He was being sarcastic guys. Kalapse has always said he'd take the 3.00 ERA and 12 wins over the 5.50 ERA and 20 wins.

I actually like to take it one step further. I'm all for abolishing the W/L record of pitchers altogether. It's a meaningless stat that does nothing but confuse people who don't know what to look for when using statistics to evaluate player performances.

 

f*** Jerome Robertson, seriously.

 

That's poor logic too. A pitcher is only as good as the players around him. Obviously some guys are flat out mutants (Johan Santana) but would Mark Buehrle really be 4-4 on the Red Sox or Angels? No.

 

I've got the flu, by the way.

I don't really understand any of this so I'll clarify a bit.

 

Who would you rather have?

 

PITCHER A: 8-7 w/ 4.90 ERA, 1.50 WHIP

or

PITCHER B: 2-8 w/ 3.46 ERA, 1.31 WHIP

 

If someone were going by wins, which people like Hawk Harrelson tend to do, they would probably take player A.

I actually like to take it one step further. I'm all for abolishing the W/L record of pitchers altogether. It's a meaningless stat that does nothing but confuse people who don't know what to look for when using statistics to evaluate player performances.

 

f*** Jerome Robertson, seriously.

I don't really understand any of this so I'll clarify a bit.

 

Who would you rather have?

 

8-7 w/ 4.90 ERA, 1.50 WHIP

or

2-8 w/ 3.46 ERA, 1.31 WHIP

 

If someone were going by wins, which people like Hawk Harrelson tend to do, they would probably take Suppan.

 

There was a poster before who was blinded by a Buerhle great start, and a typical Johan slow start, and thought that Buerhle was better than Johan. I remember that Johan was down by like small percentage points in ERA, and the poster used wins, and the small percentage of ERA overage to say that Buerhle was a superior pitcher.

I actually like to take it one step further. I'm all for abolishing the W/L record of pitchers altogether. It's a meaningless stat that does nothing but confuse people who don't know what to look for when using statistics to evaluate player performances.

 

f*** Jerome Robertson, seriously.

 

 

I don't really understand any of this so I'll clarify a bit.

 

Who would you rather have?

 

PITCHER A: 8-7 w/ 4.90 ERA, 1.50 WHIP

or

PITCHER B: 2-8 w/ 3.46 ERA, 1.31 WHIP

 

If someone were going by wins, which people like Hawk Harrelson tend to do, they would probably take player A.

 

Pitcher B. Unless pitcher A were the fifth starter and the team was in first place with, say, an 8 game lead. (I might've confused people again. Pitcher B is the superior pitcher--it just seems that his team sucks. Where pitcher A appears to be the lesser pitcher, but have a better team.)

Edited June 26, 200718 yr by BobDylan

We owe Danks a few wins where he pitches mediocre after what happened to him early in the year. Nice to win a game.

Pitcher B. Unless pitcher A were the fifth starter and the team was in first place with, say, an 8 game lead. (I might've confused people again. Pitcher B is the superior pitcher--it just seems that his team sucks. Where pitcher A appears to be the lesser pitcher, but have a better team.)

Exactly, so what the hell is the point of a pitcher's W/L record if it's so heavily weighted by the other 8 players around him (the team's offense especially)? There are so many other good stats, it's just such a damn shame that so many people decide to use a pitcher's W/L as some sort of barometer of success.

Exactly, so what the hell is the point of a pitcher's W/L record if it's so heavily weighted by the other 8 players around him (the team's offense especially)? There are so many other good stats, it's just such a damn shame that so many people decide to use a pitcher's W/L as some sort of barometer of success.

 

The main point I was making was toward your initial post...which, I guess, was sarcasm? You compared various pitchers around the league to ours and used only W/L (on the surface?) to determine who fitted with who. There are too many variables in baseball to just compare/contrast like that.

 

Win/Loss records aren't totally moot, though. Some pitchers are average but have a knack for keeping their team in the game whether it be giving up 8 runs or 2 runs. They are mutants, also.

Watching ESPNEWS, the Sox highlights came on, and the anchor was talking about how bad the Sox offense was, but how "this kid Andy Gonzalez" could be the answer for the Sox.

Watching ESPNEWS, the Sox highlights came on, and the anchor was talking about how bad the Sox offense was, but how "this kid Andy Gonzalez" could be the answer for the Sox.

Watching ESPNEWS, the Sox highlights came on, and the anchor was talking about how bad the Sox offense was, but how "this kid Andy Gonzalez" could be the answer for the Sox.

 

I seriously despise that network. I haven't turned it on in over two months and as I go to check ESPN.com for scores, sometimes I catch an article description here or there and it seems they always finish off the description with, "our expert has the answer." f*** THEM.

I really only watch sports center and all those other sports shows mainly because of the highlights. And not all of the analysis is bad, but most of it is.

 

But hey, at least they have Kenny Mayne on once in a while this year

I actually like to take it one step further. I'm all for abolishing the W/L record of pitchers altogether. It's a meaningless stat that does nothing but confuse people who don't know what to look for when using statistics to evaluate player performances.

 

f*** Jerome Robertson, seriously.

 

Um, sir, I am unsure who this Jerome Robertson is.

 

Jeriome Robertson, perhaps?

 

 

And who really spells their name - pronounced jur-ohm - like it's pronounced jare-ee-ohm? I mean, talk about a completely useless and meaningless letter in a name. Sheesh.

 

 

Oh yeah, and Danks rawkZ

Um, sir, I am unsure who this Jerome Robertson is.

 

Jeriome Robertson, perhaps?

And who really spells their name - pronounced jur-ohm - like it's pronounced jare-ee-ohm? I mean, talk about a completely useless and meaningless letter in a name. Sheesh.

Oh yeah, and Danks rawkZ

My apologies. I really should work on my spelling of s***ty rookie pitchers from 2003, I still have trouble spelling Joaquin.

Kalapse's research has proven my lame point.

We are not a bad team when our clueless hitters rap 10-12 hits.

Hit the ball!!!

Watching ESPNEWS, the Sox highlights came on, and the anchor was talking about how bad the Sox offense was, but how "this kid Andy Gonzalez" could be the answer for the Sox.

Well Phew, thank god for Andy the Messiah.

 

Um, sir, I am unsure who this Jerome Robertson is.

 

Jeriome Robertson, perhaps?

And who really spells their name - pronounced jur-ohm - like it's pronounced jare-ee-ohm? I mean, talk about a completely useless and meaningless letter in a name. Sheesh.

Oh yeah, and Danks rawkZ

My High School physics teacher played minor league ball with Jeriome. What that has to do with anything I don't know, but I thought I'd share since I'm sure all of you guys wanted to know that awesome fact.

My High School physics teacher played minor league ball with Jeriome. What that has to do with anything I don't know, but I thought I'd share since I'm sure all of you guys wanted to know that awesome fact.

Good for you.

Good for you.

I thought so.

Well Phew, thank god for Andy the Messiah.

My High School physics teacher played minor league ball with Jeriome. What that has to do with anything I don't know, but I thought I'd share since I'm sure all of you guys wanted to know that awesome fact.

 

We're happy for you!

 

Seriously, it's just nice to see our pen hold up for once and to win a game. How pathetic is it that I felt like I was on top of the world tonight.

 

So I looked at the numbers tonight....the bright side is, we only have to go 65-25 to win 95 games this year....