4 stats make a pitcher...

[gotime909]

Example

Sale 10-2, 7 wins when team scores 6 or more runs (5.89 average run support)

Verlander 9-4, 2 wins when team scores 6 or more runs (3.60 average run support)

No offense, but to me this is useless.

Say Sale was only giving up 1 run on average in those games and Verlander was giving up 3. Who's to say by that stat that Sale needed the run support?

 

[mjsb2]

No better gauge than to actually WATCH THE F'N GAMES!!!!!

I personally have no use for sabermetrics. You'll never show me any combinations of stats that will trump physically watching games.

I don't need to look at 20 pages of crunched numbers to know that Jose Valverde was the luckiest RP in the history of baseball last year.

Fire up the paper shredder, and form your own opinions people!!

This is an example of somebody who doesn't understand.

 

[gotime909]

This is an example of somebody who doesn't understand.

And an example of somebody who is just fine with that!

 

[tomdalton22]

This is an example of somebody who doesn't understand.

He is right about Valverde. None of his actual stats suggest that he should have been 45-0 in save opportunities last year.

 

[grandy]

He is right about Valverde. None of his actual stats suggest that he should have been 45-0 in save opportunities last year.

You won't get any argument that saves or save percentage are a good indicators of closer skill/performance.

Those sabermetric stats that are being tossed in the garbage by a few in this thread indicate that he was the worst among relievers with 40+ saves last season. Highest BB rate, worst FIP and xFIP.

 

[gotime909]

You won't get any argument that saves or save percentage are a good indicators of closer skill/performance.

Those sabermetric stats that are being tossed in the garbage by a few in this thread indicate that he was the worst among relievers with 40+ saves last season. Highest BB rate, worst FIP and xFIP.

MY POINT IS THAT I DON'T NEED TO LOOK IT UP!!!! My eyes told me that story without the help of that stuff.

 

[Thumb]

Actually, I agree with Hellifino in an aggregate sense, because the advanced stats are in a sense a further parsing of the primary ones he champions. I think, also, that the advance stats are especially valuable in the way that they separate pitchers' performances in a snapshot fashion--over the span of a month, season, a series of starts.

I also think there's way too much anger over what is really a nominal topic.

A couple of perfect examples why this is wrong:

Felix Hernandez, Doug Fister.

Felix had good ERA and K's but few wins, so if you use these 3 stats as an aggregate Felix would be behind someone with a little higher ERA and fewer K's but more wins when you use as an aggregate.

Doug was the same, low win totals, and low strikeouts, because he was a contact/ground ball pitcher. His ERA was nice but if you only used those stats he would still look poor compared to guys who was clearly better than.

Simple fact is Wins should never, ever be used as a stat to track a pitcher, even though it's nice to say "hey Verlander won 24 games", because like others said Winning ballgames is team dependent, and heavily offense dependent, something a pitcher does not control.

There is no 1 single stat you can use, but an overall combination of classic and sabermetrics gives you the best results.

60 years ago everyone was watching black and white TV, now we have 1080p Hi-def. It's the same with stats, just a more detailed look at the same things.

 

[grandy]

MY POINT IS THAT I DON'T NEED TO LOOK IT UP!!!! My eyes told me that story without the help of that stuff.

But it helps if you don't watch other players/teams every day. I can easily picture some d-bag non-Tigers fan saying "49 for 49 with a 2.24 ERA, what an amazing closer".

 

[Mitchrapp]

But it helps if you don't watch other players/teams every day. I can easily picture some d-bag non-Tigers fan saying "49 for 49 with a 2.24 ERA, what an amazing closer".

D-bag stepping up ;-)

For 2011 he was, especially if look at just his save opportunities. He got the job done and I know we've had this discussion before but if a closer can come in 49 games with a lead, not give it up - he did a fine job. No one is comparing him to Mo Rivera but he had a heck of a season.

 

[byco42]

A couple of perfect examples why this is wrong:

Felix Hernandez, Doug Fister.

Felix had good ERA and K's but few wins, so if you use these 3 stats as an aggregate Felix would be behind someone with a little higher ERA and fewer K's but more wins when you use as an aggregate.

Doug was the same, low win totals, and low strikeouts, because he was a contact/ground ball pitcher. His ERA was nice but if you only used those stats he would still look poor compared to guys who was clearly better than.

When I mean "aggregate" I mean over a "career."

 

[mjsb2]

He is right about Valverde. None of his actual stats suggest that he should have been 45-0 in save opportunities last year.

You don't have to tell me that.

I've been called plenty of names for saying that Valverde wasn't a top 5 closer, nor was he one of the two best Tigers RP last year.

 

[byco42]

Example

Sale 10-2, 7 wins when team scores 6 or more runs (5.89 average run support)

Verlander 9-4, 2 wins when team scores 6 or more runs (3.60 average run support)

Sale has also given up 2 runs or less in 7 of his wins.

 

[mjsb2]

MY POINT IS THAT I DON'T NEED TO LOOK IT UP!!!! My eyes told me that story without the help of that stuff.

So did ours.

These stats simply help us quantify what our eyes tell us.

Obviously you can tell by watching the game Cabrera is an elite hitter, but you can't tell just how good he is, or how he compares to the other great hitters in the game (and no, saying he's better than somebody isn't comparing him). These stats give us a better picture of how he compares to them, how much better he is than them, how many more runs he creates then them.

Those are things you can't possibly tell by simply watching.

If you don't care about that stuff, that's fine, by all means just watch the games and enjoy them.

Me personally, I enjoy watching the games, and then looking at the stats to gain as much of an understanding as I can.

 

[Mitchrapp]

So did ours.

These stats simply help us quantify what our eyes tell us.

Obviously you can tell by watching the game Cabrera is an elite hitter, but you can't tell just how good he is, or how he compares to the other great hitters in the game (and no, saying he's better than somebody isn't comparing him). These stats give us a better picture of how he compares to them, how much better he is than them, how many more runs he creates then them.

Those are things you can't possibly tell by simply watching.

If you don't care about that stuff, that's fine, by all means just watch the games and enjoy them.

Me personally, I enjoy watching the games, and then looking at the stats to gain as much of an understanding as I can.

I can tell you pretty accurately that Miguel is better than Delmon Young.

I can tell you pretty accurately than Delmon Young is better than me.

Btw, its great to want to know the stuff stats can tell you that might not be so obvious but its not bad if others don't care for it. Some people just have an opinion on what they see and that's okay.

 

[tomdalton22]

So did ours.

These stats simply help us quantify what our eyes tell us.

Obviously you can tell by watching the game Cabrera is an elite hitter, but you can't tell just how good he is, or how he compares to the other great hitters in the game (and no, saying he's better than somebody isn't comparing him). These stats give us a better picture of how he compares to them, how much better he is than them, how many more runs he creates then them.

Those are things you can't possibly tell by simply watching.

If you don't care about that stuff, that's fine, by all means just watch the games and enjoy them.

Me personally, I enjoy watching the games, and then looking at the stats to gain as much of an understanding as I can.

These stats also allow us to look at players from other teams to see how they stack up or get some level of understanding about a player that is being looked at by the team in a trade or free agent. I don't know about most posters here but I don't watch a single game outside of Tigers games.

 

[Mitchrapp]

For example, I can tell you Miguel is better than Hamilton. Even if fangraph tell me otherwise. My opinion doesn't mean less than someone else's who uses these fangraph type numbers.

 

[mjsb2]

I can tell you pretty accurately that Miguel is better than Delmon Young.

I can tell you pretty accurately than Delmon Young is better than me.

Btw, its great to want to know the stuff stats can tell you that might not be so obvious but its not bad if others don't care for it. Some people just have an opinion on what they see and that's okay.

Not sure why you quoted me, because it seems as if you didn't ready my post.

 

[kalinecountry]

There is no 1 single stat you can use, but an overall combination of classic and sabermetrics gives you the best results.


imo, in this day and age, it is best to change with the times and add as much as possible. I am interested in as much of the sabermetrics to add to the classic old school. If you don't like certain new stats then don't use but it is still there for all to at least look at. The more you have to digest about players, it gives you a better perspective, along with the eye.
Baseball is and always will be about stats.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Not sure why you quoted me, because it seems as if you didn't ready my post.

Right. I didn't mean to quote you. But I did ready your post :hehe:

 

[mjsb2]

Right. I didn't mean to quote you. But I did ready your post :hehe:

Gotcha.

Was confused, as your post basically covered what I said, but seemed as if by quoting me you were disagreeing with me.