Are pitching wins an accurate measure of a pitcher's value?

[ozzybourne]

This is a great example as to why you cannot only use stats to prove a point. There are so many variables that go into them that unless you really narrowing it down you are comparing apples and oranges. A catchers throwing percentage is another good example of this. Any catcher is going to have a great throwing percentage with Cappy on the mound. When Sheets is on the mound, Ivan Rodriguez wouldn't throw out alot of runner.

what else besides stats would you use to prove a point in baseball terms? length of service/seniority? team leadership? stats in large measure determines a baseball players salary, especially after free agent eligible. read the box score--hello, it's stats. offensive stats, defensive stats...........

 

all the stats together get analyzed and then some. look at some of the stats available after the "money ball' era has started. especially with pitchers since they dont steal bases, drive in runs, etc. then there are splits-again stats. wins are an important stat, but not the only one.

 

 

[ozzybourne]

This is a great example as to why you cannot only use stats to prove a point. There are so many variables that go into them that unless you really narrowing it down you are comparing apples and oranges. A catchers throwing percentage is another good example of this. Any catcher is going to have a great throwing percentage with Cappy on the mound. When Sheets is on the mound, Ivan Rodriguez wouldn't throw out alot of runner.

what else besides stats would you use to prove a point in baseball terms? length of service/seniority? team leadership? stats in large measure determines a baseball players salary, especially after free agent eligible. read the box score--hello, it's stats. offensive stats, defensive stats...........

 

all the stats together get analyzed and then some. look at some of the stats available after the "money ball' era has started. especially with pitchers since they dont steal bases, drive in runs, etc. then there are splits-again stats. wins are an important stat, but not the only one.

 

 

[hauser42]

Since this is fueled by the Ben Sheets comment in the other thread I'd add that since Sheets broke out in 2004 he is 40-35 for a .533 and since the Brewers stopped being one of the worst teams in baseball he is 28-21 for a .571. It isn't a fluke that as his team got better so did his record.

Sheets also has been injured during this time so he might have more wins to this total and the Brewers might have won a division last year if he would have been healthy all year.

 

Wins are only part of the equation when looking at a pitcher, and how well he is performing.

(pared back long quote --1992)

[hauser42]

Since this is fueled by the Ben Sheets comment in the other thread I'd add that since Sheets broke out in 2004 he is 40-35 for a .533 and since the Brewers stopped being one of the worst teams in baseball he is 28-21 for a .571. It isn't a fluke that as his team got better so did his record.

Sheets also has been injured during this time so he might have more wins to this total and the Brewers might have won a division last year if he would have been healthy all year.

 

Wins are only part of the equation when looking at a pitcher, and how well he is performing.

(pared back long quote --1992)

[hauser42]

Since this is fueled by the Ben Sheets comment in the other thread I'd add that since Sheets broke out in 2004 he is 40-35 for a .533 and since the Brewers stopped being one of the worst teams in baseball he is 28-21 for a .571. It isn't a fluke that as his team got better so did his record.

Sheets also has been injured during this time so he might have more wins to this total and the Brewers might have won a division last year if he would have been healthy all year.

 

Wins are only part of the equation when looking at a pitcher, and how well he is performing.

(pared back long quote --1992)

[logan82]

Yup wins matter. Vargas at 11-6 was almost as good as Sheets at 12-5. Only one win difference.

[logan82]

Yup wins matter. Vargas at 11-6 was almost as good as Sheets at 12-5. Only one win difference.

[logan82]

Yup wins matter. Vargas at 11-6 was almost as good as Sheets at 12-5. Only one win difference.

[JohnBriggs12]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

 

By some statistical analysis it could be said that Sheets is the equal of Oswalt. But the object isn't winning statistical battles it's winning. Therefore Oswalt has been considerably more valuable to the Astros than Sheets has been to the Brewers. The job of the starting pitcher is to hold the opponent to fewer runs than his team scores while he is on the mound whether that means 6 runs, 4 runs, 3 runs, 2 runs, 1 run or 0 runs. Most of those pitchers considered all time greats did this consistently. Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another but over a career these tend to even out to some degree.

 

When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games it puts quite a burden on the rest of the team to get the 78 or so more wins needed to get to the 90 usually needed to get to the postseason.

[JohnBriggs12]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

 

By some statistical analysis it could be said that Sheets is the equal of Oswalt. But the object isn't winning statistical battles it's winning. Therefore Oswalt has been considerably more valuable to the Astros than Sheets has been to the Brewers. The job of the starting pitcher is to hold the opponent to fewer runs than his team scores while he is on the mound whether that means 6 runs, 4 runs, 3 runs, 2 runs, 1 run or 0 runs. Most of those pitchers considered all time greats did this consistently. Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another but over a career these tend to even out to some degree.

 

When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games it puts quite a burden on the rest of the team to get the 78 or so more wins needed to get to the 90 usually needed to get to the postseason.

[JohnBriggs12]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

 

By some statistical analysis it could be said that Sheets is the equal of Oswalt. But the object isn't winning statistical battles it's winning. Therefore Oswalt has been considerably more valuable to the Astros than Sheets has been to the Brewers. The job of the starting pitcher is to hold the opponent to fewer runs than his team scores while he is on the mound whether that means 6 runs, 4 runs, 3 runs, 2 runs, 1 run or 0 runs. Most of those pitchers considered all time greats did this consistently. Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another but over a career these tend to even out to some degree.

 

When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games it puts quite a burden on the rest of the team to get the 78 or so more wins needed to get to the 90 usually needed to get to the postseason.

[trwi7]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

[trwi7]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

[trwi7]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

[TerraceReserved]

Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another.

Runs support, bullpen, and luck play a HUGE role in a pitchers win/loss record. Why acknowledge that and and then say this:
When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games

Sheets had absolutely no control over his win total. A pitchers job is to let up as little runs as possible. Sheets did that, and he happened to do it very well. Unfortunately for him, the offense and bullpen didn't do well behind him. Why would someone still use wins to judge a pitcher when the stats flaws are so obvious?

[TerraceReserved]

Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another.

Runs support, bullpen, and luck play a HUGE role in a pitchers win/loss record. Why acknowledge that and and then say this:
When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games

Sheets had absolutely no control over his win total. A pitchers job is to let up as little runs as possible. Sheets did that, and he happened to do it very well. Unfortunately for him, the offense and bullpen didn't do well behind him. Why would someone still use wins to judge a pitcher when the stats flaws are so obvious?

[TerraceReserved]

Now over the course of any particular season, factors such as run support, bullpen effectiveness (more so in the past 30 years) and luck play a part one way or another.

Runs support, bullpen, and luck play a HUGE role in a pitchers win/loss record. Why acknowledge that and and then say this:
When your teams "ace" only wins 12 games

Sheets had absolutely no control over his win total. A pitchers job is to let up as little runs as possible. Sheets did that, and he happened to do it very well. Unfortunately for him, the offense and bullpen didn't do well behind him. Why would someone still use wins to judge a pitcher when the stats flaws are so obvious?

[ozzybourne]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

over the last 3 years the brewers ahve won 239 games, while the astros have won 244.

 

over the last 3 years sheets has won 28 games, while oswalt has won 49 games.

 

so what is your point? jonny briggs is correct.

[ozzybourne]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

over the last 3 years the brewers ahve won 239 games, while the astros have won 244.

 

over the last 3 years sheets has won 28 games, while oswalt has won 49 games.

 

so what is your point? jonny briggs is correct.

[ozzybourne]

Ben Sheets and Roy Oswalt both came up in 2001. Oswalt is 112-54 while Sheets is 73-74.

That's nice. Now look at the teams winning percentages. Oswalt's teams were much, much better than Sheets' teams.

over the last 3 years the brewers ahve won 239 games, while the astros have won 244.

 

over the last 3 years sheets has won 28 games, while oswalt has won 49 games.

 

so what is your point? jonny briggs is correct.

[heresrobin]

Oswalt has 21 more wins over the last three years because he has started 36 more games over the last three years...and because he is better than Sheets. If you gave Sheets an additional 36 starts to match Oswalt's, Sheets would probably have another 16 wins or so, giving him a total of 44 wins.

 

I don't see how JB's statement proves that wins are a good pitching stat. All his statement proves is that Oswalt is a better, more durable pitcher who has pitched 36 more games than Sheets has over the last three years. I don't think that anybody would argue that Oswalt has been a better, more valuable pitcher than Sheets.

[heresrobin]

Oswalt has 21 more wins over the last three years because he has started 36 more games over the last three years...and because he is better than Sheets. If you gave Sheets an additional 36 starts to match Oswalt's, Sheets would probably have another 16 wins or so, giving him a total of 44 wins.

 

I don't see how JB's statement proves that wins are a good pitching stat. All his statement proves is that Oswalt is a better, more durable pitcher who has pitched 36 more games than Sheets has over the last three years. I don't think that anybody would argue that Oswalt has been a better, more valuable pitcher than Sheets.

[heresrobin]

Oswalt has 21 more wins over the last three years because he has started 36 more games over the last three years...and because he is better than Sheets. If you gave Sheets an additional 36 starts to match Oswalt's, Sheets would probably have another 16 wins or so, giving him a total of 44 wins.

 

I don't see how JB's statement proves that wins are a good pitching stat. All his statement proves is that Oswalt is a better, more durable pitcher who has pitched 36 more games than Sheets has over the last three years. I don't think that anybody would argue that Oswalt has been a better, more valuable pitcher than Sheets.

[TerraceReserved]

over the last 3 years the brewers ahve won 239 games, while the astros have won 244.

 

over the last 3 years sheets has won 28 games, while oswalt has won 49 games.

 

so what is your point? jonny briggs is correct.

 

 

Not quite. Over the past 7 years, Houston has scored 5355 runs, for an average of 765 a year. In that time, Milwaukee has scored 4972 runs, for 710 a year. The runs that Houston scored play a large part in his number of wins.

 

And besides, the point is moot. I don't think anyone would argue that Sheets has produced more by any statistical measure. He has a career 3.07 ERA to Sheets' 3.83. Sheets has 1229 IP, Oswalt has 1413 IP. Oswalt has a career FIP of 3.36 and Sheets a 3.76.

 

Oswalts been better, no doubt about it. His team has also scored more runs behind him. Bringing up that example doesn't prove anything toward the validity of W/L records.

[TerraceReserved]

over the last 3 years the brewers ahve won 239 games, while the astros have won 244.

 

over the last 3 years sheets has won 28 games, while oswalt has won 49 games.

 

so what is your point? jonny briggs is correct.

 

 

Not quite. Over the past 7 years, Houston has scored 5355 runs, for an average of 765 a year. In that time, Milwaukee has scored 4972 runs, for 710 a year. The runs that Houston scored play a large part in his number of wins.

 

And besides, the point is moot. I don't think anyone would argue that Sheets has produced more by any statistical measure. He has a career 3.07 ERA to Sheets' 3.83. Sheets has 1229 IP, Oswalt has 1413 IP. Oswalt has a career FIP of 3.36 and Sheets a 3.76.

 

Oswalts been better, no doubt about it. His team has also scored more runs behind him. Bringing up that example doesn't prove anything toward the validity of W/L records.