Stat Suggestion

[Wilson A2000]

If there is one stat that I would like to see changed in baseball, it is this one. Imagine a scenario where pitcher A qualifies for a win, is taken out of the game after 5 or more innings (complete, not half innings), and reliever A comes in. Reliever A promptly gives up the lead and would be on the hook for the loss. During the course of the next half inning, pitcher A and reliever A's team takes the lead again and continues to hold it until the game is over. Pitcher A's team wins. Why should reliever A get credit for the win when he actually blew the game? I think the win should go to pitcher A.

 

What do you think? Am I missing something?

[SouthSideRyan]

If you insist on using wins they should go to the player who contributed the most to the victory. It's best to just never use wins.

[jersey cubs fan]

If there is one stat that I would like to see changed in baseball, it is this one. Imagine a scenario where pitcher A qualifies for a win, is taken out of the game after 5 or more innings (complete, not half innings), and reliever A comes in. Reliever A promptly gives up the lead and would be on the hook for the loss. During the course of the next half inning, pitcher A and reliever A's team takes the lead again and continues to hold it until the game is over. Pitcher A's team wins. Why should reliever A get credit for the win when he actually blew the game? I think the win should go to pitcher A.

 

What do you think? Am I missing something?

 

I think you're right, but it doesn't really matter.

 

 

Traditionalists would say he shouldn't have left after 5 innings.

[Wilson A2000]

If you insist on using wins they should go to the player who contributed the most to the victory. It's best to just never use wins.

 

I don't see how any pitcher other than the starter would contribute the most to the victory.

[jersey cubs fan]

If you insist on using wins they should go to the player who contributed the most to the victory. It's best to just never use wins.

 

I don't see how any pitcher other than the starter would contribute the most to the victory.

 

Starter goes 6 innings giving up 5 runs, team wins 6-5.

[Wilson A2000]

If you insist on using wins they should go to the player who contributed the most to the victory. It's best to just never use wins.

 

I don't see how any pitcher other than the starter would contribute the most to the victory.

 

Starter goes 6 innings giving up 5 runs, team wins 6-5.

 

True. I would change my initial suggestion to a starter who performed a quality start.

[imb]

if we're getting into these hypotheticals, we should just ditch Ws anyway

[UMFan83]

I think that wins should be a novelty stat that is simply a representation of a team's record when that starter starts. So whether you pitch 0.1 innings and get ejected for throwing at someone with a 5-0 lead, or pitch 12 innings and give up 1 run and lose, you deal with the consequences. What is the point of relievers getting wins and losses? Does any care that Carlos Marmol went 2-4 last year, or do they care about his ERA, WHIP, K/9, BB, etc.?

 

I would only approve of this change if everyone whose anyone in baseball agreed to not place one iota of importance on wins and losses as it pertains to a pitcher's worth. I am pretty sure that people in hockey could care less about W-L for a goalie, and a goalie's W-L might be more indicative of a goalie's value than a pitcher's value (although still with significant flaws).

 

If this was the case, here is how our starter's W-L would be last year

Zambrano 18-10 (really 9-7)

Harden 13-13 (9-9)

Dempster 13-18 (11-9)

Wells 14-13 (12-10)

Lilly 16-11 (12-9)

Marshall 2-7 (2-5)

Gorzelanny 4-3 (4-2)

Hart 3-1 (3-1)

Samardzija 0-2 (0-2)

[Schwarber Fan]

I think that wins should be a novelty stat that is simply a representation of a team's record when that starter starts. So whether you pitch 0.1 innings and get ejected for throwing at someone with a 5-0 lead, or pitch 12 innings and give up 1 run and lose, you deal with the consequences. What is the point of relievers getting wins and losses? Does any care that Carlos Marmol went 2-4 last year, or do they care about his ERA, WHIP, K/9, BB, etc.?

 

I would only approve of this change if everyone whose anyone in baseball agreed to not place one iota of importance on wins and losses as it pertains to a pitcher's worth. I am pretty sure that people in hockey could care less about W-L for a goalie, and a goalie's W-L might be more indicative of a goalie's value than a pitcher's value (although still with significant flaws).

 

If this was the case, here is how our starter's W-L would be last year

Zambrano 18-10 (really 9-7)

Harden 13-13 (9-9)

Dempster 13-18 (11-9)

Wells 14-13 (12-10)

Lilly 16-11 (12-9)

Marshall 2-7 (2-5)

Gorzelanny 4-3 (4-2)

Hart 3-1 (3-1)

Samardzija 0-2 (0-2)

 

So if a pitcher goes 2/3 of an inning and gives up 10 runs, and then his team rallies to win 11-10, the starter should get the win rather than another pitcher that held the opposition scoreless for the rest of the game?

 

No way this ever happens, and it shouldn't.

[UMFan83]

I think that wins should be a novelty stat that is simply a representation of a team's record when that starter starts. So whether you pitch 0.1 innings and get ejected for throwing at someone with a 5-0 lead, or pitch 12 innings and give up 1 run and lose, you deal with the consequences. What is the point of relievers getting wins and losses? Does any care that Carlos Marmol went 2-4 last year, or do they care about his ERA, WHIP, K/9, BB, etc.?

 

I would only approve of this change if everyone whose anyone in baseball agreed to not place one iota of importance on wins and losses as it pertains to a pitcher's worth. I am pretty sure that people in hockey could care less about W-L for a goalie, and a goalie's W-L might be more indicative of a goalie's value than a pitcher's value (although still with significant flaws).

 

If this was the case, here is how our starter's W-L would be last year

Zambrano 18-10 (really 9-7)

Harden 13-13 (9-9)

Dempster 13-18 (11-9)

Wells 14-13 (12-10)

Lilly 16-11 (12-9)

Marshall 2-7 (2-5)

Gorzelanny 4-3 (4-2)

Hart 3-1 (3-1)

Samardzija 0-2 (0-2)

 

So if a pitcher goes 2/3 of an inning and gives up 10 runs, and then his team rallies to win 11-10, the starter should get the win rather than another pitcher that held the opposition scoreless for the rest of the game?

 

No way this ever happens, and it shouldn't.

 

Why not? The W-L stat is worthless anyways. There's no way to make it right so just make it as simple as possible, take the reliever getting wins and losses element out of it and simply make it a "record when X starts game" stat, that is a novelty stat and no importance is given to it. If a starter gives up 10 runs in 2/3 of an inning and somehow wins, it balances out for the time he goes 8 innings and gives up 1 run and loses, just like how similar crap happens with the way the stat is calculated now.

 

Basically my true point is that the W-L stat is so useless and stupid it doesn't really matter what they do with it because it will never have any importance on the game of baseball.