Thread: Stage Four

It doesn’t exist. But we keep hoping.

Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!
tlmcleod -- I would think that adding an additional pitching slot to up the % of pitchers in stats vs pitchers in game would help.

I know in the Ottoneu realm of fangraphs, they push a 5 SP / 5 RP model although it is 12 team mixed leagues.
Kent Ostby Seadogs
Oct 8 '13
My concern is that as the real game has changed and evolved from a pitching perspective, our game hasn't followed suit. I'd hasten to venture a guess that in mixed formats somewhere in the area of twenty per cent of the innings pitched each and every year are non-factors in our game. Is this a palatable situation? Maybe it is and my quest to see our game mirror the real game is a futile chase? I'm not currently convinced and believe an effort should be made to find a home for the middle-reliever and those "missing" innings. How then is this to be accomplished? Holds, to me seems to be the best answer. Are there others? Should our game even attempt to mirror the changes we've seen from a pitching perspective in the past 10-15 years. Thoughts?
Tim McLeod tlmcleod
Oct 8 '13
If you want a reference point, there were 2198 starts with at least 6 IP and 3 ER or less in 2013. 213 of those were 6 IP 3 ER or 9.7%.
van wilhoite LVW
Oct 7 '13
Highly unlikely that a pitcher will have too many outings with 3 ER in 6 IP. That said, in a real baseball game, giving up 3 runs in 6 innings is keeping your team in the game, and giving your team a chance to win come the seventh, even with no run support. That's not why I'm leery about using it -- it's more those 5+ IP starts with one or no ER. (Okay, I lost a bet in game 4 of the World Series in 2007, I bet that Lester would get a QS, and he got pulled with two outs in the sixth. No, I'm not bitter.)
mike fenger mike
Oct 7 '13
I like QS ... I'd be OK with changing its definition to 6IPw/2ER or 7IPw/3ER ... can XFL do that?
Howard Lynch LynchMob
Oct 7 '13
Not a fan of the "quality start" stat- 3 earned runs in 6 innings is a 4.50 ERA and is higher than the league average.

I wouldn't call a pitcher with a 4.50 ERA a quality starter.
van wilhoite LVW
Oct 7 '13
Reliever wins are basically luck. Starter wins have less of a luck component because of longer affect on game score, but are based upon team performance. They are probably the least projectable stat that we play for. Saves being a close second, but that's because of so many closers who lose their role mid-season.

Most projectable pitching stats- Ks, then Ratio, then ERA.

Hitting is more projectable. RBI and Runs are team stats similar to Wins, but more projectable. HR and Avg and even steals are pretty projectable.

QS+Wins probably rewards the randomness of wins, while still awarding good starting pitching. It does weaken the value of Wins of relievers, but adding Holds gives those middle relievers their value back.

I would still draft for Ratio and Ks for pitching get the associated ERA and hope to get QS and Wins and Holds.
Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Oct 7 '13
In general, I don't like either QS or holds.

This is, for the most part, redundant to ERA and WHIP.
Kent Ostby Seadogs
Oct 7 '13
The only dilemma of sorts that I have with QS exclusively is the win component of the RP disappears. The question would be is that a good or a bad situation?
Tim McLeod tlmcleod
Oct 7 '13
The same is true of saves. You give up 2 runs if you enter up 3 with no outs in the 9th and you get a save.
Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Oct 7 '13