Everyday Players

[UnashamedRiver]

Oh you must mean like Mike Gonzalez, with his 8.3 K/9 (10.4 career), which is currently better than John Smoltz's career 8.0 K/9. I guess Mike Gonzalez will last in the league as long as Smoltz did (21 years).

Or Jason Berken's 7.8 K/9 this year? I guess he'll be a stud then, throw him in the rotation when that shoulder gets fixed. Oh but his ERA got worse as his K/9 got better this year?

Or is Jim Johnson's 6.5 K/9 this year better? Maybe he belongs in the rotation. Because Matusz's 6.4 K/9 is pretty similar... yet one has the worst ERA on the team and the other has the best?

K/9 is not any predictor of long term success or immediate failure.

You are comparing relievers to starters. Starters how much lower K/9. You can find outliers to any rule. Also, K/9 is the single most important factor for determining success. There are outliers. Like there are for many things.

[sangar]

Again, as I stated in the other thread addressing this issue, these studies include injured pitchers. Our pitchers are not injuried. If one filters out pitchers with major arm/shoulder injuries the results are significantly different.

Your answer completely avoided the point I made about the original sample being too general to address our specific issues:

AL Cy Young

2010: Age 23

2009: Age 25

2008: Age 29

2007: Age 26

NL Cy Young

2010: Age 32

2009: Age 24

2008: Age 23

2007: Age 25

Ages they were at the start of the season. Even the greats have trouble excelling much after age 25-26.

The minority is not what I'm focusing on.

And yet you don't hesitate in using an insignificantly small and obviously biased minority to press your point.

[UnashamedRiver]

Your answer completely avoided the point I made about the original sample being too general to address our specific issues:

And yet you don't hesitate in using an insignificantly small and obviously biased minority to press your point.

Don't take this the wrong way, but whatever. The point I intended to originally make is that the average pitcher gets worse every year they are in the MLB or after around the age of 24-25. It's not that hard to understand and there have been studies to prove what I'm saying. The reason I said this is because I noticed our own starting pitchers have declined since their rookie year and that we shouldn't expect improvement. Again don't take this the wrong way, but it is not a debate. The average pitcher gets worse every year.

[DrOrioles90210]

Don't take this the wrong way, but whatever. The point I intended to originally make is that the average pitcher gets worse every year they are in the MLB or after around the age of 24-25. It's not that hard to understand and there have been studies to prove what I'm saying.

One guy did one study. By his own admission, he got different results than everyone else. You've ignored a flaw in that guy's study pointed out by sangar a few times.

Over and over you have ignored my point or have failed to understand what I'm saying.

Please stop saying average MLB pitcher. Find a better way of saying what you mean by average. At this point, I feel like you mean the majority of pitchers that fail to succeed at the major league level. Is that the case? Although there are far more who fail than succeed, I wouldn't call them average ML pitchers.

[UnashamedRiver]

One guy did one study. By his own admission, he got different results than everyone else. You've ignored a flaw in that guy's study pointed out by sangar a few times.

Over and over you have ignored my point or have failed to understand what I'm saying.

Please stop saying average MLB pitcher. Find a better way of saying what you mean by average. At this point, I feel like you mean the majority of pitchers that fail to succeed at the major league level. Is that the case? Although there are far more who fail than succeed, I wouldn't call them average ML pitchers.

If the majority of pitchers are failing then the average pitcher is a failed pitcher.

[BaltimoreTerp]

If the majority of pitchers are failing then the average pitcher is a failed pitcher.

That depends on how you are measuring. That's critical.

[DrOrioles90210]

If the majority of pitchers are failing then the average pitcher is a failed pitcher.

Ok, so for all of these failed pitchers, what is the average amount of starts they get?

[UnashamedRiver]

Ok, so for all of these failed pitchers, what is the average amount of starts they get?

I haven't a clue.

[sangar]

Don't take this the wrong way, but whatever. The point I intended to originally make is that the average pitcher gets worse every year they are in the MLB or after around the age of 24-25. It's not that hard to understand and there have been studies to prove what I'm saying. The reason I said this is because I noticed our own starting pitchers have declined since their rookie year and that we shouldn't expect improvement. Again don't take this the wrong way, but it is not a debate. The average pitcher gets worse every year.

So you're taking the results from an admittedly contradictory and biased study and applying it's general principle to a specific situation which is outside of the criteria of the original study and insisting it is a proven fact?

Okay, gotcha. Adiós.

[DrOrioles90210]

I haven't a clue.

Unless the guys you're talking about were given at least 50 starts (and that's a low estimate), then they weren't really given the chance to pitch for a while, have the league adjust to them (usual cause of sophomore slump or drop off in success like Pineda and Britton this year), and then make adjustments in order to find sustained success, then you can't say that those guys wouldn't improve from their rookie year (25-35 starts). That's my point.

Do you have any idea whether this guy included pitchers like Mitch Atkins or Chris Jakubauskas in his study? Because those are certainly average ML pitchers based on your definition.

[UnashamedRiver]

So you're taking the results from an admittedly contradictory and biased study and applying it's general principle to a specific situation which is outside of the criteria of the original study and insisting it is a proven fact?

Okay, gotcha. Adiós.

In response to others who brought the minority into the debate. Adios. It's not biased and I didn't admit the study was wrong.

[DrOrioles90210]

In response to others who brought the minority into the debate. Adios. It's not biased and I didn't admit the study was wrong.

The minority group are the only pitchers who were given enough starts to make adjustments in order to improve so what you're trying to prove is pointless anyway.

[UnashamedRiver]

The minority group are the only pitchers who were given enough starts to make adjustments in order to improve so what you're trying to prove is pointless anyway.

Does a pitcher like chris tillman deserve "enough" starts. No, because they can't get it done.

[DrOrioles90210]

Does a pitcher like chris tillman deserve "enough" starts. No, because they can't get it done.

That's not anyone's point. If a pitcher doesn't get enough starts to make adjustments, then you can't say that pitcher won't improve because they never got a chance.

And Tillman does deserve enough starts and he will get every chance to prove he can make those adjustments. He had enough minor league success and scouts and coaches saw enough potential in his stuff that they will give him time to improve.

[UnashamedRiver]

That's not anyone's point. If a pitcher doesn't get enough starts to make adjustments, then you can't say that pitcher won't improve because they never got a chance.

And Tillman does deserve enough starts and he will get every chance to prove he can make those adjustments. He had enough minor league success and scouts and coaches saw enough potential in his stuff that they will give him time to improve.

We shall see. But I cannot find a study that says the majority of MLB pitchers who have started games improve throughout their careers. I can't find one.