Thoughts on the quality start

#1
vols kick balls

vols kick balls

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
17,477
Likes
4
#1
In this new era of baseball is the quality start stat useless? I believe it is. 6 IP and 3 earned runs has rapidly turned from a decent start to a poor one.
 
#2
#2
6 and 2 is a decent start, 6 and 3 isn't doing much for you unless you have a great bullpen and a pretty good offense
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#3
#3
It depends on what you want the stat to tell you. If you want to know whether a pitcher is elite, it's meaningless. If you want to know whether the pitcher gives his team a chance to win, it makes sense.
 
#4
#4
GAVol said:
It depends on what you want the stat to tell you. If you want to know whether a pitcher is elite, it's meaningless. If you want to know whether the pitcher gives his team a chance to win, it makes sense.
Click to expand...
But is turning in a well below average start giving your team a good chance to win? The Major League average ERA is two thirds of a run lower than the requirements of a QS this year.

I like the idea of making a QS either/or 6 and 2 or 7 and 3.
 
#5
#5
When a starter throws a quality start, the team wins roughly 70% of the time. I'd say it's a legit stat. 10,000,000 more legit than the hold or save.
 
#6
#6
tigervol9802 said:
When a starter throws a quality start, the team wins roughly 70% of the time. I'd say it's a legit stat. 10,000,000 more legit than the hold or save.
Click to expand...
Is that stat of winning 70% of the time for this season? Just curious as that is my point that it isn't as meaningful as it was just a few years ago.
 
#7
#7
vols kick balls said:
Is that stat of winning 70% of the time for this season? Just curious as that is my point that it isn't as meaningful as it was just a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Honestly not sure. I saw one of the Cardinal beat writers throw it out the other day on Twitter. My guess is it would be all time.

A quick google search shows it argued as ineffective from an ERA standpoint (I value the W more than the ERA unless we're talking sub 2.00 personally), but I'll dig a little deeper to see if I can get win %.
 
#8
#8
tigervol9802 said:
Honestly not sure. I saw one of the Cardinal beat writers throw it out the other day on Twitter. My guess is it would be all time.

A quick google search shows it argued as ineffective from an ERA standpoint (I value the W more than the ERA unless we're talking sub 2.00 personally), but I'll dig a little deeper to see if I can get win %.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I looked on baseball reference but couldn't find anything. It seems to me that when the League Average ERA plummets that so too would the value of a Quality Start.

The 70% of quality starts also probably consists of excellent starts and that is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the borderline quality starts (6 IP and 3 ER). I would assume the win % for those would be much lower but I have no way of figuring that out.
 
#9
#9
vols kick balls said:
Thanks. I looked on baseball reference but couldn't find anything. It seems to me that when the League Average ERA plummets that so too would the value of a Quality Start.

The 70% of quality starts also probably consists of excellent starts and that is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the borderline quality starts (6 IP and 3 ER). I would assume the win % for those would be much lower but I have no way of figuring that out.
Click to expand...

I know Carp has 8 QC's this year and team is 4-9 now in games he's started.

I'd also like to see the difference in win pct for 6/3, 6/2, 7/2, and 7/3 for the numbers.
 
#10
#10
vols kick balls said:
But is turning in a well below average start giving your team a good chance to win? The Major League average ERA is two thirds of a run lower than the requirements of a QS this year.

I like the idea of making a QS either/or 6 and 2 or 7 and 3.
Click to expand...

I don't see rushing to rewrite the book based on 3 or 4 seasons, let alone 1/3 of a single season. The game ebbs and flows, always has.
 
#11
#11
tigervol9802 said:
Honestly not sure. I saw one of the Cardinal beat writers throw it out the other day on Twitter. My guess is it would be all time.

A quick google search shows it argued as ineffective from an ERA standpoint (I value the W more than the ERA unless we're talking sub 2.00 personally), but I'll dig a little deeper to see if I can get win %.
Click to expand...

The ERA isn't the best stat, but as +50% of a win is dependent on people other than the pitcher, how is it more valuable of a measure of a pitcher?
 
#12
#12
JTrainDavis said:
I don't see rushing to rewrite the book based on 3 or 4 seasons, let alone 1/3 of a single season. The game ebbs and flows, always has.
Click to expand...

but it should still be defined as a percentage of league ERA or runs allowed. Not that hard to do and will always be relevant, regardless what the clowns in Selig's office do.
 
#13
#13
To me the best pitching stat out there is WHIP. Whether it's a starter or reliever, guys with low WHIP end up successful and guys with high WHIP eventually start paying for it.
 
#15
#15
GAVol said:
To me the best pitching stat out there is WHIP. Whether it's a starter or reliever, guys with low WHIP end up successful and guys with high WHIP eventually start paying for it.
Click to expand...

and isn't that what most use? High WHIP and good ERA is luck and I don't care what anyone says about making big pitches.
 
#16
#16
BigPapaVol said:
but it should still be defined as a percentage of league ERA or runs allowed. Not that hard to do and will always be relevant, regardless what the clowns in Selig's office do.
Click to expand...

True, normalizing stats to the league average is the best way to do it.
 
#17
#17
JTrainDavis said:
The ERA isn't the best stat, but as +50% of a win is dependent on people other than the pitcher, how is it more valuable of a measure of a pitcher?
Click to expand...

Would you rather have a 20 game winner with a 3.50 ERA or a 12 game winner with a 2.25 ERA? It's really just the eyeball and "what's the goal at the end of the day" argument.

Example - look at Jake Westbrook this year. 6 wins and a ridiculously high ERA. But you dig into the numbers and see that two bad (ok, one flat out awful) starts are why it's so high and in his other 11 starts he's pitched average to well. One or two bad starts can ruin an ERA.

I'm also a WHIP fan myself. Individually, it's probably the best stat to measure a pitcher by.
 
#18
#18
tigervol9802 said:
Would you rather have a 20 game winner with a 3.50 ERA or a 12 game winner with a 2.25 ERA? It's really just the eyeball and "what's the goal at the end of the day" argument.

Example - look at Jake Westbrook this year. 6 wins and a ridiculously high ERA. But you dig into the numbers and see that two bad (ok, one flat out awful) starts are why it's so high and in his other 11 starts he's pitched average to well. One or two bad starts can ruin an ERA.

I'm also a WHIP fan myself. Individually, it's probably the best stat to measure a pitcher by.
Click to expand...

Wins are indicative of a teams run production just as much as they are of a pitcher's ability to keep runs from scoring. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. One or two bad starts doesn't ruin an ERA over the course of a 33-34 start campaign.
 
#19
#19
JTrainDavis said:
Wins are indicative of a teams run production just as much as they are of a pitcher's ability to keep runs from scoring. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. One or two bad starts doesn't ruin an ERA over the course of a 33-34 start campaign.
Click to expand...

Neither is the fact that as a whole if a pitcher has 15+ wins then in general he's probably going deep into games, eating up innings, and the team I would estimate as a result would have probably 21-23 wins in his starts, or approximately 25% of the wins needed to be a legitimate playoff contender.

I'd rather have a guy with 20 wins and a 3.50 than 12 wins and a 2.25.

At the end of the day more wins are probably going to be equal to a relatively low ERA anwyay.
 
#20
#20
GAVol said:
To me the best pitching stat out there is WHIP. Whether it's a starter or reliever, guys with low WHIP end up successful and guys with high WHIP eventually start paying for it.
Click to expand...
I love WHIP but you have to look at it with GB, LD, and FB rates along with K/9 factored in before you get the entire picture IMO.
 
#22
#22
About as bad a stat as the win. The best stats to use for pitchers are defense independent stats like FIP, k/9, bb/9, etc. Although I like WHIP a lot. Also have to take a look at BABIP to see if a regression or improvement can be expected.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top