How is pitcher "effectiveness" best measured?

Scorekeeper said:

The great thing about the game played with bat, ball, and glove whether its BB or SB is, its such a numbers driven game and there’s such a wealth of numbers, different people find different value in them, depending on their perspective, and it doesn’t mean they’re right or wrong.

When I see numbers like that, the 1st thing I think about, is how does that pitcher compare to all the other pitchers on the team? Expressing those numbers as a rate, its 1.25 outs for every hit(60 outs/48 hits). Can you express all the other pitchers the same way? I realize it’s a PITA, but I’m curious.

Click to expand...

Well I didn't say, but that pitcher also had a 9.5 ERA

Don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but another pitcher had 50 IP, like 27, or 28 hits, and ERA of 3.2

Sweet Lou said:

It is thinking like this that nearly kept Bert Blyleven out of the Hall of Fame and gave Yohan Santana's Cy young award to Bartolo Colon...Personally I believe W/L record is not a very good indication of how good or effective a pitcher is...I used to park in front of some old ware house and walk across the railroad tracks to save money on parking for games at the Big A when I was in college.

Click to expand...

Nice!

But I'm still wanting to know what effect we are measuring in order to determine effectiveness? Without that definition, this is all just so much playing with ourselves...

Scorekeeper said:

The great thing about the game played with bat, ball, and glove whether its BB or SB is, its such a numbers driven game and there’s such a wealth of numbers, different people find different value in them, depending on their perspective, and it doesn’t mean they’re right or wrong.

Click to expand...

The larger the sample size, the more accurate the numbers, which can create a problem when trying to compare "apples-to-apples". And as another poster mentioned, most good teams will pitch their "ace" against the best teams they face while pitching their #3 or #4 against weaker opponents. This may make the "numbers" of the #3 and #4 pitcher look good, but there is no question which pitcher they want in the circle in the championship on Sunday with the game on the line.

CoachKevin said:

Well I didn't say, but that pitcher also had a 9.5 ERA

Don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but another pitcher had 50 IP, like 27, or 28 hits, and ERA of 3.2

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood what I was asking for. I don’t care about ERA. I was asking to see the other pitchers expressed as outs/hits.

JAD said:

The larger the sample size, the more accurate the numbers, which can create a problem when trying to compare "apples-to-apples".

Click to expand...

Yes, larger sample sizes do improve accuracy, but depending on how the results are being used, it may or may not cause “problems”.

And as another poster mentioned, most good teams will pitch their "ace" against the best teams they face while pitching their #3 or #4 against weaker opponents. This may make the "numbers" of the #3 and #4 pitcher look good, but there is no question which pitcher they want in the circle in the championship on Sunday with the game on the line.

Click to expand...

Well, I can’t argue with the philosophy of the best pitchers facing the best opponents because that’s what competition is all about. But I don’t buy into the thought that because a weaker pitcher is facing weaker opponents the numbers for that pitcher will look better. If anything, the numbers should look pretty much the same, unless the #3 or #4 are very close to the #1, but the opponent stinks on ice.

To me, this is a great philosophical argument, but as far as I know there’s no way to prove either side because there’s no way to “rank” opponents. Heck, its nearly impossible to rank players, let alone an entire team with many players on it. But it sure is fun to discuss. 