 1 time

7 runs: 1 time

9 runs: 1 time

 

Over half the time they have scored 2 or fewer and 3/4 of the time the Cubs have scored 3 or fewer runs. Stoopid Cobs offense.

[C.C.]

I love to hear this from opposing hitters:

 

"He's got that big curveball that he throws for strikes and balls," Jones said. "They all have the same rotation, you just don't know which ones are going to be for strikes. You just have to be patient or be lucky to get one for a strike and get a hit off him."

[Chocolate Milk]

"He's got that big curveball that he throws for strikes and balls," Jones said.

 

Interesting....

[Soriano12]

IMO, yesterday was the best game I have ever seen Hll pitch. It could have very easily been a no hitter for him. It was that good.