Need help understanding pitching scoring

[Mr.TradeKing]

Another example of this is defensive shifts. Shifts are widely thought of to be as a result of the batter's tendencies and this is true. However, they can also be implemented for pitchers depending on the different situations. A pitcher can hit the outside of the plate forcing the batter to go "oppo" or more than likely hit a lazy fly ball/dribbler.

~MTK

[Mr.TradeKing]

I was looking into the subject and found this:

http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/18924/game-score-one-for-the-pitchers

It looks to be something like we are looking for. Under this scoring system, Liriano's no-no scored an 83 which is tied for the 13th best performance by a pitcher this year (this would correlate to more than 15 points in our system which is what he got). This seems reasonable when you take into account his BB's and K's.

~MTK

[VolsRaysBucs]

 While the intentions of the scoring system were no doubt sound, the application is flawed.  While attempting to "eliminate" luck as much as possible, we've essentially neutered the pitching market.  Long term, this will effect the league as one half of our roster will be valued significantly lower than the other half (position players).  Our system rewards medicority.  More so than any other sport, baseball is dissected via numbers.  To have 35 yr old journeymen spot starters valued above the Liriano's and Price's of the world is wrong.  To have middle relievers pitching to 4 batters and scoring higher than a complete game no hitter is wrong.  In real life, NOTHING is valued more than pitching.  Nothing.  If we wanted to get WAY in depth, hitters are bound by luck as well.  Pujols does not see a strike to hit if he is not protected.  What about teams that play on a "fast track?"  What about hitters playing in Petco as opposed to Coors? What type of weather that day or week?  Is the player in a fight with his significant other?  What if he is facing the OF of the Twins, who haven't a decent fielding OF on their roster.  The point is, there are an infinite number of factors that can not be accounted for.  A no-no should never be valued less than the work of a middle reliever.  Ever. I don't care if the guy killed two kids in the stands with his lack of command.  Luck can never be manually neutralized.  It does it on its own, over time.  The best pitchers are those who give up the least amount of hits and runs.  I've not done the numbers yet, but I'd bet that team-average UZR and other defensive ratings  are pretty closely lumped together across all 30 teams.  I'd venture to guess that the variance in defensive profenciency league-wide is not as great as the variance in scoring in our league. 

Forgive my diatribe, LONG day at work with unruly children 

[rcankosy]

I agree with you 100%.  There appears to be a small minority of owners here who are relying on one badly flawed article by someone in Baseball Prospectus to create a scoring system that the vast majority thinks is silly at best and horrible at worst.  The foremost statistician of our generation, Bill James, uses a much simpler and logical system called "game score" (the one used by ESPN and other well-known sites) which these guys would dismiss, because it contains such "dependent" stats as hits allowed and earned runs.  LOL.  There are some among us who prefer to analyze pitching performances on the basis on WHAT was achieved rather than HOW it was achieved.  The primary focus of a pitcher is to prevent his opponent from scoring runs.  Period.  How he achieves that is his business.  Defense and luck is pretty evenly spread out throughout baseball, so trying to eliminate it as some people are trying to do is a worthless endeavor imo. 

[rcankosy]

I posted this in the off-season, but perhaps this time we will get a more favorable response.

I propose that we adopt Bill James' formula of "Game Score" for pitching.  Game Score is calculated as follows      
      
Start with 50 points.      
Add 1 point for each out recorded, so 3 points for every complete inning pitched.      
Add 2 points for each inning completed after the 4th.      
Add 1 point for each strikeout.      
Subtract 2 points for each hit allowed.      
Subtract 4 points for each earned run allowed.      
Subtract 2 points for each unearned run allowed.      
Subtract 1 point for each walk.         
      
James' formulas are accurate and easy to follow.  They accurately reflect what really happened on the field without trying to eliminate what some folks here consider luck.      
      

[Mr.TradeKing]

Roy,

I posted this a couple posts up. I complete agree and I am on-board with this formula.

~MTK

[Canada8999]

I really believe that the conversations about rules, scoring, etc. need to be brought up during the offseason, they are only distractions at this point.  Quite frankly, we will still have to start at the beginning of this subject when discussed in the offseason.

 

Considering we have to go through it every few months again anyway... this is a bit ridiculous...

[Canada8999]

To have 35 yr old journeymen spot starters valued above the Liriano's and Price's of the world is wrong.  To have middle relievers pitching to 4 batters and scoring higher than a complete game no hitter is wrong.

Look at the top ranked players based on the current system and tell me that this is really the case...

[Canada8999]

I posted this in the off-season, but perhaps this time we will get a more favorable response.

I propose that we adopt Bill James' formula of "Game Score" for pitching.  Game Score is calculated as follows      
      
Start with 50 points.      
Add 1 point for each out recorded, so 3 points for every complete inning pitched.      
Add 2 points for each inning completed after the 4th.      
Add 1 point for each strikeout.      
Subtract 2 points for each hit allowed.      
Subtract 4 points for each earned run allowed.      
Subtract 2 points for each unearned run allowed.      
Subtract 1 point for each walk.         
      
James' formulas are accurate and easy to follow.  They accurately reflect what really happened on the field without trying to eliminate what some folks here consider luck.      

And it was rejected when you brought it up because it is notoriously flawed, and ESPN is the only one who tracks it...

[h4cheng]

Considering we have to go through it every few months again anyway... this is a bit ridiculous...

Why not start the discussion now? Gives us more time to iron out all the wrinkles.