Are there any stats that incorporate strength of opponent(s)? I don't have a specific argument, and not really looking to argue, but numbers against the Cards and Cubs can't be treated the same.

Guys guys guys.....I'm hear to tell you the deal has been made. I mean, how else would they be able to have the Homer Bailey Dual Bobblehead Night at GABP on May 10th????

 

That could just mean that is on the Rockies by then.

Are there any stats that incorporate strength of opponent(s)? I don't have a specific argument, and not really looking to argue, but numbers against the Cards and Cubs can't be treated the same.

 

I'll take that as a no.

I'll take that as a no.

 

I'm not aware of any, but that doesn't mean they aren't out there.

 

I did find this regarding WAR, but not sure how it's calculated or how it factors things in...."Pitcher opponent strength was not neutralized, so a park factor was being applied to a non-park adjusted number. Now the pitcher opponent strength is converted to a neutral environment, averaged for all opponents and then park adjusted based on a custom park factor for each pitcher based on the exact parks they pitched in."

I'm not aware of any, but that doesn't mean they aren't out there.

 

Pretty sure it does...:lol2::thumb:

Pretty sure it does...:lol2::thumb:

 

:lol2: I think that's a compliment, at least I'm taking it as such.

:lol2: I think that's a compliment, at least I'm taking it as such.

 

Correct. You're a nerd. Compliment #2.

You need to get off that pony. This ain't Walmart, you're out of quarters. No one has discounted the numbers. Teams get to the post season based on wins. Teams rely on starters to get the bulk of those wins. See the thread and discussion MTGL had about his guess about starters wins this season to see if that argument makes sense. If you continue to bang the drum that wins aren't important, then you need to be happy with a 70 win season and the starters win 51 of those. Maybe we will have the best WHIP as a team of starters and they'll give us an automatic bid to the post season.

 

I don't even understand your point. My point is individual W/L is one of the worst stats you can use to judge a pitcher.

Spin, here's where I think your logic is off.

 

W/L are THE key measure for a team's success. The starting pitcher like all other 8 defenders and batters has an impact on that. So do the relievers. W/L in the past were the key metric because it was easy to measure. Didn't take much thought or effort. However, logic says that the starting pitcher has only so much impact on the W/L outcome. Assigning value to one individual's impact on the final outcome seems short-sighted and illogical. Are there times it's obvious that the starter should get the blame or the pat on the back? Sure. However, there are way too many factors out of the pitcher's control that have shown that IT being THE measure or even a KEY measure is unwise. If a SP's ERA is 5.50 and he has a lot of Ls then that's probably safe to assign a good portion of the blame. However, if it's 3.9 in today's game how do you assign it?

 

As I've stated at least twice in this thread when evaluating Homer or any pitcher you have to look at the relative measure compared to the whole. He fares very well in that measure. And we should not be looking at what he did 3 years ago or even 2 years ago. You have to look at where he is TODAY and then make a decision on value.

Homer has improved every year with the Reds. There is no real reason to believe he's peaked either.

Homer has improved every year with the Reds. There is no real reason to believe he's peaked either.

 

One thing most, including myself, may forget is that Cueto is a FA after this season. The Reds have a team option for 2015, but let's say he has another year like this past one....Would the Reds be wise to hang on to Homer this year, try to work out an extension, and let Cueto be the one to cut loose? I think it's worth considering.

 

*Cueto's team option is for $10M in 2015, but the buyout is only $800K....That's a big chunk of change they'd be saving.

One thing most, including myself, may forget is that Cueto is a FA after this season. The Reds have a team option for 2015, but let's say he has another year like this past one....Would the Reds be wise to hang on to Homer this year, try to work out an extension, and let Cueto be the one to cut loose? I think it's worth considering.

 

*Cueto's team option is for $10M in 2015, but the buyout is only $800K....That's a big chunk of change they'd be saving.

 

I hope they can keep 2 of the 3. I'm assuming they can't keep all 3. I would think they will try to keep the cheaper two which would be Cueto and Bailey IMO.

I hope they can keep 2 of the 3. I'm assuming they can't keep all 3. I would think they will try to keep the cheaper two which would be Cueto and Bailey IMO.

 

That'd be the dumbest decision they could make. If you want to at least attempt to look like you're trying to win, you can't let Latos leave.

That'd be the dumbest decision they could make. If you want to at least attempt to look like you're trying to win, you can't let Latos leave.

 

I wish they would keep Latos but he's going to get far more money than those two guys and some people seem to suggest they're not inclined to keep raising their payroll.

Keeping the top two is still cheaper than all three? You can't let your best guy walk.

 

If they aren't serious about winning, keep 2 and 3. If they are, it has to be 1 and 2 or, at worst, 1 and 3.