Comments on: Keeping Score: Lee’s Value to Phillies Can Be Measured in Zeros – This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: Charles Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:13:45 +0000 0 run pitcher. Bizarre sense of humor pitcher who likes the beach.
5 run pitcher. Identical twin that no one knows about.

My French teacher told us he had a pair of twins in his class. One would always do well on a test and on the next one the other would do well. He figured out how to tell them apart and the pattern changed.

By: Johnny Twisto Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:51:23 +0000 Normalize to same number of games pitched.

Ahh, I don't think I did that in my post #12, and obviously I should have.

By: Charles Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:48:38 +0000 @13

That data was based on league run distribution on the probability that a team would be above or below the runs given up by the pitcher in 2011

Actual win loss record of teams
0 runs 293-0 100%
2 runs 428-149 74%
3 runs 378-255 60%
5 runs 169-333 34%

Normalize to same number of games pitched.
The 0,5 pitcher wins 67%
The 2,3 pitcher wins 67%

By: Charles Mon, 12 Sep 2011 04:57:10 +0000 @8

The pitching team's batters R/G distribution is the same as the major league R/G distribution

We will throw out the 0, 2, 3 , 5 run games when necessary
In 2011 there were 4053 games where the team scored 1 run or more
SHO pitchers would be 4053-0 or 100%
In 2011 there were 3002 games where the team scored 3 runs or more and 767 where the scored 1 or less.
2 run pitchers would be 3002-767 or 80%.
In 2011 there were 2369 games where the team scored 4 runs or more and 1344 where they scored 2 runs or less.
3 run pitchers would be 2369-1344 or 63%
In 2011 there were 1260 games where the team scored 6 runs or more and 2584 where they scored 4 runs or less.
5 run pitchers would be 1260-2584 or 33%

So if the 0,5 run guy pitches 100 0-run games and 100 5-run games he would be expected to win 133 (66%)
So if the 2,3 run guy pitches 100 2-run games and 100 3-run games he would be expected to win 143 (72%)

The 2,3 pitcher has the edge.

By: Johnny Twisto Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:56:55 +0000 JA, I know the "consistency" issue with pitchers was addressed a couple times here in the past couple months. I think it was stated that consistency (at least, at a higher level) is better, but I don't know that we had any hard numbers behind it.

I chose your examples from #8. Team winning % in games allowing either 0 or 5 runs, or when allowing 2 or 3 runs.

............0 or 5....2 or 3

There is a clear advantage to consistency at this level. If you raise the average runs scored, I don't think it would be so clear. The results might also change somewhat if you filter for runs allowed only by the SP.

By: CHARLES Mon, 12 Sep 2011 01:01:24 +0000 I found this newspaper article about Kilroy in Nov. 1889. It said he was an outstanding fielder, 0.274 batting average, and that he had a 7 inning 0-0 nohitter, but he lost a run when he failed to touch 3B when he scored. The article said he pitched 59 games and gave up 104 runs for a 1.76 average. Maybe they were talking about earned runs.

Boston Daily Globe
Saturday Nov. 26, 1889
page 7

I saw this game June 24, 1990
Chicago 22, Brooklyn 3
1 earned run each team
Brooklyn had 20 errors

"Johnny Ward's folks played ball like harvest hands today. In the fourth inning the White Stockings piled on 13 runs , none earned".

By: Charles Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:57:46 +0000 I hope this can be understood without further detail. Without going into all the statistics, based on the ML probability of a team scoring 0-2, 3-5, 6+ runs, it's slightly in favor of the 0,5 pitcher. That's assuming the pitcher pitches a complete game and I put all the shutouts as wins, no 0-0 ties. It makes a difference, if the game is incomplete and goes to the relievers because there's a probability that they will give up a run and my analysis was based on only the starting picher giving up runs. 0 and 5 run games are very likely blowouts and if the relievers give up a run or two, it won't change the outcome of many games. Relievers are more likely to change the outcome of a 2,3 run outing, because those are more likely to be close games and the winning percentage can only be lower than what I calculated based on total runs for the pitcher's team for the entire game.

By: John Autin Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:26:43 +0000 I mangled my last sentence @8 -- it should have ended:
"... will a pitcher generate more win value by allowing 2 or 3 runs every time, or by alternating shutouts with 5-run games?"

By: John Autin Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:24:38 +0000 As I was reading Sean's piece on Lee's shutouts, a passage from Jack Moore's recent Fangraphs/ESPN article about Doug Fister was in my mind:

[comparing Fister and Max Scherzer:] "Although the chances of a poor start from Fister are slightly higher, the chances of a truly shutdown start are also higher. This is a trade the Tigers (or any team) should be more than willing to make -- a pitcher giving up zero runs will never lose, whereas the Tigers' offense could bail Fister out of a four-, five- or even six-run outing behind the powerful bats of Miguel Cabrera, Victor Martinez and crew."
(sorry, it's an Insider piece; couldn't find a different location)

Could any of the math smarties out there point me towards understanding the truth (or not) of that claim? It's a question that's often raised, but I've not seen a definitive answer: In an average scoring context, will a pitcher generate more win value by allowing 2 or 3 runs every time, or alternate shutouts with 5-run games?

By: Charles Sun, 11 Sep 2011 12:12:51 +0000 @6

You're right. But the funny part is "5 times in 4 years".