Quote:
Originally Posted by bravos4evr
this is 100% wrong. pitcher wins mean doodley squat. You are basically arguing that a pitcher goes 0-6 in the playoffs with a 1.12 ERA and a 1.50 FIP was worse than a guy who goes 4-2 with a 6/70 era and a 7.05 FIP.
Why should the pitcher get credit for how good his offense performed?
|
I agree that Ws dont matter at all statisticlaly but we all know how history looks back at games. If Kershaws teams won every one of his past starts, noone would be saying how bad he was in the postseaon if he was 9-0. .
ERA isnt the sole indicator either or really important at all if your team wins every game. If your team scores 9 runs in the first inning, nobody cares if you then give up 5 runs in 7 innings which would lead to a brutal ERA but would give you the W. I do not think you would blame a pitcher for giving up 5 runs in that situation.
Like i said, if Manning lost the superbowl last year, we would be hearing a lot more of his legacy being tarnished. However his team bailed him out and it does matter when you look back at his career 20 years from now.
Just at it would matter for Kershaw if he won all of his postseason games but had an era of 6.00
What was Manning's QBR for the superbowl, does it matter since he won (even though it was a team win) They will still say has 2 'rings'.
In addition, Curry wasnt great for his lone Golden State Championship but his team got the 'W'. Wins matter even if you arent the one that was the main contributer and were supposed to be is all i am saying
Again, to keep on topic, i dont see Kershaw hurting his post season image this year with his team winning both of his starts..