0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I checked out the pitching rankings for this year, and feel pretty comfortable with it. Yeah, there might be a couple anomalies, such as Masterson, but the ability to induce ground balls is a very important statistic, and Masterson has induced at least 70 more ground balls than the likes of Josh Johnson, Tim Lincecum, and Jered Weaver. That seems pretty significant for a pitcher, regardless of his ERA or WHIP, and should warrant a higher ranking.As it stands now, I'll side with keeping the scoring system as is.
I don't feel too strong one way or the other. If Masterson is having a good year, then he is having a good year. However I just don't want a average pitcher who does well in the categories that we do count to become a top pitcher in this league.~MTK
The short answer is these categories are those that the pitcher controls, and everything else is out of his hands - ERA and WHIP are products of these categories, but they also include a significant about of luck. For that reason, if you're going to pick statistical categories to rate your pitchers buy you might as well stick with the ones that they actually control and represent their true skills/performance (and for the record, this was one of Colby's founding principles for the league)If you're interested in learning more about where all of this research comes from, I suggest researching things such as DIPS, BABIP, FIP, xFIP, tERA, etc.Some sites that come up:http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=878http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/batted-balls-and-dips/http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/pitcher-win-values-explained-part-twoand not that ESPN has anything to do with generating these findings, but just to show that they are referenced by major sports sites:http://sports.espn.go.com/fantasy/baseball/flb/story?id=5260306