Its the runs your offense scores and it has a large effect on W-L

Certain pitchers get more runs because their offense is superior.

Your whole "conditions of the game" just doesn't overcome the vast differences in offenses and bullpens (I,e. Things out of the pitchers control that affect W-L )

If I put both pitchers stats for the first 3 games next to each other, I would love to see who everyone would have chosen. Too late I guess.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

The runs have to be scored off a pitcher(s). If the guy you're discussing is so great, then how could it be that he is regularly outpitched by supposedly lesser guys? It isn't because he faces some offensive juggernaut each time out. That's just an excuse and most often one that is unsupportable. Like when Frank argued with me that Maddux may not have won 300 games had he stayed with the Cubs and I showed him that there was little difference between the offenses of the two teams in many years and in some seasons the Cub offense was decidedly better. It's misperception. The key element that makes one team better than another is the starting pitchers. If the Red Sox faced Jose Fernandez in all 162 games, they wouldn't have a good offense.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

Jose Fernandez would also have worse stats than he did in 2013.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Let's try this:

1.19 WHIP, 3.11 ERA, 0.7 HR/9, 4.8 K/9

1.13 WHIP, 3.26 ERA, 1.0 HR/9, 5.2 K/9

Both starters. Same era. Which guy was better?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

His ERA may be slightly higher, but his W/L record would probably not be significantly different. Admittedly, Fernandez may not be the best example because his sample is relatively small.

There have always been guys who looked like great pitchers but didn't get results. Javy Vazquez looked like he was going to contend for a Cy Young going into every season. he wasn't a bad pitcher like some Sox fans would have you believe. But he was a disappointing one based on his peripheral numbers which are largely the result of "stuff". There are successful pitchers with limited "stuff" and guys with great "stuff" who have limited success. Walter Johnson won 400 games pitching for a lot of shitty teams.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

The term "run support", or more accurately "a lack of run support" is specifically designed to do nothing more than defend a losing pitcher against his poor record. It should be clear to most baseball fans that when Chris Sale faces Yu Darvish he is quite likely to receive less "run support" than had he faced Joe Saunders. The fact that anyone would be discussing "run support" in such a context serves as a tacit admission that Darvish is a superior pitcher to Sale and, to me, rings as just another loser's lament.

As I'm sure stoneroses would be happy to confirm, Billy Pierce had a winning record head-to-head vs. Whitey Ford. Now, I'm uncertain whether that makes Pierce a superior pitcher to Whitey, but I am relatively sure it isn't evidence that the White Sox of that era had a superior offense to the Yankees. And stating that Pierce received more "run support" in those games, while seemingly obvious and factually correct, is hardly an endorsement of the efforts of Whitey Ford.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

[quote="Joe Orr Road Rod"]The term "run support", or more accurately "a lack of run support" is specifically designed to do nothing more than defend a losing pitcher against his poor record. It should be clear to most baseball fans that when Chris Sale faces Yu Darvish he is quite likely to receive less "run support" than had he faced Joe Saunders. /quote]
There ya go.

It exists, you just think it should be understood going in?

Everyone understands run support, JORR.


Bottom line, if a pitcher receives 6 runs of support over the season and another receives 3... that has huge implications on win/loss record.

I think it's a questionable term. When you isolate it down to an example of two pitchers who faced off more than most (like Pierce and Ford) it becomes clear how silly it is.

I will say this though, I think fashionable views of the game have been influenced by several things that all go hand in hand, ie., the stats revolution, the "steroid"/juiced ball era, and pitch counts/short starts. Obviously, in a game where starters only average 5 innings per game as opposed to 7, W/L record becomes less meaningful. But that's not to say it's meaningless. And due to whatever changes have been made to the game (MLB wants you to believe they have eliminated or drastically reduced PEDs. I tend to think they have doctored the balls again.), it's obvious that scoring is lower than it has been in years and the game is more balanced than it was for about 20 years. But I don't think we should view the game through the prism of those 20 or so seasons of offense that hadn't been seen since the 30s. A good example is the sacrifice bunt, which instead of being idiotic as it may have been in an 800 run environment is a useful tool when scoring is lower and games are closer.

And with scoring on the decline, you're going to see a lot more starting pitchers with good peripheral numbers and lousy records. That doesn't mean they are good pitchers or unlucky. Somebody has to lose and usually it's one of the starters. There's a famous game from the early 60s where Spahn and Marichal went 16 innings. I think it may be regarded as the greatest game two guys ever pitched. Spahn wound up losing 1-0. Nobody thought Spahn was "unlucky" or that he didn't get "run support". That would have been an insult to Marichal. Spahn didn't subtly complain about his team failing to score. He knew he got beat.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

Orr, I don't think you understand "peripheral numbers" if you are using them in that context. The run environment is baked into them.

_________________
1926-1931-1934-1942-1944-1946-1964-1967-1982-2006-2011

I'm not sure there's any hard definition for the term "peripheral numbers". My understanding of it is anything beyond the traditional things that are listed on the agate page in your Sunday paper. It could be anything from K/BB ratio to FIP or more detailed aggregate statistics.

Regardless, the floor for runs allowed is zero. It stands to reason that in a lower run environment there will be more losing pitchers with lower ERAs than there would be in a higher run environment. The mere fact that less runs are being scored does not somehow make those pitchers "better". Those numbers are more likely the result of game conditions many of which have been created arbitrarily by people not playing in the actual games, e.g., the Commissioner's office making a change in the baseball, an agreement among umpires to expand the strikezone, etc. A W/L record is not subject to such changes in conditions.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

Mac had Bruce Levine on and he said Samardjiza is looking for 5 or 6 years at 18 to 19 per. Wants to be paid like a Number 1.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

He has put up Edwin Jackson numbers in his career. Pay him what they pay Jackson.

I think he is more valuable in a trade than on the Cubs. I would expect the Cubs to get more than they got for Garza.

I agree . Levine seems to think some club will pay him that. Just hope its not the Cubs.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

I would rather see the Cubs trade him for a good package and then pay up for a FA Ace or two. Scherezer, Shields, and Price will most likely hit the FA market over the next two seasons. The Cubs payroll could fit a couple massive contracts in there with out much problem. If the position prospects work out, they could be pretty good a bit more quickly.

“When you’re hitting your prime and you’re hitting free agency — like it’s supposed to be done — then that’s the way it sets up for guys behind you,” Samardzija said. “I definitely have a responsibility to the players that are younger than me and approaching arbitration or approaching free agency to keep the numbers where they should be.

“And rising as they should be, in accordance to the economy and the state of the game. That’s more important than anything else — what you owe the players that did it for you and then the players behind you.”

Shark is a union-man, through and through.

Today, Shark looks like Sale looked v. Cleveland in his 5 inning start.

Scattered some hits, still has his K's.

Today though, would have been that day to try and throw to contact, instead of all the K's, because today you might have some room for error on the HR balls. This is one of the issues that Theo's WAR DEPT has with him. "Strikeouts are facist"

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

Samardzija has done very well to start this season.

I STILL would not pay him what he is looking for. He was above average for too long...I can't just see him turn into an ace just like that. And in what I would call his contract year...yeah...

No thank you. 29 years old... I'll try to trade him.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Avg of 15 mill absolute ceiling.

So trade I guess

Keeping him for a reasonable price would be awesome but seems unlikely

Trade him.

_________________

Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young Award in 2010 with a 13–12 record. A dominant pitcher like Felix cannot record a win if his team does not score any runs for him.

2004, Ben Sheets had a losing record of 12–14, despite displaying an league-best 8:1 strikeout-to-walk ratio and was among the top 5 pitchers in ERA (2.70) and WHIP (0.98).

Pitchers DO count on run support, and also bullpen support. A starting pitcher can pitch brilliantly, leaving the game with the lead, and then watch helplessly from the dugout as the bullpen blows the save and gives up the lead. That would entitle the starting pitcher to a no-decision instead of a win despite the strong performance, regardless of whether or not the team ends up winning. Starting pitchers on teams with a weak bullpen tend to have fewer wins because of this. Likewise, a pitcher can give a poor performance and give up many runs and leave the game earlier than desired, but still win because his team scored even more runs.
Not sure why you think run support doesn't matter. Clearly the run support + bullpen support = W/L.

I prefer quality starts over Win Loss records when comparing pitchers.

Sale and Samardijza both have 3.

And JORR would rightly say he prefers Wins over quality starts.

There's no cap. It's not an either/or proposition. Pay shark and then sign 1 or 2 more starters. Stop acting like a mid-market team.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

I just explained why Win Loss records are flawed.

That's fine. Just stop comparing Samardjiza and Sale. It's just stupid. Sale is one of the best pitchers in the world, and Samardjiza is a guy that NOBODY seems to think is even a #1.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

If the Cubs thought he was a number 1, then they would pay him. They don't think he is an ace and rather get prospects for him and spend ace money on ace pitchers. We don't need the next J.Danks contract on our team.

Dempster and Garza deals brought them back some decent prospects. Now with Shark they can get back a top tier prospect. I'm all for trading him for a potential future star.

I believe the comparison was who has been a better pitchers so far this year. (which is stupid to begin with only 3 weeks in) So far they have both been pretty equal. That said, I do not think Shark is even close to Sale in talent. My main point was Win Loss records should not be a factor in deciding who is the better pitcher and to disagree with JORR theory on run support.

Right. Keep trading players as they hit their prime. Like I said, stop acting like a mid market team.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Like I said, it's stupid to compare the two. Sale is by far the better player. And he has pitched better than Samardjiza has through 4 games. And he will throughout the whole season.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul