POLL Top 10 poll #18: #18 player in history - Runoff 2

[MilkSpiller22]

Yeah I could see that, except they'd need to come up with a different name for it because the other team is still not earning the run.

semantics... i dont care for them... change the name of the stat... its still the same stat...

 

[calsnowskier]

Should Maddux get a bump for all the gold gloves, or as a pitcher is that already baked into his stats?
These are the kinds of things I think about when I should be working on my taxes.....

Technically, a pitcher with a good glove will have WORSE numbers (ERA, at least). If a pitcher commits an error with 2 outs, than any runs he gives up the rest of that inning do not go on his pitching ledger.

 

[calsnowskier]

Adjusted ERA+- most times being top 5

1.	Clemens • 1984-2007	14
2.	Young • 1890-1911	13
3.	Grove • 1925-1941	12
	Johnson • 1907-1927	12
5.	Maddux • 1986-2008	10
6.	Foster • 1923-1937	9
	Mathewson • 1900-1916	9
	Palmer • 1965-1984	9
	Seaver • 1967-1986	9
10.	Alexander • 1911-1930	8
	Brown • 1903-1916	8
	Johnson • 1988-2009	8
	Keefe • 1880-1893	8
	Nichols • 1890-1906	8
	Paige • 1927-1965	8

What is “Adjusted ERA+”? ERA+ is already an adjusted stat. Is this one of those stats that puts feels into the equation (giving extra points to Williams while taking points away from Bonds)?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

What is “Adjusted ERA+”? ERA+ is already an adjusted stat. Is this one of those stats that puts feels into the equation (giving extra points to Williams while taking points away from Bonds)?

no, it is just ERA+... not sure why Baseball-reference calls it ADJUSTED and has the +... probably just easier to find for the scrollers out there...

 

[calsnowskier]

Yeah I could see that, except they'd need to come up with a different name for it because the other team is still not earning the run.

There are a number of pitching stats that need to be slightly adjusted to fit modern times. Primarily, I think a stat like “Earned Win” would be useful. Get rid of the 5 inning requirement for starters (a starter is a pitcher as is a reliever, get rid of the distinction), and remove the actual outcome of the game from the equation.

If a pitcher enters the game and gives up fewer runs than he gets, it is a “EW”. If he gives up more runs than he gets, it is a “EL”.

I don’t like that EXACTLY, but something LIKE that.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

There are a number of pitching stats that need to be slightly adjusted to fit modern times. Primarily, I think a stat like “Earned Win” would be useful. Get rid of the 5 inning requirement for starters (a starter is a pitcher as is a reliever, get rid of the distinction), and remove the actual outcome of the game from the equation.

If a pitcher enters the game and gives up fewer runs than he gets, it is a “EW”. If he gives up more runs than he gets, it is a “EL”.

I don’t like that EXACTLY, but something LIKE that.

so... umm... QS??

 

[jarntt]

This is super weak. Give us a couple names and we can show you their numbers and why they might not be so obviously better.

I'm not looking to argue individuals and numbers are a big part of the problem. Are these guys all better than Cy Young and Bob Gibson? Guys today have closers to help their numbers and they don't have to worry about pitching late into games so they just throw themselves out for 6 or 7 innings and then they are done. It's a lot easier to not have a bad ERA when you don't pitch when you are tired or when you don't have your best stuff. If you want to say wins are important then Cy Young has 300 more than Pedro. Guys didn't strikeout a lot years ago so it's hard to use that as a stat when comparing different eras. Pedro, Maddux and Randy all have one world series ring. I'm not sure if that has been part of the discussion

 

[calsnowskier]

so... umm... QS??

Closer to PQS, but still not the same.

QS (and PQS) still only applies to the starter. I want something that completely ignores the difference between SP and RP.

 

[msgkings322]

I'm not looking to argue individuals and numbers are a big part of the problem. Are these guys all better than Cy Young and Bob Gibson? Guys today have closers to help their numbers and they don't have to worry about pitching late into games so they just throw themselves out for 6 or 7 innings and then they are done. It's a lot easier to not have a bad ERA when you don't pitch when you are tired or when you don't have your best stuff. If you want to say wins are important then Cy Young has 300 more than Pedro. Guys didn't strikeout a lot years ago so it's hard to use that as a stat when comparing different eras. Pedro, Maddux and Randy all have one world series ring. I'm not sure if that has been part of the discussion

LOL 'K

 

[Cedrique]

Technically, a pitcher with a good glove will have WORSE numbers (ERA, at least). If a pitcher commits an error with 2 outs, than any runs he gives up the rest of that inning do not go on his pitching ledger.

I think it could go either way. Official scorers are kind of generous on plays that don't leave the infield so if you have a good glove you can probably save some runs on plays that would have been scored "hits" anyway. And those errors on the third out aren't great for a starter in that they extend the inning and use up pitches that could shorten their start. Overall you could be right though.

 

[calsnowskier]

I'm not looking to argue individuals and numbers are a big part of the problem. Are these guys all better than Cy Young and Bob Gibson? Guys today have closers to help their numbers and they don't have to worry about pitching late into games so they just throw themselves out for 6 or 7 innings and then they are done. It's a lot easier to not have a bad ERA when you don't pitch when you are tired or when you don't have your best stuff. If you want to say wins are important then Cy Young has 300 more than Pedro. Guys didn't strikeout a lot years ago so it's hard to use that as a stat when comparing different eras. Pedro, Maddux and Randy all have one world series ring. I'm not sure if that has been part of the discussion

But Cy Young didn’t face hitters who spent the entire night before watching video of him on his iPad. The first 2 ABs for each hitter was just getting refamiliarized with the pitcher and setting the timing. Modern pitchers need to completely change up their pitching style every game they pitch because their trap ends are known after their 3rd career game.

 

[calsnowskier]

I think it could go either way. Official scorers are kind of generous on plays that don't leave the infield so if you have a good glove you can probably save some runs on plays that would have been scored "hits" anyway. And those errors on the third out aren't great for a starter in that they extend the inning and use up pitches that could shorten their start. Overall you could be right though.

Its exact effect is tough to measure. I think after all is said, it is a good thing (numbers aside, it is DEFINITELY a good thing), but is it already factored in to ERA and IP? I don’t know. It is certainly worth mentioning that is in the conversation as the best fielding pitcher ever.

 

[jarntt]

But Cy Young didn’t face hitters who spent the entire night before watching video of him on his iPad. The first 2 ABs for each hitter was just getting refamiliarized with the pitcher and setting the timing. Modern pitchers need to completely change up their pitching style every game they pitch because their trap ends are known after their 3rd career game.

Come on, that makes zero sense. Pitchers can watch hitters too. Plus with less teams and less starting pitchers and no interleague play they knew each other pretty well from facing them so often

 

[jarntt]

LOL 'K

So profound. Good to see you are equally a clown on all boards, I guess. But, you do you...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Closer to PQS, but still not the same.

QS (and PQS) still only applies to the starter. I want something that completely ignores the difference between SP and RP.

ok... understood..
yea, i have a similar offensive stat i would like... its PRODUCTIVE OUT %... we do have stats for Sacrifices... but sacrifices are just not enough IMO...

and the percent would of course be PRoductive outs/ productive out opportunity...

so a productive out is of course if there is a man on base, if you moved them over... and an opportunity would only be when there are men on base, and only encompass outs... so if you get a hit or a walk or reach on error, then that does not count as an opportunity...

what this stat would do is really differentiate when a SO is a bad out or not... and how effective the player is when it actually matters...

this stat doesnt do much for anything... but its semi useful stat...

 

[LHG]

ok... understood..
yea, i have a similar offensive stat i would like... its PRODUCTIVE OUT %... we do have stats for Sacrifices... but sacrifices are just not enough IMO...

and the percent would of course be PRoductive outs/ productive out opportunity...

so a productive out is of course if there is a man on base, if you moved them over... and an opportunity would only be when there are men on base, and only encompass outs... so if you get a hit or a walk or reach on error, then that does not count as an opportunity...

what this stat would do is really differentiate when a SO is a bad out or not... and how effective the player is when it actually matters...

this stat doesnt do much for anything... but its semi useful stat...

Would this stat take into consideration double plays ground into as well? Because if determining a player's effectiveness on productive outs is being determined, it should penalize not just getting out but also erasing a runner on base when the player came to the plate.

Edit: Also, how would getting on base via an error play into it since that is technically an out for the player (in the sense that it counts as an at-bat but the player gets nothing to show for it in his stat line but a lower batting average)?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Would this stat take into consideration double plays ground into as well? Because if determining a player's effectiveness on productive outs is being determined, it should penalize not just getting out but also erasing a runner on base when the player came to the plate.

of coures... a double play would not be a productive out no matter what... even if another player advances...

even on errors, if an out is made, then it counts...

 

[msgkings322]

So profound. Good to see you are equally a clown on all boards, I guess. But, you do you...

Hard to engage with someone who starts with "I'm not looking to argue individuals and numbers are a big part of the problem"

I hope you continue to feed my trolling with your tears though

 

[LHG]

of coures... a double play would not be a productive out no matter what... even if another player advances...

Yes, but would the player be penalized for a doubly negative outcome?

Also, how would getting on base via an error play into it since that is technically an out for the player (in the sense that it counts as an at-bat but the player gets nothing to show for it in his stat line but a lower batting average)?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Yes, but would the player be penalized for a doubly negative outcome?

Also, how would getting on base via an error play into it since that is technically an out for the player (in the sense that it counts as an at-bat but the player gets nothing to show for it in his stat line but a lower batting average)?

no they wont be counted twice here...


i do have another stat that does penalize for DP...