Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Murray Chass: POOR WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR WORLD SERIES TICKETS and LET CRITICS GET LAST THREE OUTS

In the four match-ups in the division series every one was won by the team with the higher payroll. The results by payroll rank:

No. 1 Yankees over No. 19 Orioles
No. 5 Tigers over No. 30 Athletics
No. 6 Giants over No. 20 Reds
No. 9 Cardinals over No. 16 Nationals

Each winner needed the full five games to prevail and some needed last-inning rallies or extra-inning victories to get there, but in the end the richer teams won. There was one playoff instance where the lower-ranked payroll team won. The No. 19 Orioles defeated the No. 7 Rangers in the American League wild-card game. In the National’s wild-card game No. 9 St. Louis downed No. 15 Atlanta.

But borrowing from Tennyson, ‘tis better to have played and lost than never to have played at all. Ask the No. 2 Phillies, No. 3 Red Sox and No. 4 Angels for confirmation.

Getting to the league championship series, though, was not all about money. In the most stunning instance of money being meaningless, the Cardinals edged the Nationals in Game 5 of their series behind the hitting of two of the lowest-paid players in the playoffs. ...

Incidentally, if I may digress for a moment, the terms that are used interchangeably for this part of the year are post-season and playoffs. But they are not always interchangeable.

When the Nationals began their division series against the Cardinals, writers wrote and broadcasters said that Washington was in the playoffs for the first time in 79 years. They misspoke. When the Washington Senators played games in October 1933, they were in the World Series, not the playoffs. There were no playoffs then. The Senators did not play anyone to get to the World Series. As champions of the American League, the Senators played the New York Giants for the World Series championship. ...

This year’s two wild-card games and four division series, a total of 22 games, produced 14 save opportunities but only 7 saves, a poor ratio of 50 percent success. During the season pitchers converted 70 percent of their save opportunities.

bobm Posted: October 14, 2012 at 10:40 AM | 49 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: closer role, pinata, postseason

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. musial6 Posted: October 14, 2012 at 11:09 AM (#4269340)
MURRAY CHASS HAS NO POINT, MR PRESIDENT
   2. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 14, 2012 at 11:16 AM (#4269349)
When the Nationals began their division series against the Cardinals, writers wrote and broadcasters said that Washington was in the playoffs for the first time in 79 years. They misspoke.

Funny, but what I read was that this was Washington's first postseason appearance since 1933. Perhaps Chass misread.
   3. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: October 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4269371)
MURRAY CHASS HAS NO POINT, MR PRESIDENT
STEAGLES IS GOING TO GO NUTS IF HE SEES THAT COMMENT, MR. MUSIAL6
   4. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: October 14, 2012 at 11:53 AM (#4269378)
if I may digress for a moment


No. Stick to the gd point, Murray. Which is what?

Sorry, still recovering from Friday night. Die, Cardinals.
   5. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: October 14, 2012 at 12:57 PM (#4269433)
No. 5 Tigers over No. 30 Athletics

Yes, but my team won because it had grit and spunk and they wanted it more! (The fact they spent dozens of millions of dollars more is just a funny coincidence!)
   6. McCoy Posted: October 14, 2012 at 01:04 PM (#4269438)
Getting to the league championship series, though, was not all about money. In the most stunning instance of money being meaningless, the Cardinals edged the Nationals in Game 5 of their series behind the hitting of two of the lowest-paid players in the playoffs. ...

Except one could argue that the resources of a team that can afford a larger payroll will also allow them to have suitable replacements for injured players within their system or allow them to get them.
   7. Super Creepy Derek Lowe (GGC) Posted: October 14, 2012 at 06:22 PM (#4269879)
STEAGLES IS GOING TO GO NUTS IF HE SEES THAT COMMENT, MR. MUSIAL6

Why?
   8. cardsfanboy Posted: October 14, 2012 at 06:29 PM (#4269892)
Isn't Murray the champion of the players? Doesn't he realize that being a champion of the players means that the teams with the highest payroll is a good thing?
   9. esseff Posted: October 14, 2012 at 06:45 PM (#4269944)
That No. 30 for the A's has to be from the start of the season or something, doesn't it. I can't imagine their payroll by playoff time was lower than the Astros' without Lee, Wandy and Myers.
   10. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: October 14, 2012 at 07:02 PM (#4269992)
This year’s two wild-card games and four division series, a total of 22 games, produced 14 save opportunities but only 7 saves, a poor ratio of 50 percent success. During the season pitchers converted 70 percent of their save opportunities.

Huh, one would think that maybe facing better offenses would cut into the success rate of save opportunities...but maybe that's just too simple.
   11. Walt Davis Posted: October 15, 2012 at 01:34 AM (#4270687)
Huh, one would think that maybe facing better offenses would cut into the success rate of save opportunities...but maybe that's just too simple.

Also one might be seeing more 1- and 2-run save opps in the postseason (or maybe not, I don't know, but games tend to be closer). Also relievers generally enter a little earlier presumably leading to more "blown saves, err, holds".* Also Jose Valverde.

*Regular season 9th/extra inning save situations get converted about 85% of the time. The 70% figure presumably includes blown holds in the denominator but, of course, not successful holds in the numerator. Or it was a historically awful season for closers.
   12. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 01:51 AM (#4270689)
STEAGLES IS GOING TO GO NUTS IF HE SEES THAT COMMENT, MR. MUSIAL6

Why?


Cuz' Steagles hates the unfunny Mr. President meme only slight more than you and I do.

   13. AJMcCringleberry Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:18 AM (#4270719)
Apparently money matters in the playoffs, but not the regular season.
   14. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:23 AM (#4270720)
Cuz' Steagles hates the unfunny Mr. President meme only slight more than you and I do.
I find it mildly amusing. But I find it hilarious that the all-caps is a big part of the meme...and, you know, "STEAGLES."
   15. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:52 AM (#4270731)
This year’s two wild-card games and four division series, a total of 22 games, produced 14 save opportunities but only 7 saves, a poor ratio of 50 percent success. During the season pitchers converted 70 percent of their save opportunities.


Is he counting the complete game by CC as a save opportunity lost?
   16. bunyon Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:00 AM (#4270734)

Cuz' Steagles hates the unfunny Mr. President meme only slight more than you and I do.


KILLJOY STATHEADS FINALLY GO TOO FAR, MR. PRESIDENT.
   17. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:26 AM (#4270743)
This year’s two wild-card games and four division series, a total of 22 games, produced 14 save opportunities but only 7 saves, a poor ratio of 50 percent success. During the season pitchers converted 70 percent of their save opportunities.


OK, I counted 7 saves in 10 real save opportunities. There was also 4 "save opportunities" in which no save was attempted: the Sabathia 3-1 complete game win, game 1 of Giants/Reds in which Santiago Casilla created a save opportunity in the 9th by giving up a run in what was a 4 run lead. He finished the game. , game 3 of Giants/Reds in which Romo pitched the last 2 innings and got the win when the Giants scored a run in the top of the 10th, and game 2 of A's/Tigers in which Brian cook blew the hold in the 8th. he was never going to pitch the 9th regardless.

if you want to call that last one a blown save, fine. that still makes it 7/11, not 7/14, and pretty damned close to the regular season.
   18. bobm Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:05 AM (#4270761)
[17]. From B-R PI:

In the Postseason, For 2012, Save Opportunity, sorted by earliest date

                                                                                      
Rk             Player       Date Series Gm#  Tm Opp   Rslt  AppDec  IP H R ER BB SO HR
1         Jason Motte 2012-10-05   NLWC   1 STL ATL W  6-3  8-9f S 1.1 2 0  0  1  1  0
2       Jose Valverde 2012-10-06   ALDS   1 DET OAK W  3-1  9-9f S 1.0 0 0  0  0  2  0
3      Joaquin Benoit 2012-10-07   ALDS   2 DET OAK W  5-4 8-8  BS 1.0 2 2  2  0  0  1
4           Ryan Cook 2012-10-07   ALDS   2 OAK DET L  4-5 8-8  BS 1.0 2 1  1  0  2  0
5      Sean Doolittle 2012-10-07   ALDS   2 OAK DET L  4-5 7-7  BS 1.0 2 2  0  0  2  0
6         Drew Storen 2012-10-07   NLDS   1 WSN STL W  3-2  9-9f S 1.0 0 0  0  0  1  0
7    Marc Rzepczynski 2012-10-07   NLDS   1 STL WSN L  2-3 8-8  BS 0.1 1 0  0  0  1  0
8         Jim Johnson 2012-10-08   ALDS   2 BAL NYY W  3-2  9-9f S 1.0 0 0  0  0  1  0
9       Grant Balfour 2012-10-09   ALDS   3 OAK DET W  2-0  9-9f S 1.0 1 0  0  0  1  0
10        Jim Johnson 2012-10-10   ALDS   3 BAL NYY L  2-3 9-10 BS 2.0 1 1  1  0  1  1
11      Jose Valverde 2012-10-10   ALDS   4 DET OAK L  3-4 9-9f BL 0.2 4 3  3  0  1  0
12        Sergio Romo 2012-10-11   NLDS   5 SFG CIN W  6-4  8-9f S 1.1 2 1  1  1  1  0
13        Jim Johnson 2012-10-11   ALDS   4 BAL NYY W  2-1 13-13fS 1.0 0 0  0  0  1  0
14        Drew Storen 2012-10-12   NLDS   5 WSN STL L  7-9 9-9f BL 1.0 3 4  4  2  2  0

15        Jason Motte 2012-10-14   NLCS   1 STL SFG W  6-4  9-9f S 1.0 1 0  0  0  0  0
16          Phil Coke 2012-10-14   ALCS   2 DET NYY W  3-0  8-9f S 2.0 1 0  0  0  3  0
   19. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:26 AM (#4270770)
OK, I counted 7 saves in 10 real save opportunities. There was also 4 "save opportunities" in which no save was attempted

Save Opportunities are just saves plus blown saves, I think. So if Pitcher A starts the 7th with 3-run lead and finishes the inning (then leaves the game), giving up 1 run, it's not a Save Opportunity. If Pitcher B starts the 7th inning with a 3-run lead and finishes the inning (then leaves the game), giving up 3 runs, then it's a blown save and therefore a Save Opportunity.

It's a terrible way of accounting.
   20. starving to death with a full STEAGLES Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:48 AM (#4270786)
STEAGLES IS GOING TO GO NUTS IF HE SEES THAT COMMENT, MR. MUSIAL6
nah. i've been self-medicating with quaaludes for the last 2 months, and since then, my blood has not been boiling quite so vigorously.


Save Opportunities are just saves plus blown saves, I think. So if Pitcher A starts the 7th with 3-run lead and finishes the inning (then leaves the game), giving up 1 run, it's not a Save Opportunity. If Pitcher B starts the 7th inning with a 3-run lead and finishes the inning (then leaves the game), giving up 3 runs, then it's a blown save and therefore a Save Opportunity.

It's a terrible way of accounting.
what would the percentages look like if you measured blown saves over saves + blown saves + holds?
   21. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:55 AM (#4270858)
In the Postseason, For 2012, Save Opportunity, sorted by earliest date


Thanks bob. I missed all those blown holds, because they aren't really save situations, in any meaningful sense of the word.
   22. The District Attorney Posted: October 15, 2012 at 12:44 PM (#4270983)
I love the childishness of the "argument" that "if closing is so easy, let's see you do it!"
   23. Super Creepy Derek Lowe (GGC) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:46 PM (#4271612)
Cuz' Steagles hates the unfunny Mr. President meme only slight more than you and I do.

HA! I don't come by as much, so the played memes don't bother me much anymore.
   24. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4271681)
what would the percentages look like if you measured blown saves over saves + blown saves + holds?


Not sure, but anytime someone lists save percentage and they aren't doing it that way, they are ####### LIARS.
   25. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:41 PM (#4271716)
So how are blown saves calculated anyway? Can one get a blown save in the bottom of the first? Or is there some sort of inning limit, like only in the 7th or later?
   26. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:02 PM (#4271763)
So how are blown saves calculated anyway? Can one get a blown save in the bottom of the first? Or is there some sort of inning limit, like only in the 7th or later?


Pitcher enters after the fifth inning in a save situation.

1. team has no more than a three run lead with three or more outs remaining or
2. tying run is on deck.
   27. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:13 PM (#4271786)
itcher enters after the fifth inning in a save situation.

1. team has no more than a three run lead with three or more outs remaining or
2. tying run is on deck.


If you enter a game your team leads at any point in the sixth or with nobody out in the seventh*, it shouldn't matter how big the lead is. It's technically a save situation.


* It's also possible, I suppose, to enter a game in the fifth and be eligible for a save, if the guy you're replacing was not the game's starter. It would probably have to be a Babe Ruth-Ernie Shore type situation, however, as a relief pitcher entering a game before the sixth who goes on to finish the game is likely to get the win, rather than the save.

   28. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:42 PM (#4271870)
Pitcher enters after the fifth inning in a save situation.


Where does that come from?
   29. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:01 PM (#4271920)

Where does that come from?


Baseball-reference.com

If you expand pitchers stats out and go to relief stats, hover above blown saves and it says "pitcher enter in a save situation and lost the lead" Then go to svsit and hover over it, and it gives all the requirements.

I used Jason Motte.
   30. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:04 PM (#4271924)
Pitcher A starts and allows 7 runs in the first. Pitcher B comes in and pitches 3 scoreless innings while his team scores 8. Pitcher C comes in in the 4th with an 8-7 lead and finishes the game without allowing a run. Surely that's a save, yes? thus, if he gives up the lead anytime, including in the 4th, that should be a blown save, no?
   31. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:10 PM (#4271948)
Pitcher A starts and allows 7 runs in the first. Pitcher B comes in and pitches 3 scoreless innings while his team scores 8. Pitcher C comes in in the 4th with an 8-7 lead and finishes the game without allowing a run. Surely that's a save, yes? thus, if he gives up the lead anytime, including in the 4th, that should be a blown save, no?


As I alluded to above, this probably isn't going to happen. If a pitcher enters the game in the fourth and goes on to finish it, he's probably getting the win, rather than the save. In cases where the lead was taken for good in the first five innings but the SP is not in line for the win, the official scorer is supposed to assign the win to the pitcher who was most effective, and the guy entering in the fourth (and thus pitching 5-plus innings, compared to 3 for the other guy) is probably in line for the win.

The only exception I can see is if a reliever enters the game sometime in the first, pitches 4-plus and the reliever comes on and does likewise. In that case, Reliever A gets the win and Reliever B would get the save.
   32. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:12 PM (#4271950)
As I alluded to above, this probably isn't going to happen. If a pitcher enters the game in the fourth and goes on to finish it, he's probably getting the win, rather than the save. The official scorers is supposed to assign the win to the pitcher who was most effective, and thus the guy entering in the fourth (and thus pitching 5-plus innings, compared to 3 for the other guy) is probably in line for the win.


If a guy comes into the game down 7-0 and leaves up 8-7, and his team never relinquishes the lead, he will get the win by rule.
   33. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:22 PM (#4271970)


If a guy comes into the game down 7-0 and leaves up 8-7, and his team never relinquishes the lead, he will get the win by rule.


Looking at it again, you're probably right. Though the rule does note that a win should be awarded to the most effective pitcher, it doesn't actually list IP as one of the criteria to judge effectiveness (and the assumption for equal degrees of effectiveness is to give it to the first guy).

But that's a very specific scenario, and I'm not sure why you'd ask, as you did in 25, if a guy could get a blown save in the bottom of the first. There are very limited opportunities to be eligible for a save before the sixth, and the bottom of the first clearly isn't one of them.

   34. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:22 PM (#4271971)
Pitcher A starts and allows 7 runs in the first. Pitcher B comes in and pitches 3 scoreless innings while his team scores 8. Pitcher C comes in in the 4th with an 8-7 lead and finishes the game without allowing a run. Surely that's a save, yes? thus, if he gives up the lead anytime, including in the 4th, that should be a blown save, no?


Not by bb-ref definition of blown save. A blown save doesn't automatically mean all potential save situations. That is why sometimes if you add blown saves, and saves up, on the team level, it might equal greater than total save situation. They used to explain that in the glossary, but don't anymore.

There is another stat called save opportunities which is saves+ blown saves. But blown saves use save situation in it's definiton.

   35. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:24 PM (#4271976)
Not by bb-ref definition of blown save. A blown save doesn't automatically mean all potential save situations


That's foolish then. If you're going to suggest middle relief guys who come in during a one-run game in the seventh are in a "save situation" (which modern usage dictates they aren't), then there's no reason not to count the reliever who comes in during the sixth with his team in front by 12. Hell, the latter guy is probably more likely to get the save than the former.

   36. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:30 PM (#4271994)
But that's a very specific scenario, and I'm not sure why you'd ask, as you did in 25, if a guy could get a blown save in the bottom of the first. There are very limited opportunities to be eligible for a save before the sixth, and the bottom of the first clearly isn't one of them.


You're right. I cannot conceive of a way to get a save in the bottom of the first. but the second inning? Sure.
   37. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:49 PM (#4272035)
That's foolish then. If you're going to suggest middle relief guys who come in during a one-run game in the seventh are in a "save situation" (which modern usage dictates they aren't), then there's no reason not to count the reliever who comes in during the sixth with his team in front by 12. Hell, the latter guy is probably more likely to get the save than the former.


That is why when you are talking about save percentage you have to include holds in the discussion. It's the way the stat was designed, the only purpose of save situation as a stat is to allow for the creation of blown save and holds.


as far as listing an accurate save percentage you do (saves+holds-blown saves)/(saves+holds)
   38. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:58 PM (#4272063)
wrong thread.
   39. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:13 PM (#4272115)
You're right. I cannot conceive of a way to get a save in the bottom of the first. but the second inning? Sure.


Technically, I guess. Practically, I doubt it. I suspect a guy who only lasts 1 IP (if the other guy goes the rest of the way) is not going to be assigned a win, but I'd be interested to see how official scorers would rule. But I imagine the scorer would determine the first reliever was not effective, and give the win to the guy who went 7-plus innings.

That is why when you are talking about save percentage you have to include holds in the discussion. It's the way the stat was designed, the only purpose of save situation as a stat is to allow for the creation of blown save and holds.


That's a different (though genuine) issue.

Misirlou and I are noting that it's silly to credit a guy who enters the game in the top of the seventh with his team up 3-2 as being in a "save situation," if you are not doing likewise for a guy who enters the game in the bottom of the sixth with his team up 15-0.

The guiding principle governing "save situations" should be: if this pitcher finishes out the game and his team never relinquishes the lead, will he qualify for a save. If the answer is yes, then it's a save situation. Either that, or find some way to appropriately measure those save sitautions where the reliever was in a practical save situation (you know, where he was brought with the intent of finishing the game). But splitting the difference makes absolutley no sense.

   40. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:21 PM (#4272138)
Misirlou and I are noting that it's silly to credit a guy who enters the game in the top of the seventh with his team up 3-2 as being in a "save situation," if you are not doing likewise for a guy who enters the game in the bottom of the sixth with his team up 15-0.


I think the argument is that they don't want to award holds for that 15-0 game... As I said save situation is a stat designed to credit a pitcher for blown saves and holds. That is the only purpose of it. A pitcher who comes into a 15-0 game, and if that is called a save situation, then allows 7 runs in an inning and leaves, he would be leaving with the save situation intact, and getting credit for a hold.
   41. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:27 PM (#4272148)
Technically, I guess. Practically, I doubt it. I suspect a guy who only lasts 1 IP (if the other guy goes the rest of the way) is not going to be assigned a win, but I'd be interested to see how official scorers would rule.


Guy comes in in the bottom of the first inning down 6-4. In the top of the second, he in replaced for a PH, and his team scores 4 runs. His replacement then finishes the game without relinquishing the lead. Who gets the win and who gets the save?
   42. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:30 PM (#4272150)
Guy comes in in the bottom of the first inning down 6-4. In the top of the second, he in replaced for a PH, and his team scores 4 runs. His replacement then finishes the game without relinquishing the lead. Who gets the win and who gets the save?


If he finishes the game, I imagine that the third pitcher gets the win and nobody gets the save.
   43. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:33 PM (#4272152)
If he finishes the game, I imagine that the third pitcher gets the win and nobody gets the save.


Why? The second pitcher came in with his team behind, and left with the lead, which was never relinquished. Isn't the the definition of a relief win?
   44. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:35 PM (#4272153)

I think the argument is that they don't want to award holds for that 15-0 game... As I said save situation is a stat designed to credit a pitcher for blown saves and holds. That is the only purpose of it. A pitcher who comes into a 15-0 game, and if that is called a save situation, then allows 7 runs in an inning and leaves, he would be leaving with the save situation intact, and getting credit for a hold.


Then the problem is with the hold statistic. If you enter a 15-0 game and pitch effectively for three innings but the skipper allows someone else to throw the ninth, you ought to get a hold. If you were eligible for a save when you took the hill, you shouldn't be disqualified for at least a hold when you've fulfilled the performance-based requirements (effective pitching, three innings of work, never relinquish the lead).
   45. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:36 PM (#4272154)
Why? The second pitcher came in with his team behind, and left with the lead, which was never relinquished? Isn't the the definition of a relief win?


In these cases, the official scorer is given lattitude. And I don't think he's giving the win to a guy who went 1 IP or less instead of the guy who went 7-plus.

   46. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:44 PM (#4272159)
In these cases, the official scorer is given lattitude. And I don't think he's giving the win to a guy who went 1 IP or less instead of the guy who went 7-plus.


Show me one situation in which a pitcher came in with his team tied or behind, left with the lead which was never relinquished, and didn't get the win.
   47. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4272164)
Then the problem is with the hold statistic. If you enter a 15-0 game and pitch effectively for three innings but the skipper allows someone else to throw the ninth, you ought to get a hold. If you were eligible for a save when you took the hill, you shouldn't be disqualified for at least a hold when you've fulfilled the performance-based requirements (effective pitching, three innings of work, never relinquish the lead).


Don't argue with it. The hold stat has a lot of flaws, it was a half ass created stat to find a way to credit middle relief pitchers, and if it was recreated today, they might change it's design. You can get a hold without actually getting an out, I personally would have made a qualifier allowing no more runs than innings pitched or something like that. But that isn't the hold stat.

The hold stat has a couple of well known flaws. You can record a hold without getting an out. You can record a hold while being completely ineffective. (say you come in in a three run game, allow two runs, put two men on base, get an out and leave...you will get a hold even if the guy who relieves you allows both runs to score giving you the loss) It's not a great stat, neither is the save stat, but they are the stats we have.
   48. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:53 PM (#4272166)


Show me one situation in which a pitcher came in with his team tied or behind, left with the lead which was never relinquished, and didn't get the win.


I will, once you show me one situation in which a pitcher threw one inning, the first, and was relieved by a guy who went the next 7, and the initial guy got the win. I bet I could find an example before you did. (-:

If this were a Houston no-hitting the Yankees situation, where everybody goes 1-2 innings, then the WP is obviously going to be the guy who took the mound when his team was trailing or tied and left the game with his team in the lead, since all of the relievers had a similar degree of effectiveness. But this is a very different sitaution, where the WP can be only one of two choices, and the latter did the overwhelming majority of the work. I feel that in this particular situation (which is almost impossible to imagine happening in today's game), the third pitcher would be credited with a win on the basis of being the more effective pitcher.



   49. SoSH U at work Posted: October 15, 2012 at 11:55 PM (#4272168)
Don't argue with it. The hold stat has a lot of flaws, it was a half ass created stat to find a way to credit middle relief pitchers, and if it was recreated today, they might change it's design. You can get a hold without actually getting an out, I personally would have made a qualifier allowing no more runs than innings pitched or something like that. But that isn't the hold stat.

The hold stat has a couple of well known flaws. You can record a hold without getting an out. You can record a hold while being completely ineffective. (say you come in in a three run game, allow two runs, put two men on base, get an out and leave...you will get a hold even if the guy who relieves you allows both runs to score giving you the loss) It's not a great stat, neither is the save stat, but they are the stats we have.


And I don't disagree with any of that. But that doesn't change my basic point. It's ridiculous to define something as a save sitaution if it include some, but not all, of the situations where the pitcher is in line for a save.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Eugene Freedman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogThe 4 surprisingly quiet teams of the MLB offseason
(20 - 1:16pm, Dec 19)
Last: starving to death with a full STEAGLES

NewsblogTrading Justin Upton means the Braves are in full rebuilding mode | Mark Bradley blog
(50 - 1:16pm, Dec 19)
Last: Yoenis Cespedes, Baseball Savant

Hall of Merit2015 Hall of Merit Ballot
(93 - 1:16pm, Dec 19)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogOT: Politics - December 2014: Baseball & Politics Collide in New Thriller
(4977 - 1:15pm, Dec 19)
Last: Bitter Mouse

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - December 2014
(720 - 1:13pm, Dec 19)
Last: Moses Taylor, Moses Taylor

NewsblogThe 2015 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!
(86 - 1:05pm, Dec 19)
Last: Ryan Thibs

NewsblogVin Scully lost his 1988 World Series ring
(1 - 1:02pm, Dec 19)
Last: Batman

NewsblogPadres Acquire Derek Norris – MLB Trade Rumors
(51 - 12:48pm, Dec 19)
Last: alilisd

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(9162 - 12:45pm, Dec 19)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogMax Scherzer not a realistic option, New York Yankees' Randy Levine says - ESPN New York
(18 - 12:37pm, Dec 19)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight

NewsblogJerry Crasnick on Twitter: "Jake Peavy has agreed on 2 yr deal with
(6 - 12:36pm, Dec 19)
Last: dr. scott

NewsblogAre Wil Myers' flaws fixable? | FOX Sports
(119 - 11:54am, Dec 19)
Last: vivaelpujols

NewsblogRoyals sign Kris Medlen to two-year deal - MLB Daily Dish
(28 - 11:19am, Dec 19)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogDo MLB Owners Wield Sabermetrics as a Hammer? – The Hardball Times
(3 - 10:45am, Dec 19)
Last: Nasty Nate

Newsblog2014 Disabled List Information and So Much More – The Hardball Times
(1 - 10:26am, Dec 19)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

Page rendered in 0.3802 seconds
48 querie(s) executed