from Amazon
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Halladay v Lee: does sequencing count
BA OBP SLG
.242 .258 .366 Cliff Lee, 2010
.245 .271 .373 Roy Halladay, 2010
Slight advantage to Cliff Lee (on the rate stats… let’s ignore IP for the purposes of this discussion). In terms of runs allowed, Halladay is at 2.66 runs per 9IP, while Cliff Lee is at 3.64. Why is that?
The results of when Roy Halladay is pitching is much better when there are runners on base than with bases empty.
.262 .278 .413 Bases Empty
.215 .261 .303 Runners on base
Cliff Lee has the opposite problem:
.214 .231 .333 Bases Empty
.293 .308 .428 Runners on base
There is very little skill in terms of pitching with men on base or bases empty. The results however, are the results. Given that it is more damaging to give up a hit with men on base than bases empty, Cliff Lee is going to end up with more runs allowed than expected, and Halladay less than expected.
In terms of “counting”, do we put that as a mark against Lee and a feather in Halladay’s cap? Or, given that there is little skill in sequencing, we should only look at the performance in terms of “base/out neutral”, and simply look at their overall performance lines?
Remember though that actual runs scored, and you have to decide if you want to assign them to the pitcher, or simply create some sort of “sequencing” bucket that does not count for, or against, any pitcher.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date