Quote:
Originally Posted by the 'stache
But that's just the thing. The extra years didn't water down Ryan's stats. What stats do you think were watered down? If you're going to make factual statements like that, I suggest that you research before posting them here, because I'll call out misinformation every time.............................................. ..
|
Clipped off most of the quote as it's just there to keep who I'm replying to clear.
Interesting take on things. It's interesting how consistent Ryan was. My impression had been that he got better as a pitcher, while retaining most of his speed.
I'm also not really up on the new stats. Are they put together from the traditional stats? The traditional stuff has always seemed flawed to me. Wins are better if the team is good, and to some extent, so is ERA. A really good defense will prevent runs, an average one might make more errors keeping the runs from being "earned" and a horrible defense won't even get to the ball, leading to loads of runs, all of them earned.
My other impression of Ryan was that he was almost unhittable a big chunk of the time. (Like maybe 7 out of 9 innings at times) But the occasions where a lack of control got him in trouble, he might have backed off a bit and paid for it. (And the umpire having trouble with seeing the pitches well might have hurt the control) Or if for whatever reason the fastball just didn't move like it usually did, he would get hit and hit hard.
Not sure how to put it in numbers, but I've also long believed that power pitchers on bad teams overdo things out of a feeling that the safest path is strikeouts.
Stats wise, the comparisons of Carlton and Seaver in 72 and 71 are very interesting. Do the modern stats account for dh/no dh differences? Although I doubt the DH as it was in 73 would have made a huge difference.
Steve B