Huston, We Have A Problem

1) They got to play the Mets and Nats (two of the three worst teams in the NL last year) 18 times each. During these games they compiled a record of 27-9 while they were just 66-60 against everyone else. They might not have won 90 games if you replace a decent team with either the Mets or Nats in that division.

2) Brad Lidge remembered how to close game when he faced us and the Dodgers in the palyoffs. His slider all of a sudden breifly reappeared. It it didn’t the Phils probably would not have beaten us in that series.

3) Making it to the World Series is different than winning the World Sreies.

similarly to the pinch hitter. Just as a side note, for all starters/primary subs and the rotation, I’m totally on board with cost/marginal wins, just based on the volume of the workload.

But then again, I have trouble quantifying anything about a PH aside from just OBP and I have trouble quantifying anything about relief pitchers beyond K/BB and I guess HR/9.

Because of the volatility of their relative positions, and how their usage is so dependent on any other zillions of factors, most of which we’d both agree are unquantifiable, I can’t see just taking the standard wOBA/FIP-based WAR numbers and applying it to their performances.

It’s somewhat bass-ackwards but I’d rather use wPA over WAR for these specific situations, since their performances aren’t the type that just level off over the course of the season, it’s kind of “now or never”.

I would argue that the role of a closer is the least researched part of the game when it comes to sabermetrics. Sure a closer may not throw that many innings, but doesn’t the fact that a large percentage of the innings he’s going to be pitching in effect the outcome of a game count for something extra?

Let’s take this example. If a team goes out and scores 12 runs and its pitcher throws seven shutout innings, the shutout didn’t matter. As great as that starter was, you could have had someone throwing who gave up six runs in seven innings and you still would have easily won the game. If you really think about it, only innings pitched by starters in close games are really that meaningful because only those innings are having a major impact on the result of games.

A closer is going to give a huge percentage of his innings in one or two run games. This means that a huge percentage of his innings are going to be meaningful. (I’m willing to throw out the three run saves) In other words a starter may throw three times as many innings as a closer, but the closer’s innings are going to include a higher percentage of important ones.

The problem here as I’m sure you are already thinking is that the meaningful vs. meaningless innings theory isn’t really quantifiable. I know you’re not going to like this agreement but I would say that this is where the sabermetric road ends (at least until more research is done on it). Just because something isn’t quantifiable doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or is not affecting the game. You have to start looking at other ways of measuring the importance of closers. This holds true even if you’re dealing with undeveloped hypothesizes because quite frankly, that’s all we have to work with right now.

This is why I look for trends like exceeding the Pythagorean win percentage. Perhaps it is a coincidence that the Yankees have exceeded their Pythagorean win percentage in 11 of the last 12 years but it’s a least worth investigating why. Again I’m just throwing around a hypothesis in a place where sabermetrics don’t yet go but I would guess that Mariano Rivera would have something to do with that.

I also want to make it clear that I’m not trying to bash sabermetrics. I believe that that they are a revolutionary way to look at the game and have taught me so much about how to properly value players; however I think even sabermetrics has its limits.

/runs screaming from bad math flashbacks

I don’t necessarily think Smoltz is the only option, I just really haven’t dug too deep outside the organization and his name was one of the first that came to mind.

I also don’t think we should really be making trades and stuff for a reliever to offer assistance for one season. I’d be happy getting Smoltz for one year for a couple of mill and if that means making Street the set-up man should he come back healthy, so be it.

Down with the Sickness?

we should be fine. Walks suck when you’re asked to come in and clean up a situation, but in a clean inning, it’s not gonna kill you TOO badly, simply because that walk isn’t gonna compound on prior baserunners, and with stuff like Morales’, there’s a good chance that we’ll be stranding him anyhow.

Yeah you can post a .580 OPSa with a high WHIP when you are facing the Pads, Reds, D’backs, Mets, but that number is going to skyrocket once you start facing stronger offenses