View Single Post
  #52  
Old 06-13-2016, 04:46 PM
bravos4evr's Avatar
bravos4evr bravos4evr is offline
Nick Barnes
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: South Mississippi
Posts: 757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
Well will just have to agree to disagree then because I strongly disagree with your whole post. The player has to drive in those runs. I would rather have a player like Hodges than some guy who walks a lot and has an inflated obp, but doesn't produce. I wouldn't penalize a guy who played on a bad team and didn't have opportunities to drive in runs. However, you have to give Hodges credit for taking advantage of his opportunities and driving in those runs that led to wins.

As far as pitching wins, after era it is the most important stat. After all the idea of the game is the score the most runs/allow the fewest runs and win games. Have a good fip, whip, bb/k ratio, etc. are all fine, but in the end may be meaningless to the result of this game. Some people act like this game is played in a vacuum. They ignore that valid strategies of the game harm those prized sabr stats but produce wins. Things like pitching around hitters in situations or pitching to the score of the game. Also, to complain that a pitcher's bullpen can't hold a lead when the pitcher is partially at fault because he wasn't able to finish the game is silly in my opinion.
IDK man, "agree to disagree" is not solving the issue. pitcher wins have been PROVEN to be a worthless stat. Maybe not as much in the old days where guys threw 400 innings a year, but it's still too contingent on the quality of the offense one plays with. and that has no bearing on the ability of the pitcher. (See King Felix winning the Cy Young with 12 wins, he was easily the best arm that year, but his team's offense was awful)

and that tired argument about "played in a vacuum" doesn't fly. the only difference between modern stats and older stats is accuracy. Nobody gets accused of 'seeing the game in a vacuum" because they use batting avg and wins, so there's no reason to make the same accusations against the modern stats.

Time moves on, the game changes, stats become better, more accurate. It is the nature of science and the world. No reason to be dismissive of it.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."- Tom Waits
Reply With Quote