Red Sox: Off Season '23-'24

[cp176]

Just chuck out the wins and it all makes perfect sense!

 

In the case of a pitcher with this profile, the wins would take care of themselves. But for arguments sake, i'm pretty sure that two of our more voluminous posters can dig up pitchers with stat lines similar to what I have mentioned, who just couldn't seem to get the wins.lol

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Just chuck out the wins and it all makes perfect sense!

 

Name a guy who's ERA and WHIP were better than only a handful of starters in the NL in '23, and in the AL in '22...

 

Hint: rhymes with Like Skywalka

[notin]

It's arguments like this that actually make looking any stat in combination with others as being significant. I like pitchers who win a lot of games and have low earned run averages to go along with lots of innings pitched with any type of fastball that is 94mph +. Does that make me just another old schooler who doesn't get it?

 

No.

 

And by looking at fastball velocity, you less of an Old Schooler than you realize.

 

All I want to know is - what value does W-L bring to the table?

 

Good W-L with a low ERA is obvious. No one dislikes that, except opposing hitters.

 

But what about good W-L with a bad ERA? Or bad W-L with a good ERA?

[cp176]

No.

 

And by looking at fastball velocity, you less of an Old Schooler than you realize.

 

All I want to know is - what value does W-L bring to the table?

 

Good W-L with a low ERA is obvious. No one dislikes that, except opposing hitters.

 

But what about good W-L with a bad ERA? Or bad W-L with a good ERA?

 

I really do hope that most baseball fans realize the importance of looking at an athlete's production from as many directions as possible.

[Bellhorn04]

In the case of a pitcher with this profile, the wins would take care of themselves. But for arguments sake, i'm pretty sure that two of our more voluminous posters can dig up pitchers with stat lines similar to what I have mentioned, who just couldn't seem to get the wins.lol

 

The wins don't take care of themselves any more, that's the whole point.

 

Sonny Gray was a silly-looking 8 and 8 last year with a 2.79 ERA in 184 innings. 2nd in the AL Cy Young voting. Signed a contract with the Cardinals for $25 mill a year.

 

All facts, all truth.

[cp176]

The wins don't take care of themselves any more, that's the whole point.

 

Sonny Gray was a silly-looking 8 and 8 last year with a 2.79 ERA in 184 innings. 2nd in the AL Cy Young voting. Signed a contract with the Cardinals for $25 mill a year.

 

All facts, all truth.

 

Wouldn't it be nice to know lets say for arguments sake, his innings pitched total was 235 instead of 184. Might have been entirely different. I knew someone would rise to the bait and prove that there really is no place and old schooler can hide.

[Old Red]

The wins don't take care of themselves any more, that's the whole point.

 

Sonny Gray was a silly-looking 8 and 8 last year with a 2.79 ERA in 184 innings. 2nd in the AL Cy Young voting. Signed a contract with the Cardinals for $25 mill a year.

 

All facts, all truth.

 

Like I said before FA even started. There is a big need for starting pitching, and pitchers will get paid not, because they are all that good, but because they are available. I mentioned when Gray got signed he had never been paid more than $10M before, and now he’s getting $25M. Not, because he is better at 34, but, because three is a need, and he available.

[Bellhorn04]

Wouldn't it be nice to know lets say for arguments sake, his innings pitched total was 235 instead of 184. Might have been entirely different. I knew someone would rise to the bait and prove that there really is no place and old schooler can hide.

 

Nobody pitches 235 any more - that's part of the deal here. Again, it's just the simple facts. I'm not a young man either, I just turned 68. But I like facts, I can't help it.

[Bellhorn04]

Like I said before FA even started. There is a big need for starting pitching, and pitchers will get paid not, because they are all that good, but because they are available. I mentioned when Gray got signed he had never been paid more than $10M before, and now he’s getting $25M. Not, because he is better at 34, but, because three is a need, and he available.

 

Good try, but it doesn't explain why he's getting a lot more money than Winner Wacha.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Good try, but it doesn't explain why he's getting a lot more money than Winner Wacha.

 

WHIPPER Wacha!

 

1.1 the last two highly-mocked-on-talksox years...

[cp176]

Wouldn't it be nice to know lets say for arguments sake, his innings pitched total was 235 instead of 184. Might have been entirely different. I knew someone would rise to the bait and prove that there really is no place and old schooler can hide.

 

Oh i forgot to say that no stat really stands alone I guess. How about this - better players tend to have better stats. Wins and losses are still stats no matter their significance to stat, metric, analytical metric manipulators. Better pitchers could subsequently have better stats which might equate to more wins than losses? Right or wrong it is what i'm gong with. Note my choice of words have been carefully chosen to keep the hounds from nipping at my ass.

[notin]

I was going to say Smoltz in the 1-0 Game Seven of the '91 World Series... but he only pitched into the 8th. Jack Morris threw a 10-inning shutout for the win -- but let's not dive back into his Hall of Fame resume...

 

... then again, there was the classic where Marichal bested Spahn and each pitched 15-inning shutouts before Mays home run gave them both decisions.

 

I was speaking specifically of Montgomery never going 9 innings in a no decision...

[moonslav59]

It's arguments like this that actually make looking any stat in combination with others as being significant. I like pitchers who win a lot of games and have low earned run averages to go along with lots of innings pitched with any type of fastball that is 94mph +. Does that make me just another old schooler who doesn't get it?

 

Not at all.

 

Would it change your view on two SP'ers, if the two players had identical ERA's, defense behind them and both teams went 23-10 in their starts, but one guy went 11-10, while the other went 20-10?

 

Both pitched 94 mph+.

Both pitched the same IP and went into the 6th inning the same amount of times.

 

If you think one is better, can you explain why?

[moonslav59]

Good try, but it doesn't explain why he's getting a lot more money than Winner Wacha.

 

It also doesn't explain why pre-arb and arb pitchers get paid less, even if they are better than FA pitchers.

[notin]

I really do hope that most baseball fans realize the importance of looking at an athlete's production from as many directions as possible.

 

I'm all for multiple directions. And I'm not accusing anyone of looking solely at W-L. But in my opinion, the stat doesn't tell me much. And this is something that current baseball bullpen strategies have marginalized even more. It has reached the point that if the game is decided by anything that happens after the 6th inning, the starter is getting a no decision. And sometimes even earlier.

 

And no one likes the "opener" strategy. But it does exist, and has some solid logic behind it when it is done properly. But it also completely messes up two statistics - wins and blown saves. You basically have a strategy when the starter is ineligible for the win, and the relievers can get blown saves as early as the second inning. (I have yet to see one that early, but it is possible. But I did see Ryan Brasier get credited with a blown save in the 5th inning of a game last year.)

[notin]

Oh i forgot to say that no stat really stands alone I guess. How about this - better players tend to have better stats. Wins and losses are still stats no matter their significance to stat, metric, analytical metric manipulators. Better pitchers could subsequently have better stats which might equate to more wins than losses? Right or wrong it is what i'm gong with. Note my choice of words have been carefully chosen to keep the hounds from nipping at my ass.

 

I agree, but the one stat where it is remarkably easy to find better pitchers with worse stats seems to be W-L record. I still find it absolutely crazy that John Lackey had a more wins and a better W-L record during his 4 months pitching for a last place Red Sox team in 2014 (in which he went 11-7) that he did pitching a full season for a World Series Champion in 2013 (where he went 10-13).

 

It's only one example, but it uses the same pitcher (so - similar talent?), and factors in overall team ability and length of time playing.. Even if you added losses to Lackey's record until you had the same amount of decisions in both years, he STILL has a better record for the last place team....

[moonslav59]

To me, better pitchers pitch more innings than most others, get batters to make more outs than most others and when batters do get on base, it is mostly singles or BBs rather than 2Bs, 3Bs and HRs.

 

With batters, most of us realize all hits are not equal, so we value SLG% more than BA. SLG % also values HRs and XBHs. HRs are a traditional stat used by many to add value to batters with nearly the same BA. We also realize walks are better than making an out, so they should have some value, too. Maybe OBP gives BB's too much value, as they are not as good as a single, if the single advances a runner an extra base or leads to a run, but many of us value OBP more than BA. For this reason, I really value OPS, and therefore OPS Against for pitchers. To me, it is better than WHIP, since it counts 2Bs, 3Bs and HRs as worse than singles.

 

I like ERA, but ERA- and ERA+ provide context that is hard for most of us to do in our heads with any precision.

 

OPSA & ERA- are two stats I value more than wins or ERA. I'm fine with those who disagree.

 

I'd like someone to explain why team record in starts is not more important than W-L records. It's all about the team winning, so why let dumb rules warp the final results of each game a starter starts?

[Old Red]

Good try, but it doesn't explain why he's getting a lot more money than Winner Wacha.

 

Good try? I’m not trying anything. I said all this before FA even started months ago. Why would you sign Monty to a lot more money than Wacha if you could get the same, or better results from Wacha for less money? I wouldn’t.

[cp176]

To me, better pitchers pitch more innings than most others, get batters to make more outs than most others and when batters do get on base, it is mostly singles or BBs rather than 2Bs, 3Bs and HRs.

 

With batters, most of us realize all hits are not equal, so we value SLG% more than BA. SLG % also values HRs and XBHs. HRs are a traditional stat used by many to add value to batters with nearly the same BA. We also realize walks are better than making an out, so they should have some value, too. Maybe OBP gives BB's too much value, as they are not as good as a single, if the single advances a runner an extra base or leads to a run, but many of us value OBP more than BA. For this reason, I really value OPS, and therefore OPS Against for pitchers. To me, it is better than WHIP, since it counts 2Bs, 3Bs and HRs as worse than singles.

 

I like ERA, but ERA- and ERA+ provide context that is hard for most of us to do in our heads with any precision.

 

OPSA & ERA- are two stats I value more than wins or ERA. I'm fine with those who disagree.

 

I'd like someone to explain why team record in starts is not more important than W-L records. It's all about the team winning, so why let dumb rules warp the final results of each game a starter starts?

 

Am i on fairly safe ground if I suggest that pitchers with similar stats to the ones that you listed tend to win more games than pitchers with poorer stats?

[cp176]

I agree, but the one stat where it is remarkably easy to find better pitchers with worse stats seems to be W-L record. I still find it absolutely crazy that John Lackey had a more wins and a better W-L record during his 4 months pitching for a last place Red Sox team in 2014 (in which he went 11-7) that he did pitching a full season for a World Series Champion in 2013 (where he went 10-13).

 

It's only one example, but it uses the same pitcher (so - similar talent?), and factors in overall team ability and length of time playing.. Even if you added losses to Lackey's record until you had the same amount of decisions in both years, he STILL has a better record for the last place team....

 

i think that if you are going to make a worthwhile evaluation of any athlete in any game you better access all the available information about that athlete that you can get your hands on.

[Old Red]

I agree, but the one stat where it is remarkably easy to find better pitchers with worse stats seems to be W-L record. I still find it absolutely crazy that John Lackey had a more wins and a better W-L record during his 4 months pitching for a last place Red Sox team in 2014 (in which he went 11-7) that he did pitching a full season for a World Series Champion in 2013 (where he went 10-13).

 

It's only one example, but it uses the same pitcher (so - similar talent?), and factors in overall team ability and length of time playing.. Even if you added losses to Lackey's record until you had the same amount of decisions in both years, he STILL has a better record for the last place team....

It’s not crazy at all when it comes to a starting pitchers W-L record. There are so many different things that goes into it. It could be just as simple as one starter on a staff always seems to get more runs for him when he pitches, and one always pitches when the team scores less runs. If you sit down, and count the number of things that can go into a pitchers W-L record the number is way up there, so you would have to interpret many things unless you are a Pedro type, and even then there could be a few circumstances.

[notin]

Good try? I’m not trying anything. I said all this before FA even started months ago. Why would you sign Monty to a lot more money than Wacha if you could get the same, or better results from Wacha for less money? I wouldn’t.

 

But does Wacha get the same, or better results?

 

Montgomery did make 32 start and pitch 188 innings with a 3.20 ERA. He gave the Rangers and Cardinals 20 quality starts in his 32 outings.

 

 

 

Wacha started 24 games with a 3.22 ERA. His 134 IP was his most since 2017 (not impressive). He did give SD 10 quality starts, but that is only 2 more than Montgomery gave Texas alone (in 11 outings!!). And less than he game last place St. Louis.

[notin]

It’s not crazy at all when it comes to a starting pitchers W-L record. There are so many different things that goes into it. It could be just as simple as one starter on a staff always seems to get more runs for him when he pitches, and one always pitches when the team scores less runs. If you sit down, and count the number of things that can go into a pitchers W-L record the number is way up there, so you would have to interpret many things unless you are a Pedro type, and even then there could be a few circumstances.

 

 

 

That's the point. So many things go into it, and many of them have nothing to do with the starting pitcher.

 

I mean, if one starter gets more runs, as you note, it does help his W-L record, but what does that say about him as a pitcher?

[moonslav59]

Am i on fairly safe ground if I suggest that pitchers with similar stats to the ones that you listed tend to win more games than pitchers with poorer stats?

 

More often than not, yes, but there are so many examples where it is not true, especially for pitchers on bad hitting, bad pens and or bad defensive teams, or who play on teams that score most of their runs in late innings, after the SP has left the game.

 

While it's true we can find exceptions for every stat or metric praised by any of us, it just seems so much easier to find exceptions for W-L pitchers who were better or worse than their record indicated.

 

This can even occur over a long career, so it often does not all "even out" as we go long term, something we say often about most stats.

 

Nolan Ryan went 324-294 over 27 seasons. That's an average of 12-11.

 

It never "evened out" for him. His 3.19 ERA and 2.94 FIP tell the story much better.

 

Show me one pitcher who had a good ERA and his W-L record better described how good he was, and the same for a bad pitcher.

 

Yes, good pitching leads to more wins, but "more" is relative, when you pitch for a team who scored 3 runs for you vs another pitcher who plays on a team that scores 6 for them. Over the long term a better pitcher, who pitches on a bad team) will win less and lose more than a worse pitcher ona team that scores way more when he pitches.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

It also doesn't explain why pre-arb and arb pitchers get paid less, even if they are better than FA pitchers.

 

"Budget parameters!" said Sam.

[notin]

i think that if you are going to make a worthwhile evaluation of any athlete in any game you better access all the available information about that athlete that you can get your hands on.

 

I go as far as I can without invading anyone's privacy

 

Actually I just look at stats and acknowledge the influence of all the human stuff. I sometimes mention it once it becomes common knowledge (like Montgomery's wife doing residency in Boston). That's the kind of thing I cite and quote, but would never go research on my own...

[moonslav59]

That's the point. So many things go into it, and many of them have nothing to do with the starting pitcher.

 

I mean, if one starter gets more runs, as you note, it does help his W-L record, but what does that say about him as a pitcher?

 

There are many factors that affect ERA, too, but not to the same extent as W-Ls, and not to the same extent.

 

Falty W-L rules.

Run support (and how lucky those runs come, as in not all in 1-2 games)

Defense behind the pitcher (not just measured by unearned runs)

Strength of opponents faced, especially their line-ups.

Park factors (mostly having to do with LHPs v RHPs or long ball pitchers vs GB pitchers and park dimensions.)

How quickly your manager yanks you, even if you are doing well, but also when you are getting rocked.

[notin]

Am i on fairly safe ground if I suggest that pitchers with similar stats to the ones that you listed tend to win more games than pitchers with poorer stats?

 

I actually don't think so.

 

I think merely listing the top five active pitchers in career wins and top ten in ERA is not a good metric without a solid minimum IP. But even if you look at top ten in K or fWAR, are even they the same names?

[moonslav59]

"Budget parameters!" said Sam.

 

Not everything is about Sam.

[Old Red]

That's the point. So many things go into it, and many of them have nothing to do with the starting pitcher.

 

I mean, if one starter gets more runs, as you note, it does help his W-L record, but what does that say about him as a pitcher?

 

I know, and have never disputed all the things that go into a pitcher’s W-L record, and it depends on how deep you want to dig. Like I’ve said before I notice W-L record, and ERA first, and then look at hits, K’s, BB per innings, and how many HR they give up.