attn: cf fantasy baseball participants

[MDS]

that doesnt make any sense

you cant equate a strikeout (something a pitcher directly earns) to a win/loss (which is predicated on run support or the bullpen, something a pitcher has no control over)

nice try though

[ice grillin you]

so if a pitcher pitches eight shutout innings with 16 k's and his teams wins 3-0 he didnt directly earn the win??

what on gods earth is wrong with you

and strikeouts are predicated on the strike zone the quality of the opposing lineup...whether its a day or night game ect...its not always how good the pitcher is and he doesnt always earn them...plus like i said the pither can have lots of strikeouts but suck at pitching on any particular day

[MDS]

so if a pitcher pitches eight shutout innings with 16 k's and his teams wins 3-0 he didnt directly earn the win??

what on gods earth is wrong with you

How did he get the 3 runs of support, though? What happens if he didn't? Sure, in broad baseball terms that is a "deserved" win, but it happened in large part because his offense happened to score enough runs for him on that given day.

Like I said sometimes the w/l makes sense...in that case it sort of does. But it only makes sense some of the times.

and strikeouts are predicated on the strike zone the quality of the opposing lineup...whether its a day or night game ect...its not always how good the pitcher is and he doesnt always earn them...plus like i said the pither can have lots of strikeouts but suck at pitching on any particular day

perhaps. you could say the same thing about miguel cabrera going 4-4 with 4 bloop singles. theres a certain amount of chance and luck associated with just about EVERYTHING in baseball. strikeouts are no stranger to that, but in just about every case its a fairly earned and concrete stat.

[ice grillin you]

i would say the same thing about every stat...sometimes they mean you are going to win and sometimes they mean you arent...you are the one saying that wins are completely meaningless ALL THE TIME

ill take a win anyday over having the most strikeouts in a game

[MDS]

it isnt about what you want or what youd take.

a strikeout is a strikeout is a strikeout. its defined and it tells how good or bad a pitcher is at it.

wins and losses are totally random, totally arbitrary and can very likely tell you nothing about how good or bad a pitcher is. 30 years ago no one in their right mind would vote for king's 15-13 seasons or whatever it was for cy young. theyd see the record and that would be that.

but when you look past that misleading 15-13, you see a pitcher was was dominating, that got no run support, and that had his bullpen blow his leads. all things out of his control. the strikeouts, though, were not. those were earned.

[ice grillin you]

wins and losses are no more misleading than strikeouts....they are just waaaaaaaay more impotant

[MDS]

they are important for a team, yes. not for a pitcher. K's are important for a pitcher because they are the only stat the eliminates luck, i.e. a blooper finding daylight, a fielder booting a routine grounder, a flyball leaving the yard because of the wind/stadium being a bandbox.

[ice grillin you]

wins are important for a pitcher becaue the more pitchers who get wins the better the team is

again stop trying so hard and just look at the game like a regular human being as opposed to a billy beane programmed robot

[MDS]

wins are important for a pitcher becaue the more pitchers who get wins the better the team is

you just proved my point right there. wins are a TEAM stat.

you're right. a pitcher getting a lot of wins shows how good the team is. a good pitcher on a bad team (king) or a good pitcher on a mediocre team (halladay, lee, hamels) will show the same type of results.

but you cant fault or blame the pitcher if hes good and the team stinks. thats the whole point. the stat means nothing to the pitcher, it means something to the team.

[ice grillin you]

you're right. a pitcher getting a lot of wins shows how good the team is

negative on that....pitchers on bad teams can get a lot of wins

just like a cal ripken can be great in all the numbers you think are important on a horrible team

[Geowhizzer]

1972 Steve Carlton:  27-10
1972 Phillies:  59-97

[MDS]

not sure what that means but for the 1000th time wins meant something in 1972 because pitchers actually finished their games.

there were pitch counts. there were no lefty specialists or middle relievers or closers. look through the game log, very few of carltons wins had a save attached to them. many were 3-0, 1-0, 2-1, etc. obviously its one of the more amazing seasons ever, and would be less-amazing if he had a zesty closer blowing all his games. but he didnt, cause the game wasnt played that way back then.

now its just different. a pitchers record doesn't really indicate a whole lot.

[ice grillin you]

i dont know who these new jacks think they are but if im a pitcher im hoping i lose every game...cause it doesnt matter either way

[Munson]

IGY keeps thinking about wins in terms of the real game/the team....this aint the real game, this is fantasy sports

[MDS]

i dont know who these new jacks think they are but if im a pitcher im hoping i lose every game...cause it doesnt matter either way

what? you idiot, its about team wins. TEAM. wins for the individual pitcher are like wins on an angel or torahs on a bimah. they mean dick.