Not me. Buehrle had an ERA+ of 112 and 104 the past two seasons. Danks had 79 and 83.

 

And Buehrle was worthless by the end of the year and I think it was more than just fatigue. I don't trust him to be back to his normal self this season.

And Buehrle was worthless by the end of the year and I think it was more than just fatigue. I don't trust him to be back to his normal self this season.

 

Danks was worthless in 80% of his starts.

Danks was worthless in 80% of his starts.

15 of his 30 starts were quality starts, and 1 of those other 15 he went 5 2/3 IP and gave up just 1 run against a pretty good Yankee lineup. But sure.

15 of his 30 starts were quality starts, and 1 of those other 15 he went 5 2/3 IP and gave up just 1 run against a pretty good Yankee lineup. But sure.

 

I agree that Danks was not nearly as bad as people make him out to be but the quality start stat is pretty worthless.

15 of his 30 starts were quality starts, and 1 of those other 15 he went 5 2/3 IP and gave up just 1 run against a pretty good Yankee lineup. But sure.

 

 

This. Danks gets a bad wrap because of his contract (which by the way, although still not good, isn't extremely awful -- he's probably a $8-10mm arm just based on being able to throw 180-200 innings)

 

His starts weren't awful last year. Actually quite decent. His tendency in my opinion is that when blows up, he blows up badly. Inflates his ERA. Also, in those games you can't say he kept us in them. He's not the one Im worried about.

 

 

Erik Johnson is going to be brutal if he doesn't keep the ball in the park and get lucky getting out of his base on balls.

 

That being said I'd take Buehrle if he wanted to come back -- or even if he wanted to sit out half a season and then come back. Though I'm guessing hes announcing his retirement.

15 of his 30 starts were quality starts, and 1 of those other 15 he went 5 2/3 IP and gave up just 1 run against a pretty good Yankee lineup. But sure.

 

Samardja also had 15 quality starts last year if we are using that as the measure of success.

Samardja also had 15 quality starts last year if we are using that as the measure of success.

 

Samardzija was also supposed to be a #2, Danks is a 5th Starter

Quality starts are dumb. Quality starts are also a fine way to show whether or not a guy was "worthless in 80% of his starts."

Quality starts are dumb. Quality starts are also a fine way to show whether or not a guy was "worthless in 80% of his starts."

 

Worthless was an overstatement. Been seeing too much Donald Trump in the media I guess. Buehrle had 19 quality starts and pitched like garbage for the last few months of the season.

Quality starts are dumb. Quality starts are also a fine way to show whether or not a guy was "worthless in 80% of his starts."

That was what I was getting at. Sure a 6 IP 3 ER start is a 4.50 ERA, but even so the worst possible "quality" start is far from worthless.

Worthless was an overstatement. Been seeing too much Donald Trump in the media I guess. Buehrle had 19 quality starts and pitched like garbage for the last few months of the season.

No one's arguing that Buehrle was better than Danks last year. The question is who would be better this year.

Edited January 29, 201610 yr by OmarComing25

That was what I was getting at. Sure a 6 IP 3 ER start is a 4.50 ERA, but even so the worst possible "quality" start is far from worthless.

 

From Wikipedia, here are some examples of why the quality start stat is worthless

 

In July 2000, Mark Mulder went 6 2/3 innings, gave up 15 hits and nine runs — but only two were earned, so that was classified as a quality start.

 

In June 1997, Randy Johnson struck out 19 in a complete game but allowed four runs. That was not a quality start.

 

In July 1982, Mike Scott allowed seven hits and walked five in six innings, did not strike out anybody, gave up seven runs, but only three of those were earned. Quality start.

 

In April 1974, Gaylord Perry went 15 innings and allowed four runs. Not a quality start

 

From Wikipedia, here are some examples of why the quality start stat is worthless

 

In July 2000, Mark Mulder went 6 2/3 innings, gave up 15 hits and nine runs — but only two were earned, so that was classified as a quality start.

 

In June 1997, Randy Johnson struck out 19 in a complete game but allowed four runs. That was not a quality start.

 

In July 1982, Mike Scott allowed seven hits and walked five in six innings, did not strike out anybody, gave up seven runs, but only three of those were earned. Quality start.

 

In April 1974, Gaylord Perry went 15 innings and allowed four runs. Not a quality start

Fair enough, though a quick check of Danks' game log shows that none of his quality starts involved any unearned runs.

Fair enough, though a quick check of Danks' game log shows that none of his quality starts involved any unearned runs.

 

I also don't like it because it is a rigid 3 ER or less, 6+ IP. It has always been those numbers despite what the league ERA is that year. A 4.50 ERA in the late '90s to early '00s was pretty good. Now it's pretty bad.

 

I think the stat should be adjusted to something resembling what the NHL considers a quality start for a goalie. A goalie gets a quality start if his save percentage is higher in that game the league's average for the season in games in which he faced 20 or more shots and has to be higher than 88.5% in games he faced less than 20 shots.

 

Baseball could go to something similar to that. Keep the 6 inning minimum as I think that is a good number. But give the pitcher a quality start only if their runs allowed per nine (earned or unearned) are less than the league's average that year. That way the parameters for a quality start move along with the quality of pitching in the league. The better the pitching, the better you have to pitch to receive a quality start.

 

If they went to something like this Danks would have about 5 less quality starts last year.

From Wikipedia, here are some examples of why the quality start stat is worthless

 

In July 2000, Mark Mulder went 6 2/3 innings, gave up 15 hits and nine runs — but only two were earned, so that was classified as a quality start.

 

In June 1997, Randy Johnson struck out 19 in a complete game but allowed four runs. That was not a quality start.

 

In July 1982, Mike Scott allowed seven hits and walked five in six innings, did not strike out anybody, gave up seven runs, but only three of those were earned. Quality start.

 

In April 1974, Gaylord Perry went 15 innings and allowed four runs. Not a quality start

So 4 examples in 40 years means it happens enough to make it a useless stat?

two starts ago Sale gave up 7 runs including a grand slam and got a quality start. just sayin'.

So 4 examples in 40 years means it happens enough to make it a useless stat?

 

There is a hell of a lot more examples than that. How does it make any sense at all that a 3 ER, 6 IP game is a quality start but a 4ER, 9 IP game is not? The first pitcher has a 4.50 ERA and the second pitcher has a 4.00 ERA. And why is a start in which a pitcher has an ERA nearly 3/4 of a run worse than league average qualify as a quality start? Shouldn't that be considered a below average start?

Edited January 29, 201610 yr by lasttriptotulsa

There is a hell of a lot more examples than that. How does it make any sense at all that a 3 ER, 6 IP game is a quality start but a 4ER, 9 IP game is not? The first pitcher has a 4.50 ERA and the second pitcher has a 4.00 ERA. And why is a start in which a pitcher has an ERA nearly 3/4 of a run worse than league average qualify as a quality start? Shouldn't that be considered a below average start?

 

I get your point, but in reality, how many 4ER, 9IP games exist?

I get your point, but in reality, how many 4ER, 9IP games exist?

 

It goes beyond that. Like Hatchetman said, last year Sale had a start in which he gave up 7 runs and got a quality start. Why? Because 6 of them were unearned. Would anybody in their right mind say that Chris Sale had a good start that game?

It goes beyond that. Like Hatchetman said, last year Sale had a start in which he gave up 7 runs and got a quality start. Why? Because 6 of them were unearned. Would anybody in their right mind say that Chris Sale had a good start that game?

 

 

How did the guys reach base? I mean that is what fWAR is based on. That's why he's a 6 fWAR player. It focuses on FIP and Strikeouts.

No one's arguing that Buehrle was better than Danks last year. The question is who would be better this year.

 

Buehrle if he wants to be. I don't have faith that he would be his 30 year old self or anything, I just don't have any faith in Danks anymore. Hopefully I am wrong.

How did the guys reach base? I mean that is what fWAR is based on. That's why he's a 6 fWAR player. It focuses on FIP and Strikeouts.

 

He had a 6 run inning in which the sequence went as follows.

 

Flyout

Single

Reached on E4

K

Single (1 run scores)

Single (1 run scores)

Walk

Grand Slam

Walk

Groundout

 

So Sale allowed 6 base runners that inning not counting the reached on error. Sure you can say those guys shouldn't have been batting because the inning would have been over after that K but that is part of pitching. You have to pitch over those things. How can you say a guy pitched a quality start when one error caused him to implode and allow 5 base runners and 6 runs the rest of the inning?

He had a 6 run inning in which the sequence went as follows.

 

Flyout

Single

Reached on E4

K

Single (1 run scores)

Single (1 run scores)

Walk

Grand Slam

Walk

Groundout

 

So Sale allowed 6 base runners that inning not counting the reached on error. Sure you can say those guys shouldn't have been batting because the inning would have been over after that K but that is part of pitching. You have to pitch over those things. How can you say a guy pitched a quality start when one error caused him to implode and allow 5 base runners and 6 runs the rest of the inning?

 

Was that in Minnesota? Pretty sure I was at that game. Ugh.

 

Was that in Minnesota? Pretty sure I was at that game. Ugh.

 

No, Cleveland, September 18th. He had a 9 R (8 ER), 3 inning start in Minnesota on April 30th. Maybe that's the one you were thinking of.

I also don't like it because it is a rigid 3 ER or less, 6+ IP. It has always been those numbers despite what the league ERA is that year. A 4.50 ERA in the late '90s to early '00s was pretty good. Now it's pretty bad.

 

I think the stat should be adjusted to something resembling what the NHL considers a quality start for a goalie. A goalie gets a quality start if his save percentage is higher in that game the league's average for the season in games in which he faced 20 or more shots and has to be higher than 88.5% in games he faced less than 20 shots.

 

Baseball could go to something similar to that. Keep the 6 inning minimum as I think that is a good number. But give the pitcher a quality start only if their runs allowed per nine (earned or unearned) are less than the league's average that year. That way the parameters for a quality start move along with the quality of pitching in the league. The better the pitching, the better you have to pitch to receive a quality start.

 

If they went to something like this Danks would have about 5 less quality starts last year.

I agree with you, I'm not a staunch defender of quality starts as a stat by any means, it was just a quick and easy way to disprove the notion that Danks was "worthless" in 80% of his starts last year. In 16 of his 30 starts, he went at least 5 2/3 innings, and gave up 3 runs (earned or unearned) or fewer. Is that great? No, but if you could guarantee me that he could do that again this year I'd probably take it, assuming the other 14 aren't all complete meltdowns.