Comments on: Worked So Long For What?

By: Steve Lombardi

Steve Lombardi — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:53:09 +0000

Some nice and appreciated follow-up on this topic:

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2010/4/12/1417671/their-winning-percentages-were

By: Kahuna Tuna

Kahuna Tuna — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:21:15 +0000

Another way to rank these pitchers is by number of percentage points above or below the winning percentage of the teams that they played for. That ranking looks like this:

1. Frank Tanana: .504 indiv. minus .472 team = +.032
2. Javier Vazquez: .504 indiv. minus .488 team = +.016
3. Bobo Newsom: .487 indiv. minus .473 team = +.014
4. Claude Osteen: .501 indiv. minus .492 team = +.009
5. Bob Friend: .461 indiv. minus .453 team = +.008
6. Jeff Suppan: .500 indiv. minus .494 team = +.006
7. Jack Powell: .463 indiv. minus .459 team = +.004*
8. Floyd Bannister: .484 indiv. minus .481 team = +.003
9. Tom Zachary: .493 indiv. and team; zero difference
10. Tom Candiotti: .479 indiv. minus .481 team = -.002
11. Danny Darwin: .484 indiv. minus .487 team = -.003
12. Steve Trachsel: .474 indiv. minus .477 team = -.003
13. Steve Renko: .479 indiv. minus .482 team = -.003
14. Charlie Hough: .500 indiv. minus .506 team = -.006
15. Jim Slaton: .489 indiv. minus .497 team = -.008
16. Mike Moore: .478 indiv. minus .490 team = -.012
17. Bobby Witt: .475 indiv. minus .494 team = -.019
18. Bob Knepper: .485 indiv. minus .507 team = -.022
19. Jim Clancy: .456 indiv. minus .485 team = -.029
20. Kevin Gross: .473 indiv. minus .503 team = -.030
21. Rudy May: .494 indiv. minus .525 team = -.031
22. Bump Hadley: .494 indiv. minus .538 team = -.044
23. Mike Morgan: .431 indiv. minus .497 team = -.066

* The list covers only the years 1901-1912 of Powell's career. If the first four seasons of his career (1897-1900) are included, Powell winds up tied for second with Vazquez: .491 indiv. minus .475 team = +.016.

By: Steve Lombardi

Steve Lombardi — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 02:58:45 +0000

FWIW, FYI, more on neutral stats:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/equiv_stats.shtml

By: DoubleDiamond

DoubleDiamond — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:39:09 +0000

And Tom Zachary would have done even worse without that 12-0 year with the Yankees that is still the record for most wins in a season without a loss.

Some of these guys were the long-time so-called ace for poor teams.

By: Steve Lombardi

Steve Lombardi — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:55:00 +0000

Good point JDV

By: JDV

JDV — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:20:36 +0000

I couldn't help but notice that Bannister (1), Moore (1), Witt (3), and Morgan (4) were all among the top four overall picks in their respective drafts. Could they have remained in rotations based more on their "can't miss" labels than on their performances?

By: eorns

eorns — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:22:59 +0000

The neutral W-L sounds more like what I was thinking of, though it only uses average run support. It would be great if you could feed in a particular team/level of support to that. I'm aware of the Neutralized Pitching stats, but they're only for an entire career as if it were all pitched in one season. I want to see Bob Friend as if his 1951 season was on the 1951 Yankees, his 1952 on the 1952 Yankees, etc., not his entire career as if he was on the 1951 Yankees, say.

By: Steve Lombardi

Steve Lombardi — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:14:22 +0000

Nice summary John Williams

By: Thomas

Thomas — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:38:21 +0000

hahahahhaha

I read the intro and I said to myself, I wonder if Steve Trachsel started enough games to make this list... and there at #18...

By: John Williams

John Williams — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:01:06 +0000

This is like the kevin costner or bruce willis list. Lots of movies without much box office. Never an Oscar acting, but never the worst thing in the movie. A hit one a decade, but a movie every year.