Scott Lindholm @ScottLindholm
#MLB @dan_bernstein hipped me to this--two different Bob Welch seasons, traditional metrics vs. advanced

Scott in Davenport tweeted this on Bob Welch.

1990 A's were 4th in MLB in runs scored.

1986 Dodgers were 4th from last in MLB in runs scored.

JORR, you are literally arrogant about everything though.

Walk, strikeout and home run ratios are now considered "advanced"? That has been around and used throughout my life.

I think I have asked this before and I certainly cannot be the first to have asked this but if a strikeout is equal to any other out from a batting perspective the equation must balance that the same is true from a pitching perspective.

I don't care if the A's scored 200 runs per game. If you really think that Dodger season was better, you're baseball retarded. It's like arguing that black is white. And getting arrogant about it.

I have never liked war

Scott in Davenport tweeted this on Bob Welch.

I think I have asked this before and I certainly cannot be the first to have asked this but if a strikeout is equal to any other out from a batting perspective the equation must balance that the same is true from a pitching perspective.

It's about the single player and what is and isnt in their control. It's designed to predict future performance, not tell you what happened in the past.

Same thing with the Runs Scored/Runs against. A team might win a bunch of one run games and that's fine. They won those games. They count. But the team that is outscoring opponents like crazy is more likely to win more in the future.

But yes, like all stats they are flawed


The HUGE problem with WAR is the balance between Off and Def which is why you have guys like Zobrist and Lawrie on top ten lists

I'm just focused on this one, compartmentalized problem. It MUST balance mathematically and logically.

Welch forgot how to be a winner in 86. then he remembered again. Then forgot again.

If you really think that Dodger season was better, you're baseball retarded.

Are you able to locate one person in the world that has made such a statement? Not strawman conjecture, I mean someone who has actually tried to argue that point?

Isn't that the reason for Scott in Davenport bringing it up? To show that his record is "meaningless" and his actual WAR (which is what counts) was far superior in the 1986 season?

you don't forget how to strike guys out. you get old or you get hurt. you don't forget how to win either.

I presumed he brought it up to showcase a rather abberant anomaly in regards to the WAR statistic itself. I don't have the context for it, so it's only a guess.

Personally, I also read it as something interesting shown by the anomaly ... that Welch's shit season with the Dodgers apparently happened during a shitty pitching season overall as his efforts, dreadful as they were, would seem to not be counted amongst the absolute worst that season (and that season alone). Conversely, I took it to mean that his inarguably sensational season w/ the A's came during a season of, apparently, a numberous array of sensational pitching performances.

There are so many different versions of WAR, I'm not sure if any or all of them confine the average or model for the "replacement player" to a single season. If they do, people certainly shouldn't be using them across different seasons to declare one guy better than another.

Anyway, with my knowledge of bernstein's war on pitchers' W/L record, I think it is safe to assume that this was nothing more than an attempt by Scott to curry favor with his master.