came here to post lol dbacks. what an ******* kirk gibson is. first guy on the steps to fist bump his ******* pitcher.

lol dbacks

http://arizonasports.com/42/1668458/...eye-for-an-eye

it's always awesome to see stupid people get punished for their stupidity. so often that doesn't happen

I hope there was some TLR influence in that beaning decision, because that would be fantastic.

TLR would of waited until tomorrow

Get Goldschmidt out of town asap

LOL from twitter:

eager to see how the lolbbwaa finds a way to not give trout the MVP this year

there's no reason to ever use it. it's the rare amalgam stat that manages to be less useful than either of its parts.

if ERA counted runs given up on errors that would be the most important stat because that's all that actually matters.

Seriously tho, dbacks sucking hard b/c they're idiots is good, basically hating them now more than rivals. Someone is blaming the manager but for all I know Gibson's just following GM orders on that (which this level of stupidity is already known).

I'm sure losing this game as a result will set the rest of the league on notice and arizona will win the NL west. (spoiler alert no they won't and a fair chance everyone gets fired at the end of the season)

runs allowed/9 is a great stat. bref has it. era is busted.

edit: it will be a sad day when kevin towers finally gets canned.

What are your thoughts on quality starts as a team stat (not individual)? I know a QS is by no means a dominant start or any measure of eliteness, but they do keep each team in the game with a chance to win. For example, the Brewers are 2nd in MLB in quality starts, yet their starting rotation is 26th in WAR. They are obviously suffering from a higher HR/9 (mainly due to Estrada alone), are 7th in BB/9 (supposedly the only part of BABIP and/or WHIP a pitcher can control). However, I think BABIP and WHIP are somewhat useful as not all balls in play are equal, as not all contact is the same. Some pitchers can induce bad contact while others get crushed (using the Brewers as an example again they are 7th in WHIP and tied for first with the A's in BABIP -- this is not all luck, also their starters are 1st in innings pitched while I agree the emphasis should be on quality innings that says something too). It just seems to me that something is getting missed here in the WAR calculations.

Meanwhile, Detroit's starting rotation is somehow 2nd in WAR.

i think it's an excellent way to measure the number of times a team's starters have pitched 6 or more innings while allowing 3 or fewer earned runs

yeah, I wasn't trying to validate it as a stat or anything, sorry if it was too much of a derail as I ramble too much and that often turns into incoherent thoughts, I guess I should have just asked, do most here think WAR is calculated accurately for pitchers or does it have room for improvement?

I just seem to find lots of discrepancies, such as how Justin Verlander has a higher WAR this season than Jonathon Niese, Ervin Santana, Wily Peralta, Tyson Ross, Gerrit Cole, and others too.

rwar is pretty much perfect except for defense adjustment but there's really not much that can be done about it unless mlbam decides to release fieldf/x or whatever the hell the new system's called data (probably not gonna happen).

not really a huge fan of fwar for pitchers but i appreciate what they're trying to do.

Justed wanted to drop in and say,

I hope Gibson and Towers DON'T get canned, they've turned this entire DBacks season into such comedic relief.

Feel bad for the Dback fans here tho

here's a good team stat: the brewers starters are 19th in runs allowed.

another good one: they've been the luckiest team in the nl

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

first i suggest reading how fangraphs calculates war.

They have also pitched the most innings so are not 19th in R/9 but 13th. Luckily the bullpen is elite (minus Wang who just lowers our run differential in blowouts to fool the pundits )

edit: the brewers luck factor on the page you linked should actually be fairly close to san francisco's when over-emphasizing run differential without looking into underlying factors as a measure of how good a team is

i'm not sure what your edit means exactly but brewers are 3 wins luckier than the giants in d3 which is a lot.

I meant that if you substitute Wang with an average reliever the Brewers vs. Giants run differential would be within a few runs of each other, which that calculation seems to be focused on. You didn't specify d3 until now so I did not spend any time comparing the differences between d1, d2, and d3, so I was just going by the general flow of that page which seems to be primarily based on win differential.

You can conservatively add about 15 runs to the Brewers run differential, most likely a couple more.

so do we get to replace the worst reliever on every team or just the brewers

If the worst reliever on every team is a rule 5 pick who never pitched above rookie ball and is not ready for the majors but should be good 2-3 years from now, but will do some mop-up duty in blowouts while allowing a lot more runs than a normal reliever would allow in the same amount of innings, then yes.

The Brewers worst reliever is much, much worse than any other team's worst reliever, and he is not used except in emergencies or blow-outs (games they were going to lose anyways but end up giving a lot more runs than expected because of him). This is something computers miss but people who have knowledge of a team know. Come Sept 1st he won't see another inning until 2016 or 2017.

i mean the giants just dfa'd a guy who allowed 15 runs; he certainly won't be pitching for them in the postseason. i get to wipe out all those runs right?

The difference is the Giants used Huff as part of their bullpen/rotation in game situations they were trying to win.

I know what you're saying, but what you're saying really does not apply to the Wang situation. It is a unique scenario that normal stats will never capture.