I think you still need to get some wins and I think you still need to drive in some runs. They are each an important statistic in a large group of statistics. You cannot just ignore them because some gearheads come up with abstract statistics.Quote:
Originally Posted by metswon69
Management must think something of them. Contracts routinely have bonuses for the traditional stats. Never heard of a guy getting a bonus for his XFIP ot his WAR.
The only stats in baseball contracts are Games, IPs, and ABs or PAs, and never Wins, ERA, Ks, AVG, HRs, etc. Not sure if it is part of the basic agreement with the MLBPA or something everyone managed to agree upon.Quote:
Originally Posted by jomota48
I like Wins and RBIs because, historically, they were how we talked about and evaluated pitchers, but they really aren't all that relevant as standalone stats. The only value in Wins for me is that a pitcher consistently goes 5+ innings to get a W, and probably pitched and won w/o his best stuff. RBIs are relevant to me as in the % of RISP that score.
Yes but wins are overvalued tremendously.Quote:
Originally Posted by jomota48
Good pitchers can be victims of a bad bullpen (we have seen that before), an error or errors, or little run support.
Let's say a pitcher A pitches to 2.5 ERA (3 FIP and the better peripherals) and wins 11 games, and you have pitcher B who wins 19 games and pitches to a 4.4 ERA (5 FIP and the obvious worse peripherals)?
Who is the better pitcher?
If i saw those two, it's without question pitcher A.
If i was looking to acquire a pitcher, pitcher A gives me the better chance to win then pitcher B does even though pitcher B won more games.
Look at Phil Hughes i believe in 2010 when he won 18 games, he wasn't nearly as good as his record indicated and was the benefactor of having the best run support in the majors (or one of the best)
Does anyone think we could make a trade involving Dickey for Dee Gordon? And would anyone in here do that trade?
I would rather keep Dickey than trade with the Dodgers right now. Their system is depleted.
well, while i understand your point and agree that wins are irrelevant to the value of a pitcher, i disagree that RBI's are equally as irrelevant to the value of a hitter. Sure, your teammates have to be on base for you to get RBI's, but it does show clutchness of a particular player. If a hitter has a knack throughout his career for coming through with RISP and lets say usually has a somewhat low avg but very good RBI numbers every yr, I'd definitely say that adds value to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by metswon69
The raw stat, RBI, does not.Quote:
Originally Posted by bklynny67
Q: If player A has 100 RBI and Player B has 50 RBI, which player is more clutch?
A: I have no idea.
However, if Player A tallied 100 RBI with 500 runners in scoring position and Player B tallied 50 with 100 RISP, we know that Player B is more clutch because he drove home 50% while Player A drove home 20%.
As I said…Wins are part of the equation of evaluating a pitcher. CY winners are almost always near the top in the Wins category, Wins comes up in contract negotiations yada, yada, yada.
Is wins the only evaluator???? No. But it is part of the deal.
If they wiped Wins off the face of the earth, we'd have no problem identifying the best pitchers.Quote:
Originally Posted by jomota48
Don't worry about wins. We can be just like Little League.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dugmet
Why can't we sign an OF'er or reliever?
The Mets can sign Ollie Perez for 3/36, but don't like the idea of signing a Cy Young winner for 3/45? LOL this organization continues to amuse me.
I'm confident we could, but I doubt we would.Quote:
Originally Posted by bklynny67
Dee Gordon at this point seems to have about as much value as Fernando Martinez. After part of the last 2 seasons in MLB, I imagine he'll be out of options after this season. And it's doubtful he could even hit right now at the AA level.
As long as we get ice cream at the end of it all, I'm happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by jomota48
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustla23
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...th-r-a-dickey/
Good article by Matthew Pouliot:
Quote:
Again, the Mets don’t think Dickey is worth Ryan Dempster/Dan Haren money, yet they think another team should be willing to fork over two of their best young talents for him, when they could, you know, just sign Ryan Dempster instead.
Quote:
At this point, Dickey should really just tell the Mets to keep their money and that he’s going to test the open market. He’d be doing them a big favor by signing a two-year, $26 million extension. If he were a free agent right now, he’d have his pick of three-year, $45 million-$48 million offers, and it hardly be a shock if some team went to $20 million per year. He has a realistic shot of outperforming Zack Greinke over the next three years.