***Official 2011-12 MLB HOTSTOVE OFF-SEASON THREAD***

1 game? No.

10 k's, or 12 baserunners, the goal is to win the game Nappy.

And keep in mind, RF mentioned Lackey, and I'm not a fan of his, and think if you were going to sign him as a FA you'd better not overpay him as he does win games, but he can just as easily lose them with the bad breaks that happen in every MLB game.

For example, in LA mayb Lackey gets the ground ball with two men on and 1 out in the 5th with a 1 run lead, in Boston, maybe he doesn't get it, that is how it goes.

The good ones though, just find a way to avoid it happening to them.

 

You cant judge a pitcher on wins. Not until he plays defense behind himself at all nice spots and takes ever AB anyway. However I think you can be dominant pitching to contact. Putting the ball where the hitter has to pull it or jump ahead early and hit dribblers is just as much a skill as the K

Im sorry but anyone who thinks a pitcher would win as many games pitching for the 99 Marlins as they would the 97 Marlins is ridiculous. Wins have nothing to do with a pitchers skill. He can leave up 100-0 and end up with a loss.

 

There is some truth in the fortune part, however how do some pitchers seem to have it on their side consistently?

21 outs to generate 3 runs is not giving your team a chance to win the game or leaving with a tie?

Over a season, that would be 33 starts 7 innings=240 Ip's or so?

That sounds like a fairly good pitcher BDH.

 

Sorry you can't have it both ways. If you put that much emphasis on wins and loses. That should be a bad start for you

 

Well BDH, not saying that performance makes anyone an Ace pitcher, am saying that is keeping your team in the ballgame with a chance to win it, and that is pretty much all you can ask of your pitching imo.

The rest of it, K's, WHIP, etc, is froth.

 

I'd thought you were asking about the pitcher himself being bad.

Well sure, that is a bad start, your team did not win the ballgame.

 

Great pitchers always have a bad win-lose record on bad teams and always good ones on good teams. The proof is there. If your still judging pitchers that way, its just you wanting to turn your cheeks to the facts.

 

Would you celebrate a 1-0 loss?

Why or why not?

 

This debate again?

 

"If" they do manage that sort of start, it would stand to reason they would win games sans, your assertion, WHIP and the rest of it, that approach negates the importance of such statistical monkery...

The guy going 7 innings is somehow not important?

Why?

 

I would celebrate the personal performance, yes.

 

Logically then, if a team went 0-162, but lost every game 1-0, the whole season would be considered spectacular?

 

So by your logic the pitcher went 0-30 but yet had a ERA of 1 for the season with 20 complete games....that isn't a spectacular season?

 

Which is my position, no need for the statistical indices, a live arm who makes it through those innings is no different from a junkballer who pitches with runners on base inning after inning.

If the junkballer manages to win gm in and gm out, and the live arm doesn't, isn't that what matters?

 

The premise was, a 1-0 loss could, or could not be, celebrated.

If yes, then why not celebrate an entire season of such losses, if no, then what is the value of a 1-0 loss, you still lost.

 

We shall never agree BDH, the ONLY objective measure of a starting pitcher's performance, is W or L's.

 

thats a huge logical fallacy, as its not even a stat meant to just measure a pitchers performance.
era,whip, and such are statistics specifically made to measure an individuals performance.
If you really want to play that game then you can blame win/loss on a batter who plays a perfect game and goes 4-4, as he would be part of the w or l stat.

 

Bro, I'm so bored, and stressed, that I've opened Wiki's "Fallacies" page to see where Lucky is coming from!

I'm not sure if he is referencing:

-circular cause and consequence
-correlation is not causation

Anyone have any idea who will replace Puljos in St Louis?

Berkman to first base?

For whatever reason, I don't see Prince going there.

And on MLB's coverage of the winter meetings, they mentioned the Braves had shopped Jair Jurrgens.

 

A's traded Cahill.

 

I thought Gio Gonzalez was going to be traded.

 

Who says he won't be?

 

Might want to read the wiki article again. And yes it is a logical fallacy what you are saying. You are trying to argue a team stat is the best measure of individual performance.

 

The only way you can use W-L tol judge a pitcher is possibly at the end of a career. Even then you are grasping at straws. The fact is that a pitcher who plays for a team with bad fielding and offense will win less games than a clone of himself on a different team.

Maybe we should just throw out the other 8 players on the field since they have no input as to the end result.

 

Disagree, W/L for a pitcher is the only actual measure for them, there is no other statistic to accurately measure their performance.

Pitchers, handling the ball and thusly the game, are the most important position in any given ball game as their performance directly impacts the score and thusly the W/L's.

 

.

Padre, W/L is the most archaic of all stats for a pitcher. Reason being, it depends on factors beyond his control. If his team scores him no runs, he can't win. If his bullpen blows a lead, he can't win.

ERA is a MUCH better stat, as is WHIP. In football, I might agree with you. But how do you explain Felix Hernandez having unbelievable numbers and winning the CY yet have a losing record? I'll tell you, his team had arguably the worst offensive year of any team in recent memory.

It's also the reason guys on the Yankee and Sox have great records, but average stats. If your team scores you 6 runs a game you should win almost every time.

 

So many stats in baseball, so many flaws with each of them.

 

Which would be great if it was just the pitcher that effected the score. Which is my point, you are claiming logic while trying to use a stat that has various other factors in it to measure one factor in it.

 

Should have listened to this guy.