Again With The Myths?
Nolan Ryan is one of the best pitchers in baseball history. Ryan piled up the strikeouts, but he also piled up the walks - he had a career BB/9 of 4.7, and twice issued more than 200 free passes in a single season. His career ERA+ of 112 doesn't even rank in the top 250 all time. Other pitchers with a career 112 ERA+: Bartolo Colon, Wilson Alvarez, Al Leiter, and Orel Hershiser. Ryan was incredibly durable and frequently dominant, but one of the best he was not.
The key to a successful team is pitching and defense. The value of a run scored is essentially the same as that of a run prevented. Just ask the Yankees. Or the Mets. Or the Phillies. Or pretty much any of those Cleveland teams from the 1990's. While having the best offense in the league isn't any guarantee to get you to the playoffs, neither is having the best pitching staff, and at the end of the day it's just as good to beat someone 7-6 as it is to beat them 2-1.
The playoffs are a crapshoot. The idea behind this cliche - that the October sample size is so small that pretty much anything can happen - is perfectly fine; even the best teams in baseball have the odds stacked overwhelmingly against them. But that doesn't mean it's all a matter of luck. I can't find the article(s) for my life, but it's been shown that teams with good defenses, strikeout pitchers, and/or aggressive contact lineups tend to succeed more often in the postseason than their peers. The '01 Diamondbacks had the two dominant aces. The '02 Angels had the aggressive lineup, awesome defense, and shutdown bullpen. The '03 Marlins had the lineup and reliable ace. And so on. There's no way to guarantee a championship, as anyone can win in any given year, but there are ways to better your odds. And remember, once you're in October, depth doesn't mean anything. If you're looking to win a championship, you damn sure better have stars at the top.
The trade deadline is exciting and full of movement. I fall for this one every year. The biggest names to be traded on July 31st over the past few seasons: Eric Gagne, Octavio Dotel, Greg Maddux, Julio Lugo, Matt Lawton, Kyle Farnsworth, Steve Finley, Esteban Loaiza, Jose Contreras, Aaron Boone, Sidney Ponson, Bobby Howry, John Thomson, Ugueth Urbina, Pedro Astacio, Rondell White, and Al Martin. The big Nomar trade back in 2004 is literally the only deal involving a superstar to go down on deadline day in a long long time, and even then Nomar was fighting injury (he only played 81 games). Significant trades do get made during the year, but by the time July 31st rolls around, odds are all the major names are staying put where they are.
Mark Buehrle is a wuss. Wrong.
The 2001 Mariners were built on pitching, defense, and fundamentals. The 2001 Mariners scored the most runs in the league and also had the highest BA and OBP despite playing half their games in Safeco. On top of that, their team defensive efficiency was a staggering 23 points ahead of second place. This team was built on an unstoppable offense and one of the best defenses in recent history. I don't know why its lineup never gets the respect it deserves. Its total .283 EqA is tied with the 2003 Red Sox for the best baseball's seen in seven years.
The 2002 Angels won the World Series with pitching, defense, and fundamentals. In 16 playoff games, the 2002 Angels scored 101 runs and allowed 81. They drilled 24 homers. Their starters had a cumulative ERA of 5.38. They scored 95 runs in their 11 wins. These guys won the Series because of hitting, John Lackey, Troy Percival, and Francisco Rodriguez.
Dave Roberts' steal in Game 4 of the 2004 ALCS was the turning point in the series. WPA boost of Millar's leadoff walk: +12.4%. WPA boost of Roberts' steal: +11.5%. WPA boost of Mueller's tying single: +25.6%. It was an important stolen base, to be sure, but it wouldn't have happened were it not for Millar's walk, and it wouldn't have mattered were it not for Mueller's single.
Jim Rice should be in the Hall of Fame. Not only did Jim Rice fail to compile the big round numbers that the HoF generally requires for admittance, but he also took liberal advantage of his home ballpark - away from Fenway, Rice had a career .789 OPS. For good measure, he also didn't play great defense or contribute very much on the basepaths. Admit Jim Rice and you might as well admit Chili Davis and Ellis Burks. And do you think they're two of the best players in baseball history?
Individual batter vs. pitcher matchups contain valuable information. As shown in The Book, these matchup statistics basically contain zero predictive value. Just because Adrian Beltre is 6-10 against Shaun Marcum with two home runs doesn't mean he's likely to keep hitting him in the future.
Young players are unreliable and inconsistent, while veterans are steady and dependable. The average rookie with 50+ plate appearances has hit .271/.328/.420 so far this year, against a league-average batting line of .268/.336/.422. Meanwhile, the average rookie with 40+ IP has a 4.64 ERA (4.90 for starters, 3.99 for relievers), against a league-average ERA of 4.46 (4.61 for starters, 4.19 for relievers). It should be noted that when people talk about this alleged phenomenon, they're usually talking about position players, not pitchers. After taking ten randomly selected everyday rookies and writing down their monthly OPS splits, I came up with an average monthly percent standard deviation of 18.7%. Repeating the process for ten randomly selected everyday veterans, I came up with an average monthly percent standard deviation of 18.3%. It's hardly a perfect study, but the point is this - veterans have just as much in-season statistical fluctuation as rookies do. Gary Sheffield had a .675 OPS in April, a 1.042 OPS between May and June, and a .733 OPS ever since. Veteran consistency? These bits of conventional wisdom concerning young players have to stop.
Late-season momentum carries over into the playoffs. I'm speaking on a team basis here, not individual players. It really doesn't. Check out this article by Studes at THT. Between 1969-2004, World Series champions actually had a slightly lower September winning percentage than the average postseason team. Remember 2000? The Yankees went 13-18 after September 1st, then went on to win the Series. A year later, Arizona went 10-11 in September and did the same thing. On the flip side, the 1977 Royals went 25-5 after September 1st and didn't do anything in the playoffs. Momentum doesn't seem to make a difference. Once you get into the division series, everything starts from scratch.
Over the past several decades, the talent pool has been diluted by expansion. Since 1950, the population of the United States has doubled, the league has been integrated, and both Latin America and Asia have turned into Major League breeding grounds. With every passing day, there's more available talent in the world than ever before. Dilution is a crock.
Closers fall apart in non-save situations. This one's part myth, part fact. Closers don't fall apart, but they do perform worse. Between 2002-2005, the top closers in baseball put up a 2.51 ERA when slamming the door and a 3.26 ERA in non-save situations. Good, but worse. About a month ago, Kevin Hench took a similar look on a smaller scale and found that this year's top ten closers saw a 26-point ERA increase in non-save situations. While it's hardly the suicide to bring your closer into a non-save situation that so many fans think it is, there is some truth to the sentiment.
A walk's as good as a hit. This is a cheap cop-out way to close, but I didn't want to finish on the non-save-situation point. Unless there's a guy on first, a walk doesn't push anyone around the bases. The difference in run value is .15. The same basic idea goes for the old saying that a hit and a steal's as good as a double. It's not. But I don't have to explain this to you.
0 recs |
46
comments
Comments
Mark Buehrle
He's on the far end of the badass bell curve.
by Gomez on Sep 25, 2007 12:26 AM PDT 0 recs
My respect for the man just doubled tonight.
by Goose on
Sep 25, 2007 1:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
This one is hard.
Really hard. I'll be the first person to say "walk rate is king", but every once so often there's a historical oddity that blows everything out of the water.
Even if he was a better Kip Wells or Daniel Cabrera, he still threw seven no hitters. Even if you don't like the no hitter or think it's an overrated accomplishment, it's still impressive enough that Nolan managed to do it not just 7 times, but nobody else in major league history is even close.
Fluke and luck may have been what Nolan was born with. And in the end, can you hold it against him? I know I'd abuse my good fortune if I could.
by TIF on Sep 25, 2007 2:43 AM PDT 0 recs
Mark Buehrle is a wuss. Wrong.
by JI on Sep 25, 2007 7:42 AM PDT 0 recs
Wait a second...
I agree. In some cases, they're better.
These are great season-ending stocking stuffers, even if you are fudging with the definitions of "myths" vs "clichés."
:-D
by LouKlimchock HoF on Sep 25, 2007 7:47 AM PDT 0 recs
I wonder if Buehrle is a fan of The Simpsons
Moe: You ever been hunting before, there, Barty?
Bart: No. Something about a bunch of guys, alone, together in the woods. Seems kinda gay.
("Homer's Phobia" Episode Number: 168, Season Num: 8)
by JoshC on Sep 25, 2007 8:05 AM PDT 0 recs
You knew you'd get the most flack for Nolan Ryan
There is no superstat that I recognize as encompassing the best player at any position. There are multiple (old and new) stat categories for a reason. And if you want to talk about durable workhorse strike-out pitchers, Nolan Ryan is near the top of that conversation, don't you think? I think Roger Clemens has a pretty good edge, but can you imagine Nolan Ryan starting the season several months late every year? What is your criteria for being a top pitcher? We recognize Hank Aaron as the best home-run hitter of all time (putting Bonds aside), so you have to at least concede that Ryan was the best strike-out pitcher of all time, don't you?
Plus he did lead the league in adjusted ERA+ 2 years in his career. That's something.
An interesting side-note, he led the league in wild pitches 11 years. I realize that doesn't support my point, but it's a cool stat nonetheless.
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on Sep 25, 2007 8:06 AM PDT 0 recs
My criteria for being a top pitcher
Nolan Ryan was extremely durable and racked up a ton of strikeouts. But to be one of the best pitchers of all time, you just need to do a way better job of keeping runs off the board.
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 8:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
So are you arguing
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 8:17 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I believe so, yes.
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 8:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't
By the way, the next on the list after Pedro are actually Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson and then Dan Quisenberry. But certainly Clemens deserves to be discussed as one of the best of all time.
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 8:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
On the list of
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 8:41 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Quisenberry was a reliever
We can disagree on who deserves to be part of that "best ever" group - God knows people have been doing it forever - but the fact of the matter is that Nolan Ryan shouldn't get mentioned.
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 8:55 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I know who Quisenberry and Grove are
I'll concede that Ryan isn't the best overall. He's certainly the best strike-out pitcher of all time (single-season stats and career), and he is one of the most durable pitchers the game has seen (while still be effective, of course). In those two areas he does deserve to be mentioned among the top. But clearly you are focused on an "all-around" category, and I'll agree Ryan doesn't come that close to cracking my top 10.
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 9:01 AM PDT
up
0 recs
For the record
If I made a list of the most dominant pitchers of all time, Ryan would get consideration. But that's a different category, and he allowed too many runs to be one of the best overall.
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 9:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think
And for that stretch from '95-2002 (and throw in 91-94 too, really) Johnson was freakin' awesome. He does have the best career SO/9 innings as well. I still give Ryan some points for managing to strike out 1000+ more batters, play for 7 additional years (so far), and not have his back give out or arm fall off. But you are right that Johnson is right there at the top of the list of his particular style of pitching, and you've given me something to think about. Randy probably won't pitch for as long as Ryan (nor pitch nearly as many innings), but since I consider pitchers with much shorter careers in the list of best all-around, I can't forclose Randy from being right there with Ryan for best strike-out pitcher of all time. Pedro, not so much, at least not for like 1000 more strikeouts, 4 or 5 years.
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 10:05 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I'd be interested
Nolan Ryan had nasty stuff. I'm not saying he's the best ever, but I think his 112 ERA+ is a little deceiving.
by Manzanillos Cup on
Sep 25, 2007 10:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Actually, I checked
by Manzanillos Cup on
Sep 25, 2007 10:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
This is the best I can do
Ryan, innings 7-9: .591
Ryan facing opponents 3rd+ time: .625
Ryan after pitch 101: .602 (not complete stats)
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 10:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I can't speak
Ryan had 7 years with higher complete game totals than Randy Johnson's best single year -(Johnson had 12 complete games in 1999, Nolan had 14 or more 7 times in his career, breaking 20 five times). Pedro broke double digits one time, with 13.
For innings pitched - Johnson's highest was 255.3 in 1993, and Pedro's was 241 in 1997. Ryan had 5 seasons higher than Johnson's best, and 6 better than Pedro's. He had 16 seasons of 196 or more innings. I agree with Jeff that he's not in the running for best overall of all time, and it matters a good deal what is going on in those innings, but it's pretty amazing to wonder what kind of pitcher he'd have been if most of his career was in the active bullpen era we enjoy today.
I don't think you add on years to the end of his career or anything, but maybe he does get a boost for having to only pitch 7 innings a game? I don't know how you'd ever determine that, but it's interesting to think about. Is it reasonable to think a person's walk rates stand a better chance of going down if a pitcher only goes 6+ or 7 and has his rate extrapolated to a greater extent as opposed to pitching more innings and going deeper in ballgames when he's not likely to be as effective or sharp? Could be. There are plenty of pitchers in the 4 man rotation eras who have good rates despite pitching many innings (there are only 112 pitchers with more complete games thrown than Ryan), so I don't know what to think.
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 11:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/ryanno01.shtml
See the "lgERA"? That's League ERA, adjusted for Ryan's home ballparks. It's 3.57- meaning an AVERAGE pitcher would put up an ERA line of just over 3.5. He only pitched 4 years in his career in an environment where an average pitcher could be expected to give up 4 earned runs per game.
Now, let's look at RJ:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml
Career lgERA: 4.43
IOW, RJ's pitching in environments where pitchers are giving up nearly an earned run more a game (thanks to smaller parks, more home runs, etc.).
That's why this isn't even close in my book. It's a lot easier to pitch a bazillion innings and strike out almost 400 batters when you're in a league where the average hitter is basically Willie Bloomquist with maybe a little bit more power (1973 AL average hitter: .259/.328/.381), as opposed to the average hitter RJ faced in 1995: .270/.344/.427
by eponymous coward on
Sep 25, 2007 12:43 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't agree
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 2:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Oops
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 2:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Big Train Johnson...
But, um, I'm not sure I'd agree that the level of talent in the 10s and 20s is that much worse than it is in the modern era (guys Clemens, Pedro, etc., and to a certain extent, Ryan, have faced). While the AL has Vlad, Manny, Ortiz, Ichiro, A-Rod, and a bunch of other big time hitters, I'm not sure they're at the same tier as Sisler, Ruth, Heilmann, Cobb, Shoeless Joe, Collins, Lajoie. Yeah, there's the SLG with the HRs, but again, you're talking a different era, which is difficult to do. But as far as hitters go, the competition that Johnson, and others that pitched in that era (10s-20s) was just as tough, collectively, in that era's game, as it is today.
by PositivePaul on
Sep 25, 2007 11:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
That said...
Throwing durability out the window, and longevity, then it's Koufax, hands down.
by PositivePaul on
Sep 25, 2007 11:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I hope it was clear
by Mariner fan in Rockies exile on
Sep 25, 2007 11:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Maddux?
Granted I think Clemens has the edge on both of them, but probably not by as much as you'd think.
by srs on
Sep 25, 2007 10:55 AM PDT
up
0 recs
He finished in the top ten in ERA 8 times
I agree with Jeff that he isn't one of the best pitchers of all time, but I think he's overstating his case a bit.
by JI on
Sep 25, 2007 8:38 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Ummm.
Ryan's a deserving HOFer for sure, but there's a reason he has a grand total of zero Cy Young Awards- whenever/wherever he was in the league, there were 4-5 better pitchers you could point to.
Hell, Nolan Ryan was quite arguably the SECOND-best pitcher on the team a couple of times, for a run of 3-4 years:
Frank Tanana on the Angels
Mike Scott on the Astros
You can't say that about guys like RJ, Pedro or Seaver until it was clear they were on the downside of their career. Maybe Clemens after he went to the Yankees, but he had a very dominant run that Ryan never had.
Ryan's greatness stems from his extended performance of being good (but not great) over a long period of time, NOT because of his peak performance (which wasn't that great).
by eponymous coward on
Sep 25, 2007 12:28 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Agreed.
by JI on
Sep 25, 2007 12:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
pitching 4 or 5 complete games in a season
by Llewdor on
Sep 25, 2007 2:54 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Actually...
It's just that some team play with loaded dice (better pitching, superstar hitters, etc.).
by rtang on Sep 25, 2007 8:44 AM PDT 0 recs
Closers in non-save situations
The larger sample size of their 9th inning appearances is going to include a few 7-8-9s, but when they're brought in to save the day in the seventh or eighth, they're probably facing the best that the opposing lineup has to offer.
by derek on Sep 25, 2007 9:44 AM PDT 0 recs
Re: closers
by nathaniel dawson on
Sep 25, 2007 10:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
So I guess that'd make Buehrle
by SethGrandpa on Sep 25, 2007 10:16 AM PDT 0 recs
Can you sidebar these?
by pdb on Sep 25, 2007 12:56 PM PDT 0 recs
You the man
by pdb on
Sep 25, 2007 2:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I got the fax while driving.
by Jeff on
Sep 25, 2007 2:21 PM PDT
up
0 recs
It's their own fault
by pdb on
Sep 25, 2007 2:28 PM PDT
up
0 recs
but they were southern californians right?
by Matthew on
Sep 25, 2007 2:50 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I loved those 2003 Dodgers
by Llewdor on Sep 25, 2007 2:51 PM PDT 0 recs
Nolan Ryan
Ryan's career ERA would have been considerably lower if he would have sat every time he had an ache or a pain like many of the pitchers that you see in the game today. He would have never even come close to pitching in as many innings as he eventually did.
by Tom on Sep 25, 2007 7:34 PM PDT 0 recs












