Skip to main content

Pitchers should not ultimately be judged by their records

In my opinion, many people make a bigger deal about a pitcher's record than they should when it comes to evaluating that pitcher's level of effectiveness and overall success in Major League Baseball. As I see it, a pitcher's record is not solely reflective of his level of effectiveness, but reflective of the entire team's level of effectiveness when he starts. A pitcher can be nearly flawless for a game, yet if the defense slips up a time or two and/or the offense doesn't generate any runs, it will be impossible for him to notch a win by his name.

The following ten pitchers have a combined record this year of 44-48 (.478): Clayton Kershaw (5-4), Stephen Strasburg (3-5), Anibal Sanchez (5-4), Travis Wood (5-4), Chris Sale (5-4), James Shields (2-6), Scott Feldman (5-4), Hiroki Kuroda (6-5), Kris Medlen (3-6), and Ervin Santana (4-5). The worst ERA among these ten pitchers is Ervin Santana's 2.99 earned run average. All ten of these pitchers currently have sub-3.00 ERA's, yet have a combined sub-.500 record. Clayton Kershaw has a sub-2.00 ERA at 1.93, yet is only 5-4 on the season. Stephen Strasburg has an ERA of 2.54, yet is 3-5 on the season thus far. James Shields and Kris Medlen are currently sporting ERAs of 2.81 and 2.87, respectively, yet have gone a combined 5-12 on the season. These ten pitchers have been ten of the most effective pitchers to this point in the season, yet their records aren't showing that. How can this be? A lack of run support and poor defensive play.

On the flip-side of those statistics are the pitchers whom sport solid records with less-than-satisfactory ERAs, due to great run support. Jason Hammel and Jeremy Hellickson are a combined 11-6 this season. What's their combined ERA? 5.18 - a full 2+ more runs than the 5-12 duo of James Shields and Kris Medlen. The reason for this is that Hammel and Hellickson rank 2 and 3 in all of baseball in run support, as they're getting an average of 6.31 and 6.23 per start.

I think it's very easy for many fans, columnists, and ESPN talking heads alike to judge a pitcher, first and foremost, on his record. However, I think that's often times inaccurate, and simply look at a pitcher's record as being a statement of how well the team has played on a whole when he has taken the mound. While I'm a firm believer in the saying that great pitching beats great hitting (most times), I also can't deny the fact that without scoring runs, it's impossible to win.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/order/false

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/sort/runSupportPerStart/type/expanded-2/order/true
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more