I don't think either one had a really great year. But sure, luck and randomness can skew the results in a 30 game sample. It's not going to do that over 200 starts. Otherwise you could post the stats from a bunch of all-time greats with career losing records who got unlucky or lacked "run support". Those guys do not exist. And an 11-14 season is NEVER good. How could it be? If you're that good, you have to pitch better than the guys you're facing more often than not. I believe that was an absolutely terrible Sox offense that season though. In many of those games the average difference may have been approaching two runs and occasionally even more. That isn't going to be the case over any pitcher's career.

What do you mean "production"? Vasquez and Buehrle limited scoring and outs at similar clips throughout their respective careers. Javvy did it one way, Buehrle another. Buehrle's longevity certainly helps, as he was that good for about 400 more innings than Javvy.

You know exactly what I mean. Buehrle clearly had the better career. Why is that?

You know exactly what I mean.

I don't need to see their entire career WL to know that's an elite player. And if he does that with an 11-14 record, he pitched his ass for for a putrid offense. His run support that year was 3.19.

because he won more games....duh

But I don't want to wait for a pitchers career to be over to determine who is better. I can read between the lines and say that Chris Sale is better. WL leave a lot of false positives, give me the pitcher that has had 9 k/9 while walking less than 2 a game. I don't need to see their entire career WL to know that's an elite player. And if he does that with an 11-14 record, he pitched his ass for for a putrid offense. His run support that year was 3.19.

Wins are the outcome, give me the stats that describe how the pitcher performed.

on your attempt at a gif

No, I don't. I'll ask again: what do you mean by "production"? Pitching wins?

Fine, since you don't know what production means.

Who had the more successful career?

And I won't respond if you say "How do you define 'successful'?" like it is some sort of quantum physics level concept.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

I think I already explained that it's very similar.

I don't think either one had a really great year. But sure, luck and randomness can skew the results in a 30 game sample. It's not going to do that over 200 starts. Otherwise you could post the stats from a bunch of all-time greats with career losing records who got unlucky or lacked "run support". Those guys do not exist. And an 11-14 season is NEVER good. How could it be? If you're that good, you have to pitch better than the guys you're facing more often than not. I believe that was an absolutely terrible Sox offense that season though. In many of those games the average difference may have been approaching two runs and occasionally even more. That isn't going to be the case over any pitcher's career.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

See JLN, even leashyourkids knows what it means.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

I dont care at all if overrated Chris Sale wins a meaningless Cy Young award for a go-nowhere Sox team. If they get back in the race sure, I'll enjoy personal awards. But I dont watch the Sox to see Chris Sale blow games against division rivals or serve up HR's to Junior Lake, I want to see them win. Bragging about the historic nature of players on teams who dont win shit is Cubs fan behavior that I will no longer abide.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

Ok.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

He kind of shut you down earlier, so I'm employing his methods.

Huh?

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

Here is how the Sox do when applying a harmonic mean to their run totals so far this season:



As you can see, they are much more likely to score less than 3 runs than their arithmetic mean would have you believe, and the distribution is skewed positively, with four teams (27% of the AL) above one standard deviation up from the mean, but only 2 teams (13% of the AL) below one standard deviation below the mean.

If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.

Here is how the Sox do when applying a harmonic mean to their run totals so far this season:



As you can see, they are much more likely to score less than 3 runs than their arithmetic mean would have you believe, and the distribution is skewed positively, with four teams (27% of the AL) above one standard deviation up from the mean, but only 2 teams (13% of the AL) below one standard deviation below the mean.

Here is how the Sox do when applying a harmonic mean to their run totals so far this season:



As you can see, they are much more likely to score less than 3 runs than their arithmetic mean would have you believe, and the distribution is skewed positively, with four teams (27% of the AL) above one standard deviation up from the mean, but only 2 teams (13% of the AL) below one standard deviation below the mean.

Ok if this has what baseball has become to you morons fine! I'll watch the Cubs vs. The Reds and say Jake Amrita has been one of the best pitchers over the last season and a half in baseball. So I'll watch the game drinking some beer and having some popcorn....will Turd will have his slide rule and abacus. I think I'll have more fun than Turd

Jesus Christ, what is this, 2007? Ken Tremendous has hung em up for a good long while.