Wow, I just found the perfect example of why I hate when ...

[Bote McBoteface]

people use win/loss record to determine a pitcher's worth.

 

 

 

 

 

http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_430912.jpg

 

3-10 with a 3.53 ERA. Ouch.

[CubmanPi]

Examples abound. I forget the names, but there were one or two guys starting for teh Nats who jumped out the same way. Check the Pirates and any other bad team and I'm sure you'll find more. Check the other side of the coin too. Pettitte was a 20-game winner with the Yankees while carrying an ERA just shy of 5.00. (Edit - Also, Bob Howry got the win the night he gave up the final 3 runs when the Cubs gave away their 5-run 9th inning lead.)

 

Anyone who has put any deeper thought than "winning is good, losing is bad, so this must be a good stat" understands the concept, and its evidence is readily available on many teams every season.

 

With a title so long, most people would find room to include what the thread is about.

[Bote McBoteface]

I was originally hoping to fit the whole thread into the title and just post a picture of Matt Cain. I thought it'd be funnier that way. It didn't work, so I had to improvise.

 

But, every year..especially when it comes down to cy young talk.. you hear about how "this pitcher deserves it more because he has more wins." It's something that really gets under my skin.

[David]

Randy Johnson 2004

[Omar]

Randy Johnson 2004

 

ERA+ of 171 and a 0.900 WHIP. Man, was he lights out or what?

[Derwood]

i know this is fictional, but in my sim league, I had Kelvim Escobar put up the following line:

 

211.1 IP, 3.32 ERA, 209 H, 31 BB, 216 K, 24 HR, OpAvg .255, 33 GS, 22 QS

 

final record?

 

6-17

 

my team literally scored 0 or 1 runs just about every time he pitched

[chuckywang]

Another reason why Cy Young's 511 wins is the most unbreakable record in sports, but also one of the most useless.

[David]

Randy Johnson 2004

 

ERA+ of 171 and a 0.900 WHIP. Man, was he lights out or what?

 

That he was.

 

I remember having an argument with one fan who was adamant about W-L being the most important pitcher statistic. I tried to get him to concede the point by comparing Johnson that year (2004) to Sean Estes (who went 15-8 with a 5.84 ERA that year). He just said that Johnson was a .500 pitcher and Estes was a winner.

 

I wanted to pull my hair out.

[Derwood]

Roger Clemens:

 

2005: 13-8, 1.008 WHIP, 221 ERA+

2006: 7-6, 1.041 WHIP, 197 ERA+

 

wow, what a loser

[Post Count Padder]

Randy Johnson 2004

 

ERA+ of 171 and a 0.900 WHIP. Man, was he lights out or what?

 

That he was.

 

I remember having an argument with one fan who was adamant about W-L being the most important pitcher statistic. I tried to get him to concede the point by comparing Johnson that year (2004) to Sean Estes (who went 15-8 with a 5.84 ERA that year). He just said that Johnson was a .500 pitcher and Estes was a winner.

 

I wanted to pull my hair out.

I run into the same problem. I pose them this question: You have one game to win. Do you go with pitcher A (7-12 2.75) or pitcher B (16-8 5.50)? About 60% of the people I ask choose pitcher B, citing the fact that "he wins games".

[Have a seat, Neifi]

I don't even think pitchers should be given wins and losses. Same with goalies in hockey.

[David]

Randy Johnson 2004

 

ERA+ of 171 and a 0.900 WHIP. Man, was he lights out or what?

 

That he was.

 

I remember having an argument with one fan who was adamant about W-L being the most important pitcher statistic. I tried to get him to concede the point by comparing Johnson that year (2004) to Sean Estes (who went 15-8 with a 5.84 ERA that year). He just said that Johnson was a .500 pitcher and Estes was a winner.

 

I wanted to pull my hair out.

I run into the same problem. I pose them this question: You have one game to win. Do you go with pitcher A (7-12 2.75) or pitcher B (16-8 5.50)? About 60% of the people I ask choose pitcher B, citing the fact that "he wins games".

 

The worst part is that they're usually 100% convinced that you're an idiot, and that they're right. I got called a "stat guy" today just because I pointed out that the Cubs ERA since getting rid of Barrett hasn't really changed.

[David]

I don't even think pitchers should be given wins and losses. Same with goalies in hockey.

 

I agree.

[David]

The funny thing is, these same people are quick to point out that the only reason Rex Grossman has like a .750 winning percentage is his defense.

 

It seems like people, even really dumb people (like much of the Bears fan base) are fairly open to statistical analysis, while brushing off most baseball stats outside of the triple crown stats and W-L.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

I don't even think pitchers should be given wins and losses. Same with goalies in hockey.

 

I agree.

 

Or QBs in the NFL.

[Rob]

Nolan Ryan in 1987 threw 211.2 innings with a 2.76 ERA. That ERA was the best in the entire league among qualified hurlers, yet he went 8-16. Anybody paying the slightest bit of attention 20 years ago would have realized then exactly how useless a stat wins is to evaluate a pitcher.

[CubmanPi]

I don't even think pitchers should be given wins and losses. Same with goalies in hockey.

 

I agree.

 

Or QBs in the NFL.

Is that a prominent/official stat? I've seen it used here and there, but for some reason I feel like I see references to a team's record with at quarterback rather frequently. Anyway, I think there are enough games decided the same way the Bears Cardinals MNF game was for that stat to carry the same meaning it has in baseball, or even hockey.

[Derwood]

Nolan Ryan in 1987 threw 211.2 innings with a 2.76 ERA. That ERA was the best in the entire league among qualified hurlers, yet he went 8-16. Anybody paying the slightest bit of attention 20 years ago would have realized then exactly how useless a stat wins is to evaluate a pitcher.

 

Steve carlton's "27 wins on a 59 win team" thing in 1972 is pretty overblown too

[soccer10k]

Nolan Ryan in 1987 threw 211.2 innings with a 2.76 ERA. That ERA was the best in the entire league among qualified hurlers, yet he went 8-16. Anybody paying the slightest bit of attention 20 years ago would have realized then exactly how useless a stat wins is to evaluate a pitcher.

 

Steve carlton's "27 wins on a 59 win team" thing in 1972 is pretty overblown too

 

That's just amazing that he was able to get that many wins for such a bad team. Not that he didn't earn them with his 1.97 ERA that year.

[soccer10k]

Roger Clemens:

 

2005: 13-8, 1.008 WHIP, 221 ERA+

2006: 7-6, 1.041 WHIP, 197 ERA+

 

wow, what a loser

 

In 2005 Clemens got 5 no decisions in games the Astros lost 1-0. They also scored 0 runs in nine of his starts that year.