How do you calculate a quality start?

[cuubs4life]

I hear the term "quality start" used a lot. Is this calculated a certain way? or just an opinion of the official score?

[CubColtPacer]

The official qualifications for a quality start are 6 or more innings, 3 or less earned runs.

[NCCubFan]

A totally meaningless statistic IMO. Under the definition, pitching 6 innings and giving up 3 earned runs (4.50 ERA) is better than pitching a complete game and giving up 4 (4.00 ERA). I don't buy that.

[UK1679666180]

How do I? The standard definition has been given but it isn't much of a stat.

 

You can tell how well a pitcher is throwing by watching him more than reading his box score.

[NCCubFan]

Qualitatively, to me a quality start means that the pitcher goes deep enough into the game to avoid taxing the bullpen (at least 6 innings, preferably 7) and leaves with his team leading or close enough to have a reasonable chance to win. That says he's doing his job more than looking at the numbers does.

[Danny82]

Totally meaningless stat?

 

Hardly.

 

It's a good statistic for showing the percentage of time that a pitcher keeps his team in the game. While there are certainly outlying situations in which a start that qualifies as a QS might not be as good as an effort that does not, those situations do not completely invalidate the stat.

[Bruce Miles]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

[UK1679666180]

Totally meaningless stat?

 

Hardly.

 

It's a good statistic for showing the percentage of time that a pitcher keeps his team in the game. While there are certainly outlying situations in which a start that qualifies as a QS might not be as good as an effort that does not, those situations do not completely invalidate the stat.

 

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

I see the purpose of the stat, it's too simple in nature though. My problem is with how those who put too much validity with the stat as some do with Wins by a pitcher.

 

Baseball is a pitch by pitch segmented game.

 

While it's great to look at a box score and see that a pitcher was effective, I want to see how and why he was effective.

[frostwyrm]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

I think it's perfectly appropriate to jump on the minimum requirement. If the bulk of quality starts tend to exceed the minimum requirement by a significant margin then that's a good argument for making the minimum requirement more stringent. Quoting a 1.63 ERA just underscores the lameness of the quality starts that just barely met the requirement.

[Mephistopheles]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

[Bruce Miles]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

 

 

We're talking about quality starts, period, here. I'm not talking about the bad starts, so there are no stats that we're "throwing out" here. In the Cubs' quality starts, a stat people like to malign, they have a 1.63 ERA. That's all quality starts combined, whether they meet the minimum requirement or not. In games the Cubs don't get a quality start, the team record is 11-29.

[Brian]

IMO, 6IP 3ER is more impressive in the AL. It still says that the pitcher kept his team in the game, and pitched 2/3 of the game. If a pitcher can do that consistently than they are doing their job.

[frostwyrm]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

 

 

We're talking about quality starts, period, here. I'm not talking about the bad starts, so there are no stats that we're "throwing out" here. In the Cubs' quality starts, a stat people like to malign, they have a 1.63 ERA. That's all quality starts combined, whether they meet the minimum requirement or not. In games the Cubs don't get a quality start, the team record is 11-29.

 

Great, so let's change the requirement to 7IP 3ER. 7IP 3ER equates to a 3.86 ERA, which is actually good. I'm sure the quality starts with an ERA over 4.00 didn't produce nearly as good a record as all the quality starts combined, reason being that a 4+ ERA isn't particulary good.

[CubColtPacer]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

 

 

We're talking about quality starts, period, here. I'm not talking about the bad starts, so there are no stats that we're "throwing out" here. In the Cubs' quality starts, a stat people like to malign, they have a 1.63 ERA. That's all quality starts combined, whether they meet the minimum requirement or not. In games the Cubs don't get a quality start, the team record is 11-29.

 

Great, so let's change the requirement to 7IP 3ER. 7IP 3ER equates to a 3.86 ERA, which is actually good. I'm sure the quality starts with an ERA over 4.00 didn't produce nearly as good a record as all the quality starts combined, reason being that a 4+ ERA isn't particulary good.

 

You aren't just throwing out 6 innings, 3 runs then. You're throwing out 6 innings 2 runs, 6 innings 1 run, and 6 innings 0 runs. Is that not worse then just leaving in the 6 innings 3 runs?

[frostwyrm]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

 

 

We're talking about quality starts, period, here. I'm not talking about the bad starts, so there are no stats that we're "throwing out" here. In the Cubs' quality starts, a stat people like to malign, they have a 1.63 ERA. That's all quality starts combined, whether they meet the minimum requirement or not. In games the Cubs don't get a quality start, the team record is 11-29.

 

Great, so let's change the requirement to 7IP 3ER. 7IP 3ER equates to a 3.86 ERA, which is actually good. I'm sure the quality starts with an ERA over 4.00 didn't produce nearly as good a record as all the quality starts combined, reason being that a 4+ ERA isn't particulary good.

 

You aren't just throwing out 6 innings, 3 runs then. You're throwing out 6 innings 2 runs, 6 innings 1 run, and 6 innings 0 runs. Is that not worse then just leaving in the 6 innings 3 runs?

 

Best way IMO would be to require a min. of 6IP and an ERA less than or equal to 4.00 for the game. That way you would have to do 7IP if you allow 3ER, but you could still get a quality start by doing 6IP/2ER. This would elimate those mediocre games that are currently counted as quality starts. 4.50 ERA is not "quality" pitching.

[Derwood]

you can go 6 innings and give up 10 runs and get a quality start (if 7 are unearned)

[Soul]

you can go 6 innings and give up 10 runs and get a quality start (if 7 are unearned)

 

....and an error is often a subjective, arbitrary determination as well.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Qualitatively, to me a quality start means that the pitcher goes deep enough into the game to avoid taxing the bullpen (at least 6 innings, preferably 7) and leaves with his team leading or close enough to have a reasonable chance to win. That says he's doing his job more than looking at the numbers does.

 

The only way a pitcher can put his team in the lead is with his bat, no? So what you're talking about here isn't even a measure of the pitchers' effectiveness at pitching !!

[Bruce Miles]

Actually, the stat is meaningul. People want to jump on the minimum requirement and say it's a bogus stat. The Cubs have 43 quality starts. The team is 31-12 in those games, and their starters have a 1.63 ERA in those starts.

 

Well of course every team's ERA is going to be outstanding when they basically say "hey let's throw out the bad starts and keep the good ones." It's kinda worthless.

 

 

We're talking about quality starts, period, here. I'm not talking about the bad starts, so there are no stats that we're "throwing out" here. In the Cubs' quality starts, a stat people like to malign, they have a 1.63 ERA. That's all quality starts combined, whether they meet the minimum requirement or not. In games the Cubs don't get a quality start, the team record is 11-29.

 

Great, so let's change the requirement to 7IP 3ER. 7IP 3ER equates to a 3.86 ERA, which is actually good. I'm sure the quality starts with an ERA over 4.00 didn't produce nearly as good a record as all the quality starts combined, reason being that a 4+ ERA isn't particulary good.

 

You aren't just throwing out 6 innings, 3 runs then. You're throwing out 6 innings 2 runs, 6 innings 1 run, and 6 innings 0 runs. Is that not worse then just leaving in the 6 innings 3 runs?

 

Best way IMO would be to require a min. of 6IP and an ERA less than or equal to 4.00 for the game. That way you would have to do 7IP if you allow 3ER, but you could still get a quality start by doing 6IP/2ER. This would elimate those mediocre games that are currently counted as quality starts. 4.50 ERA is not "quality" pitching.

 

How many of those "mediocre" starts to you think the Cubs have had this year? One. Exactly one. On April 9, Ted Lilly pitched 6 innings and gave up 3 earned runs. The Cubs lost 5-3 when Howry gave up 2 runs. In all other quality starts, the starting pitcher has exceeded, in most cases by far, the minimum standard. There is research that says this is the case in most quality starts. It's not a perfect measure. But it does tell a pretty accurate story.