Comments on: Does Verlander’s ’11 Match Guidry’s ’78? This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mike Felber Thu, 22 Sep 2011 07:06:18 +0000 It is very good that now we are looking at other net Performance evaluations, Fangraphs, & arguing which system might be more accurate, rather than assume one system is the only one one or better with no consideration of anything else/why.

How much BBIP play vary due to pitcher performance is a big open question. Many think only FIP are meaningful, & only knuckleballs effect BBIP averages. This seems extreme, but I don't know how much is chance.

The quality of competition must also be considered. I agree with Charles' reasoning, Guidry was at least a little better. Verlander could get & deserve the MVP, as could Bautista. Fangraphs loves Elsbury, & he should be considered.

By: Charles Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:27:11 +0000 @102

My opinion is that Guidry had a "better" year and I make that decision independently of the team record, because I see ERA and HRs allowed as the significant difference between the two.

I choose not to agree or disagree with a statement that Guidry had a "more valuable" year, based on his impact on a close race.

I will not judge Verlander's potential for an MVP award in 2011, based on the fact that Guidry had a "better" year or "more valuable" year in 1978 and did not receive one.

By: Dvd Avins Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:49:36 +0000 @100 It's fuzzy how much "better" is the same a "more valuable". 99's point is that the year was more valuable, which is a matter of definition about which reasonable people will disagree.

By: Johnny Twisto Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:01:15 +0000 I much to prefer to look at what actually happened as opposed to their interpretation of what they think should have happened.

Oh, I agree. I think the FIP stats are better for projecting forward than determining what actually happened. The problem is in determining what did happen which the pitcher was responsible for. I'm just not sure how much credit to give Verlander for his low BABIP. But, I guess it's a choice between crediting him, or his fielders, or both. I do agree the players on the field should be credited for what actually happens, even if it's an anomalous result, rather than waving that stuff away to the luck fairy.

By: Charles Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:41:47 +0000 @99

Your point is this.

Guidry had a better year because he won 25 games for a team that won their division by 1 game and Verlander is on a team that leads their division by 13.

By: Mike S. Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:57:23 +0000 One huge difference is the realignment of divisions. Verlander's Tigers have a 13 game lead, and are the only team above .500 in their division. Meanwhile, if Guidry had gone 24-4 and not 25-3, the 1978 Yankees don't make the postseason.

By: Chad Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:17:50 +0000 @ 91 I much to prefer to look at what actually happened as opposed to their interpretation of what they think should have happened.

Verlander has more wins, fewer losses, a better ERA, better WHIP, more strikeouts, fewer walks, more starts, more innings pitched.

I appreciate what fWAR is trying to do, but all the above point to Verlander being a definitively better pitcher in my book. They're basically saying Verlander has been extremely lucky, and Sabathia somewhat unlucky, and therefore they're equal this year. The actual results paint a much different picture.

As to what I would expect Verlander's BABIP to be next year ... I would suspect it would be higher than this year, but below league average. Athlete's performance goes up and down from year to year in most every sport. I think Verlander is a special pitcher who's had a special year - much the way Ron Guidry (I choose him because he and Verlander were the original basis of the post) had a career low babip in 1978.

By: Charles Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:10:18 +0000 @96

Verlander has the highest winning% in the AL.
Scherzer and Porcello at 0.609 have the best winning% in the AL with 162 IP and an ERA greater than 4.30
Penny is the only pitcher in the AL with 162 IP and an ERA over 5.00 with a non-losing record (10-10).

I would say the everyday players (hitters) are doing quite well carrying the other 3 primary starters. The other starts have been divided between 6 players. The most recent is Fister going 6-1 in 9 starts with a 2.12 ERA.

Scherzer: Team record in starts: 19-12
Porcello: 19-10
Penny 15-14
Combined 53-36 0.596 Still higher than their 0.582 team %

By: Charles Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:05:49 +0000 @75

Detroit is 2nd in the league in winning percentage.
When Verlander pitches, his team is 25-8.
When he doesn't pitch, they are 64-56. That winning percentage would be sixth in the league, but still lead the division.

Why doesn't his team do better when he doesn't pitch?
ANSWER: His team is average or slightly below average in most pitching statistics even when his numbers are included.

How do they have a winning record without him?
His team is #4 in most batting statistics. The 3 teams typically ahead of them are the other 3 playoff teams.
They are #5 in Runs Scored-Allowed differential.

By: kds Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:36:17 +0000 Fwiw, Guidry was tied for 7th in the league with his 16 CG, Verlander is currently tied for 4th with his 4.