2014 Phillies Thread - There's Always Next Year

[Rome]

CLIFF LEE

[smeags]

smug will trade him for two bags of rocks again. bank on it.

[MDS]

only a complete moron would rather have 2013 chris sale...unless of course you like losing

at least come up with an example where the guys era is under three compared to another year where its over 5 and he has way less wins....or where the stats in general arent even close

you seriously would rather have a .02 less era and .1 less h/9 if it came with six less wins?

i feel like im talking to a religious person...and not even a jesus freak....like someone in a nutty cult where they believe goats are people and god is a 12 year old boy from providence. you are looking at this in such a different capacity than reality.

ill try to be as simple as humanly possible. chris sale had essentially similar statistical seasons in 2012 and 2013. one season he went 17-8 because his team was good. the other season he went 11-14 because he team sucked. his record is predicated on the quality of the guys behind him and in the lineup. things he has zero control over.

[ice grillin you]

i didnt watch his season but maybe in 2013 he faltered late in a handful of his starts...like heidi has done quite a bit in his career giving up a homer in the 7th to lose 3-2

lots of factors here buddy...but the bottom line is i want my starting pitchers to get a lot of wins....it means a lot

[MDS]

youre missing the point, as usual

he didnt get "wins" because his team stinks. the same reason king felix doesnt win more than 13 games a year. no run support, bad defense, bad bullpen. all factors out of your control and all factors that go into deciding pitching decisions.

the good thing is the majority of organized baseball doesnt value the stat. in fact sale had more cy young votes in 2013 then he had in 2012. no one farging cares about pitching records anymore except for you, hawk harrelson and harold reynolds.

[ice grillin you]

SP's gets wins on bad teams all the time....in fact the most famous example ever happened in philadelphia

[MDS]

im talking to a brick wall...referring to something that happened 30 years ago before pitch counts and bullpen specialists. the game be different.

at least sandberg gave up an out so jayson nix, ryan howard and possibly ben revere can hit with a runner at 2nd. bunting rules. bunting rules. i love bunting. smart. smart. smart.

[MDS]

BUNTING WORKS!! bunt bunt bunt all the time.

[ice grillin you]

only nerds could make baseball not fun.....no wonder noone watches it anymore...it for geeky white people and teenage girls who live on cul de sacs

[MDS]

bunting and pitching decisions and pinch running are fun? thats what makes baseball fun? all this time i thought it was the fly outs to rightfield.

[BigEd76]

Pap goes through Freeman/Upton/Johnson 1-2-3 and the Phils win 1-0

[smeags]

SP's gets wins on bad teams all the time....in fact the most famous example ever happened in philadelphia

im not a sabremetric guy by any means but this is one time that crowd is right. the win stat isn't pointless IMO but it can be very, very misleading both ways.

curt schilling vs jamie moyer - who was better ?

[Eagles_Legendz]

only nerds could make baseball not fun.....no wonder noone watches it anymore...it for geeky white people and teenage girls who live on cul de sacs

the irony to that statement is that sabr people prefer homeruns and getting on base which in theory makes baseball more enjoyable.

there's a lot of correlation and causation issues here.  i don't think it takes billy beane to look at a situation and realize a team a pitcher pitches on has a huge impact on his W/L total and that's out of his control.  saying that it's just sabr people is not really accurate.  I can't tell you what VORP measures but I know that Felix Hernadez is Felix Hernadez whether he's on the Mariners or Yankees and his same exact performance would give him wildly different win totals while being literally the same pitcher -- that is enough to indicate it's as much a team stat as an individual stat.  Obviously if you suck the odds are low you win a lot of games.  The point is it doesn't take a stat geek to acknowledge the role that so many others play in terms of that statistic, and when you're looking at an individual performance, why don't you stick to stats that are (basically) within the pitcher's control (ERA/WHIP/Kper9 etc).  It's far more valuable that wins as a stat because you're arguing against a strawman here.  You're making it like no one cares whether a team wins or loses a game when that's not true.  The argument isn't that wins are irrelevant.  The argument is you're measuring one player's performance when so many other variables go into a win than just one player, so the best way to look at the player is to look at the player's stats, not whether the team scored for him that day, made 4 errors, bullpen blew the game, etc, all things that go into whether a pitcher gets a W.

You have your position and that's fine, and I know you aren't someone to regularly change that position, but there's a world of difference between someone acknowledging that a lot of times what pitcher gets a "win" is random (see: Lee, Cliff this year) and then saying all of those people are stat geeks/worship at the alter of Billy Beane. 

[PhillyPhreak54]

Hey Havas help me out here. I just read the game recap and it says that they won because Revere singled home a runner who was sacrificed to second. Sacrifice is a bunt play so that means a bunt worked and won them a game. It was used in the right situation and they won.

But but lil guy says bunting is the devil, right?

[ice grillin you]

pretty much his nightmare scenario...i would bet anything that he would rather not bunt there and the phillies lose than beautifully sacrifice the team to a victory