Top 10 poll #7: #7 player in history - Runoff

[calsnowskier]

I still like wins and BA

I know we have spoken many times about this, but I am disappointed in baseball statisticians for not showing the importance of Quality start, or at least QS%...

but I do think WINS actually shows a specific mind-set of a pitcher... of course, we all understand that there is a lot more into a win and a loss.. lots of it is not up to the pitcher... but we see this all the time, sometimes a pitcher needs to only give up one run, and gives up 2.. we can say they pitched well still.. but they just didn't have that edge to them that day... and same with the opposite... like when a pitcher can afford giving up runs...

wins are kind of like saves... some pitchers have the winners mentality... some players don't... but both are mental stats more than actual pitching quality stats...

but as for BA... I don't understand the negativity... I think looking at BA and BB separately is so much better than OBP...

There was a SP stat that a Giants beat write made up about 15-20 years ago that we tracked on the Giants board at the time. I don’t remember what it was called, but it basically took each start and rated it between 0-5 (0 being an absolute bed-shitting and a 5 being a great outing). There were 5 aspects it looked at to determine the score (going from memory)…. IP, HRs, Ks, WHIP, and runs(?). If the pitcher hit the mark for a category, he got 1 point. It seemed pretty simple, but it ended really passing the sniff test at the end of the day.

@tzill what was this stat called?

 

[Cedrique]

Nothing represents this better than the Win for pitchers or Batting Average for hitters. When I was growing up, these were the FIRST stats e looked at to determine how good a player was. Today they are hardly even mentioned anymore outside of for trivial purposes. ERA, IP, WHIP and FIP are much more important stats for pitchers and OPS is the main number for hitters.

Yeah that's all we had back in the day. You had to wait for the Sunday paper to see the season long stats for any particular player, and that was pretty basic. AB H, 2b 3b HR AVG. I think ERA has always been a thing though.

But it's so much more nuanced compared to how we viewed stats in the past. And a lot of long time casual fans get an idea of how to evaluate someone and then just accept it as fact even though we're still evolving in the way we view stats. For example, a lot of fans of today place way to high of a negative value on strikeouts for a hitter.

 

[LHG]

There was a SP stat that a Giants beat write made up about 15-20 years ago that we tracked on the Giants board at the time. I don’t remember what it was called, but it basically took each start and rated it between 0-5 (0 being an absolute bed-shitting and a 5 being a great outing). There were 5 aspects it looked at to determine the score (going from memory)…. IP, HRs, Ks, WHIP, and runs(?). If the pitcher hit the mark for a category, he got 1 point. It seemed pretty simple, but it ended really passing the sniff test at the end of the day.

@tzill what was this stat called?

Was that back in the ESPN days? I remember QS being a big deal here about 8 years ago. The 0-5 sounds only vaguely familiar, and I, being one of tzill's alts, cannot remember the name of it.

 

[calsnowskier]

Was that back in the ESPN days? I remember QS being a big deal here about 8 years ago. The 0-5 sounds only vaguely familiar, and I, being one of tzill's alts, cannot remember the name of it.

It was one of the topics tz went to the mattress’ about. I think it may have been Pure Quality Start? And it may not have been CREATED by one of the local beats, but I seem to remember it was heavily stumped by one of them.

 

[LHG]

It was one of the topics tz went to the mattress’ about. I think it may have been Pure Quality Start? And it may not have been CREATED by one of the local beats, but I seem to remember it was heavily stumped by one of them.

Was this during the gp era or after he departed?

 

[calsnowskier]

Was this during the gp era or after he departed?

I think after…

 

[LHG]

I think after…

That may have been before I resurfaced here.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

It was one of the topics tz went to the mattress’ about. I think it may have been Pure Quality Start? And it may not have been CREATED by one of the local beats, but I seem to remember it was heavily stumped by one of them.

The Pure Quality Start Thread

– USATODAY.com This is just one link that I found that is rather team-unspecific. It is from a few years back, though. Basically, a SP got one point for each of the following... 1) Minimum of six innings. 2) Allow no more than an equal number of hits to the number of innings...

sportshoop.la

 

[calsnowskier]

The Pure Quality Start Thread

– USATODAY.com This is just one link that I found that is rather team-unspecific. It is from a few years back, though. Basically, a SP got one point for each of the following... 1) Minimum of six innings. 2) Allow no more than an equal number of hits to the number of innings...

sportshoop.la

Rereading that thread, I gotta say I was quite convincing. I am more of a fan of the stat now than I was when we started this convo today.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Rereading that thread, I gotta say I was quite convincing. I am more of a fan of the stat now than I was when we started this convo today.

Yea. And I still not a fan of it. But more so I don’t understand the intent of the usage of the stat. It’s a per game stat that measures dominance. But when accumulated I think it loses its strength.

 

[calsnowskier]

Yea. And I still not a fan of it. But more so I don’t understand the intent of the usage of the stat. It’s a per game stat that measures dominance. But when accumulated I think it loses its strength.

Think of it like a WAR7, but at the game-level rather than the season-level.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Think of it like a WAR7, but at the game-level rather than the season-level.

I get the stat game to game. But once it is accumulated, it really is no longer good. For a bunch of reasons.

1. The accumulation would need to be a per game average. Otherwise the # of starts would skew the stat too much.

2. Because of the average, it’s not a consistency stat. It’s simply how good your best games were. Or how bad your bad games were. It’s not how often were you good or how often you were bad

3. Once you lose the consistency angle then it shows season long dominance just as well as ERA, WHIP or k/9. It has very little uniqueness.

So again, I don’t understand the intended usage of the stat.

At least QS% would measure consistency in how often you get a QS. Which has a unique usage.

But modern day baseball QS is basically dead since most pitchers don’t go 6 anymore.

 

[calsnowskier]

I get the stat game to game. But once it is accumulated, it really is no longer good. For a bunch of reasons.

1. The accumulation would need to be a per game average. Otherwise the # of starts would skew the stat too much.

2. Because of the average, it’s not a consistency stat. It’s simply how good your best games were. Or how bad your bad games were. It’s not how often were you good or how often you were bad

3. Once you lose the consistency angle then it shows season long dominance just as well as ERA, WHIP or k/9. It has very little uniqueness.

So again, I don’t understand the intended usage of the stat.

At least QS% would measure consistency in how often you get a QS. Which has a unique usage.

But modern day baseball QS is basically dead since most pitchers don’t go 6 anymore.

I am completely lost as to how you think a stat of a simple 6/3 is useful, but a stat that describes more accurately how each start was is completely worthless. And I have not seen anyone use the PQS as an average stat. I would use it as a counting or weight stat instead.