The most overrated position in sports

#2
#2
Good read. I like how one of the closers took a nap before he was needed.

Maybe I need to consider a career as a ML closer.
 
#4
#4
I think a change that would greatly improve the save statistic is instead of labeling a 3 run lead to start an inning a save situation, just change it to "tying run at the plate" no matter when a pitcher enters the game.

What needs to happen is for the "Hold" to become more prominent. IMO, the 7th and 8th inning guys are as underrated as the 9th inning guys are overrated.
 
#5
#5
GAVol said:
I think a change that would greatly improve the save statistic is instead of labeling a 3 run lead to start an inning a save situation, just change it to "tying run at the plate" no matter when a pitcher enters the game.

What needs to happen is for the "Hold" to become more prominent. IMO, the 7th and 8th inning guys are as underrated as the 9th inning guys are overrated.
Click to expand...

I don't like any of the relief stats, a pitcher can be mediocre and pile up saves and holds.

I like the save concept you put put there, the qualifications now are dumb, any pitcher who cannot pitch an inning without blowing a 3 run lead more often than not, should not be in the league.
 
#6
#6
Maybe the thing to do is to combine saves and holds into one stat and give it out to anybody who enters a close game with a lead or tie and leaves without giving up the lead or falling behind, regardless of what inning it is. There's nothing magical about the ninth inning.

A counting stat like that would still fuel the iron-clad one-inning-per-pitcher trend, which I think is another misuse of resources, but at least managers would be more inclined to bring their best relievers in whenever the game is on the line instead of saving them for some hypothetical relief situation that never ends up happening.
 
#7
#7
The fact that a reliever can come into the game with a 3 run lead, get a k, and then walk 5 straight, and still get a 'hold' if the next guy bails him out, is stupid. It's a make believe stat from SABR that is generally useless, except for contract negotiations, of course. The stat driven trend in baseball is ridiculous.

IMHO, the only ones that matter are WHIP+ and OAV+

the + being in relation to the league average for a given season.
 
#8
#8
WHIP is one of the most telling stats there is . . . yet nobody knows what the heck it is.
 
#9
#9
JTrainDavis said:
The fact that a reliever can come into the game with a 3 run lead, get a k, and then walk 5 straight, and still get a 'hold' if the next guy bails him out, is stupid. It's a make believe stat from SABR that is generally useless, except for contract negotiations, of course. The stat driven trend in baseball is ridiculous.

IMHO, the only ones that matter are WHIP+ and OAV+

the + being in relation to the league average for a given season.
Click to expand...

If we're going to count wins and losses for pitchers, I've got no problem crediting a reliever with a "hold" if he does the job, regardless of how well he actually pitches. Obviously the way it's drawn up right now could use some tinkering, but I don't have a problem with the general principle.

WHIP and OAV+ basically measure the same thing. If I only get two pitching stats, I want WHIP and ERA+.
 
#10
#10
Vercingetorix said:
If we're going to count wins and losses for pitchers, I've got no problem crediting a reliever with a "hold" if he does the job, regardless of how well he actually pitches. Obviously the way it's drawn up right now could use some tinkering, but I don't have a problem with the general principle.

WHIP and OAV+ basically measure the same thing. If I only get two pitching stats, I want WHIP and ERA+.
Click to expand...

true, those are telling numbers, though im becoming a sucker for BABIP+
 
#11
#11
I do like BABIP, just because it lets you know what the flukes are. I'd go with ERA+ and WHIP if I only got 2 stats to pick though.
 
#12
#12
Lets get some Silver King these days, 66 games, 585.2IP, 45 wins, 1.64 ERA.....the CG is a ghost now, over the last 20 years it doesnt matter anymore if a starter is on it, 2 run lead after 7 its on to the pen.
 
#14
#14
You know the closer role may be overrated but i would go on record and say that middle relief is the most important part of a team these days.
 
#15
#15
wounded mullet said:
You know the closer role may be overrated but i would go on record and say that middle relief is the most important part of a team these days.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how good middle relief is if your stating pitching sucks. The best middle-relief corps in baseball isn't going to hold up if they've got to come in the 5th or 6th inning every night because the starters can't get the job done. And then you've got nothing.

Starting pitching and power hitting. Those are the cornerstones.
 
#16
#16
Vercingetorix said:
It doesn't matter how good middle relief is if your stating pitching sucks. The best middle-relief corps in baseball isn't going to hold up if they've got to come in the 5th or 6th inning every night because the starters can't get the job done. And then you've got nothing.

Starting pitching and power hitting. Those are the cornerstones.
Click to expand...


Good point but with baseball evolving out of the steroid era, i would say small ball and speed are taking more of importance than the long ball.

Strong starting pitching is important of course, but the days of starting pitchers throwing complete games on a regular basis are over, most games are won in the 7th and 8th innings.I guess in the end, in order to have a championship team you need the SP who goes 6-7 innings, the setup guy, the situation one out guy and a dominant closer....
 
#17
#17
The new ballparks are doing a good job compensating for the putative end of the steroid era. I shouldn't have said just "power hitting"; it's really about the marriage of OBP and power-hitting. The slap-hit and speed game is exciting -- I loved watching Whitey Herzog's teams play, and I'd still argue that he's as good a manager as has ever pulled a uniform down over his paunch -- but it's too dependent on what the statheads call "batting average on balls in play," which is notoriously fickle. You can't build your offense around these guys because they'll hit .320 one year and .265 the next. (Think Edgar Renteria, as an example.) Give me guys on my team [1] who can consistently draw walks and/or mash the ball.

And as far as pitching goes -- really, in the era of the one-inning-at-a-time reliever, the whole key is having a starting rotation that can consistently get you through the sixth inning every night. A good bullpen will have five good arms who can rotate around and consistently get you three decent innings of relief. But if the starters are only going five, or consistently having to come out in the sixth, then that's a whole extra guy every night who's got to come in. And since no bullpen in the majors can go seven good arms deep, your good relievers are going to have to pitch basically every other night instead of every third night. Which means by the middle of the summer, everyone's hurt and burned out and sucks.

Really, the whole pitching staff revolves around the sixth inning. If your starters are getting through it, you ought to be in good shape. If your relievers usually have to come in, you're in trouble. Regardless of how good those relievers are.


[1] And since my team is the Braves, they are of course about the last team in the majors that still hasn't figured out that they ought to look at the "walks" column every once in a while when evaluating how good a hitter is.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top