Carlos Zambrano is underrated

[CubColtPacer]

So Z is worth 1.6 wins with his bat, but can anybody tell me a game last year that the Cubs would have lost if not for Z's bat (but instead one of an average hitting pitcher)?

 

It doesn't quite work like that because that effectively penalizes Z for being really good at the plate and pitching well at the same time (because the Cubs would blow out the other team, therefore making Z's hitting less important). Not to mention, in a close game, would you count RBI's in the 2nd or 3rd inning of a 1 run game? That doesn't mean they aren't important, but it's hard to pinpoint that as the reason for the win.

Here's a few examples though:

 

Cubs win 7-6 over Padres, Z goes 3 for 3 with 1 RBI

 

Cubs win 6-3 over Marlins, Z has a key double in the 5th inning that led to 4 runs.

 

Cubs win 3-2 over Reds, Z's homer in the 3rd gives the Cubs the cushion they need.

[Mephistopheles]

and you're not even including "hidden runs" that come by him not making an out in a situation that led to a run scored via an RBI single by Soriano or Theriot. Most pitchers get out a lot more often than him, and that has value.

[Guest]

So Z is worth 1.6 wins with his bat, but can anybody tell me a game last year that the Cubs would have lost if not for Z's bat (but instead one of an average hitting pitcher)?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN200806020.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/FLO/FLO200808150.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200808210.shtml

 

Three games in which Zambrano's offense contributed to a run, and the Cubs won by one.

 

That doesn't mean the Cubs would have lost those games.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So Z is worth 1.6 wins with his bat, but can anybody tell me a game last year that the Cubs would have lost if not for Z's bat (but instead one of an average hitting pitcher)?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN200806020.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/FLO/FLO200808150.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200808210.shtml

 

Three games in which Zambrano's offense contributed to a run, and the Cubs won by one.

 

That doesn't mean the Cubs would have lost those games.

 

On average, they would have lost about half. 3/2 = 1.5, pretty close to the original number.

[Guest]

So Z is worth 1.6 wins with his bat, but can anybody tell me a game last year that the Cubs would have lost if not for Z's bat (but instead one of an average hitting pitcher)?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN200806020.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/FLO/FLO200808150.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200808210.shtml

 

Three games in which Zambrano's offense contributed to a run, and the Cubs won by one.

 

That doesn't mean the Cubs would have lost those games.

 

On average, they would have lost about half. 3/2 = 1.5, pretty close to the original number.

 

Zambrano's RBI's, which I'm assuming you're using to say he contributed a run, also came in the fourth, second and third innings, respectively. Considering the runs came early in each contest, there was still a lot of baseball left to be played and you can't assume that the games would have played out the same way. It's not like if Zambrano got the game-winning hit in the bottom of the ninth inning.

 

I agree that Zambrano had a bigger impact with his bat than most people would expect considering he is a pitcher, but I don't think those box scores directly prove much of anything in of themselves.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So Z is worth 1.6 wins with his bat, but can anybody tell me a game last year that the Cubs would have lost if not for Z's bat (but instead one of an average hitting pitcher)?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN200806020.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/FLO/FLO200808150.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200808210.shtml

 

Three games in which Zambrano's offense contributed to a run, and the Cubs won by one.

 

That doesn't mean the Cubs would have lost those games.

 

On average, they would have lost about half. 3/2 = 1.5, pretty close to the original number.

 

Zambrano's RBI's, which I'm assuming you're using to say he contributed a run, also came in the fourth, second and third innings, respectively. Considering the runs came early in each contest, there was still a lot of baseball left to be played and you can't assume that the games would have played out the same way. It's not like if Zambrano got the game-winning hit in the bottom of the ninth inning.

 

I agree that Zambrano had a bigger impact with his bat than most people would expect considering he is a pitcher, but I don't think those box scores directly prove much of anything in of themselves.

 

"prove" isn't quite what I was going for. I think it's more like "provide interesting context to the abstract value of Wins Above Replacement."

[treebird]

you really can't do what you're trying to do with WAR or WARP or VORP (translated into wins without considering defense, of course).

 

those numbers exist completely irrespective of what actually takes place during games as far as wins and losses.

 

also, i really don't like WAR.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

you really can't do what you're trying to do with WAR or WARP or VORP (translated into wins without considering defense, of course).

 

those numbers exist completely irrespective of what actually takes place during games as far as wins and losses.

 

also, i really don't like WAR.

 

I get that, I really do. But it's nonetheless interesting to see where Zambrano's bat potentially changed the outcome of an actual game.

[Mephistopheles]

you really can't do what you're trying to do with WAR or WARP or VORP (translated into wins without considering defense, of course).

 

those numbers exist completely irrespective of what actually takes place during games as far as wins and losses.

 

also, i really don't like WAR.

 

warp is brar, frar and prar more or less.

[DiamondMind]

Part 2!

 

http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2009/2/2/743444/pitcher-s-hitting-continue

[Blue W]

Am I looking at this wrong? If Z can only contribute with his bat in games he pitches, then how can you look at his pitching and hitting numbers seperately? He has pinch hit in the past, but the vast majority of his ABs obviously are in his starts. So if his pitching nets him 3.3 wins over average isn't his bat a part of those wins already? Or do they figure these numbers in a statistical vacuum where all numbers are of independent of each other? Perhaps I'm just revealing my lack of math skills. Can someone explain. Because to me its an irrelevant number since Z's hitting rarely if ever is the cause of overcoming an off day pitching, which is the only case where his bat is more important than his arm in determining his value to a team.

[Mephistopheles]

it won't overcome an offday pitching, but sometimes it will overcome an average day pitching and make it a good day production wise. to think it is irrelevant is to be stupid.

[rocket]

i wonder how many of your posts don't contain the word 'stupid'.

[Mephistopheles]

As of right now 7711.

[Guest]

As of right now 7711.

You've used the word stupid in 130 of your posts?

 

That's an impressive total.

[Mephistopheles]

I'm not sure how many of them were it posted by me, or me quoting someone who used it.

 

search.php?keywords=stupid&terms=all&author=mephistopheles&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

 

Tim has used it 75 times. IMB! has used it more than twice as much as I have. Rocket is at 108.

 

 

 

Slacker.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Mephistopheles

[wekse]

As of right now 7711.

You've used the word stupid in 130 of your posts?

 

That's an impressive total.

 

lololol

[Guest]

I'm not sure how many of them were it posted by me, or me quoting someone who used it.

 

search.php?keywords=stupid&terms=all&author=mephistopheles&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

 

Tim has used it 75 times. IMB! has used it more than twice as much as I have. Rocket is at 108.

 

 

 

Slacker.

I've got more than 3 times as many posts, too. So my rate is approximately 1/6th. Surely you wouldn't try to slant your use of stats like that, would you? ;)

[rocket]

I'm not sure how many of them were it posted by me, or me quoting someone who used it.

 

search.php?keywords=stupid&terms=all&author=mephistopheles&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

 

Tim has used it 75 times. IMB! has used it more than twice as much as I have. Rocket is at 108.

 

 

 

Slacker.

 

well to be fair, i don't think the post where i asked you how many times you used the world stupid should count.

[Mephistopheles]

I've got more than 3 times as many posts, too. So my rate is approximately 1/6th. Surely you wouldn't try to slant your use of stats like that, would you? ;)

 

Arent a lot of the old threads deleted?

[imb]

hey, let's get back to meph's front page articles!

[imb]

oh, sorry, i meant let's get back to meph talking about college football in 90 percent of his posts!

[Mephistopheles]

which is still lower than the percentage of posts imb! uses to attack meph

[imb]

which is still lower than the percentage of posts imb! uses to attack meph

 

incorrect

 

yet another stat you got wrong.

[Mephistopheles]

You're right and we should all bow down to IMB!.