Brandon Webb going for the big 20
by azwebber17 on Aug 26, 2008 6:39 PM EDT
Email
PrintTonight Webby toes the rubber with a 19-4 record - already the best in baseball - going for his 20th win against a not so good Padres team. He is pretty much a sure bet for the Cy Young the only real competition is Lincecum, on a bad SF team, who in my opinion shouldnt get it for that reason. And possibly Sabathia: but he was in the AL for half the year, and really wasn't pitching well until becoming a Brewer, so Webby should definitely get the hardware. Why haven't we extended this guy yet? It's ridiculous: he is the best pitcher in the majors - give him whatever he wants for God's sake.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Brandon Webb: ERA+ 165
Timcecum: ERA+ 164
THAT’S why Webb should win it over Lincecum. He’s got better numbers when park adjusted — as well as pitching more innings, etc.
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
ERA+ Update
Adjusted ERA+
Lincecum-SFG 173
Volquez-CIN 161
Dempster-CHC 158
Santana-NYM 156
Webb-ARI 154
Pitching VORP
Lincecum 59
Santana 53.5
Webb 50.0
Haren 48..5
Dempster 48.3
THT PRC (Pitching Runs Created
Lincecum 112
Santana 99
Webb 98
Haren 97
Dempster 92
THT FIP
Lincecum 2.77
Haren 2.91
Webb 3.05
Sheets 3.26
Billingsley 3.26
I think it’s fairly obvious who the front runner SHOULD be at this point. Of course the writers will go for Webb if he ends up with 22 or 23 wins, or more. Unless of course his ERA really blows up and lincecum ends up over a half run better.
In 2004 I was outraged that Clemens won it over RJ. It would be hypocritical of me to suggest that Webb should get the award for being the best pitcher over Lincecum this year. But Webb still has time to close the gap.
On a per inning basis
Lincecum’s been the best so far, but I hope CYA voters continue to evaluate pitchers’ actual game results over a season, in concert with some of these efficiency averages, instead of merely extrapolating per inning excellence into mythical 9 inning game or seasonal ‘equivalents’ – as you seem to be in favor of here (and with Randy in ’04).
This is still a game (last time I checked) and the object is to win – not “pitch well enough to win if your offense or bullpen or luck was a little better”. Webb’s Dbacks are a dozen games over .500 ( vs 10g over for Tim’s Giants) and Brandon has more wins than Tim has decisions. Reasons for that are both within and beyond the respective pitchers’ control; for example, Lincecum’s gone deeper into games this August than he had previously, and whaddya know, he’s racking up Wins! More power to him.
Unlike a couple weeks ago, it’s a very liquid (ie "fun") race, and I wont defend Brandon to the death, but rather the guy who helps his team win the most – and there’s a variety of ways to look at that. The underlying data you provided is useful, but essentially secondary, data, and reduces that question more than genuinely answers it.
by Diamondhacks on Aug 28, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
I agree with homerism, even when it’s disguised behind logic. ;-) Rec’d
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
Lincecum is winning
He has a 15-3 record and a .8333 Win %
Webb has a 19-5 record, and a .792 Win %
The D Backs are 20-8 in Webbs Appearances, and the Giants are 19-9 in Lincecums Appearances.
Webb has 6 more “decisions” than Lincecum, and he is 4-2 in those decision. but as we can see from above, the teams records during their apperances are almost identical. Making your effort to paint this as an indication that Lincecum just doesn’t know how to win is shown to be even more hollow when you look closer and see that Lincecum has pitched better than Webb in the no decisions too:
Lincecum 10 G, 62. 1 IP, and has a 2.60 ERA In 5 of those no decisions, he went 7 innings. He did a lot more than just pitch well enough to win in most of those games.
Webb 4 G, 26 IP 3.12 ERA He went 5,6,7,8 innings one time each in those 4 ND
In Losses:
Lincecum 3 G , 19 IP 5.68 ERA
Webb 5 G 26.1 IP, 8.20 ERA
When Webb loses, he gets crushed, and doesn’t give his team a chance to win. Lincecum has only had one game all year where he didn’t give his team a chance to win.
I love Webb, but year to date, Lincecum has been the better pitcher….so far. There is nothing secondary about the data presented. Yours was just another attempt to affix all value to a pitcher based on how many “Wins” he is credited with. But as can be seen above, even that didn’t hold up under just a little bit more scrutiny.
This really wasn’t one of your better efforts DH
There's never been an issue here
as to whether or not Lincecum’s pitched great and had some better stats than Brandon – and your attempt to rebut my post by steering the debate towards those non-arguments is nothing short of embarrassing. You painted yourself into a corner with yet another barrage of homogenized stats to reach the mypoic conclusion that it’s “fairly obvious who the CY frontrunner SHOULD be” – and you got called on it.
I dont think its obvious at all. It’s a helluva lot less obvious than it was one and two weeks ago, when Webb was the prohibitive favorite. And that’s largely because the selective snapshot data you present here is more volatile and less exhaustive or conclusive than you appear comfortable imagining.
Yours was just another attempt to affix all value to a pitcher based on how many "Wins" he is credited with
Oh, nice!!!! Another ‘rebuttal’ via mischaracterization. Let me refurnish this out of respect for your short term memory loss ;- )
I hope CYA voters continue to evaluate pitchers’ actual game results over a season, in concert with some of these efficiency averages…
You see, I’m not the one regurgitating reams of derivative Vorpitude to the utter exclusion of Webb’s primary and glaring advantage. On the contrary, I’m far more reluctant to casually dismiss Webby’s whopping 4 game lead in the Win column, because unlike you, I appreciate that the “game” unit deserves at least equal footing with the sabermetrically extrapolated “inning”, in terms of evaluating current (not future) starter performance.
As far as my “effort” to paint this as an indication that Lincecum “just doesn’t know how to win”, I’ve hardly intended to do that, pointing out instead that some of this is likely within – and some beyond – his control. He is obviously a great pitcher and a worthy CYA candidate. The germane point is that, for whatever combination of reasons, he hasnt won nearly as often as Webb.
If you think that should have little or no bearing on the award for the league’s best pitcher, and you clearly do judging by your 2004 “outrage”, then you’re entitled to your opinion. But that’s all it is.
FWIW, I probably would’ve voted for Randy too, but even a modicum of appreciation for other points of view and my own limitations serves to quell any potential “outrage” over what is ultimately a subjective award.
by Diamondhacks on Aug 28, 2008 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I too was in the front of the “lynch the media for giving Roger freaking Clemens the Cy Young” mob and also feel that I’ve got to shut up now in this Lincecum-Webb race. I love Webb and wouldn’t trade him for the world, but I see no argument for him being superior to Lincecum this year.
"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck
My argument
isnt that Webb’s superior – it’s that it’s not “obvious” he’s inferior to Lincecum at this point in time.
Since shoe’s throwing around imperfect representations of performance, let’s add to the record that Brandon has a better ERC and WHIP (even before park adjustments) and is barely trailing Tim in DIPS (Defense Independent ERA), after park. Santana and Lincecum both have 22 Quality Starts – Webb and Haren 21 each. Which is truly more impressive in context? Did you know Lincecum, along with the walks, has thirteen wild pitches compared to Webb’s seven, or that he’s even worse than Brandon at holding baserunners? Or that his park adjusted OPS against is considerably higher? Amidst all the ink spent on Tim’s strikeouts and mystifying delivery, I cant blame you if this escaped your attention.
To summarize, the guy with all these advantages is also 19-5; the other guy is 15-3. Our team is a dozen games over .500 with our guy; his team is ten games over .500. ( Both teams are otherwise sub .500 with below average hitting and bullpens). I’m not asking anyone to believe Webb’s clearly superior. I dont believe it myself. Tim Lincecum’s frickin’ awesome. My question is, in light if all this, is it “fairly obvious” than Lincecum is more deserving? I honestly dont think the evidence is fairly obvious at all. If anything, it’s unfairly obvious ;- )
The other thing that I forgot to bring up with shoe is this greater notion of whether “luck” should play into individual post season awards. We’d all agree that it does, but should it and to what extent? My concern with some of the more rabid sabermetric wannabes is that their effort to neutralize all context and strip all random variation (luck) from performance also tends to strip meaning from performance and the game. This “stripping”, it seems to me, is more useful in a predictive sense (ie pitcher A won the CYA, but pitcher B was really more effective in context, so we project B will be more effective than A next year). I’m all in with that.
What I’m less enthusiastic about is suggesting in real time that it’s “fairly obvious” a guy with slightly better underlying stats but four fewer wins should be this year’s “Pitcher of the Year” (or frontrunner). What exactly are we honoring today? The man who would’ve fared best if we neutralize everything, or the guy who actually maximized his team’s fortunes, happenstance or not? Personally, since the game is played on a field (not a spreadsheet) under irregular conditions, the most satisfying answer to me is some hybrid of both approaches.
by Diamondhacks on Aug 29, 2008 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Hmmmm.....
Amidst all the ink spent on Tim’s strikeouts and mystifying delivery, I cant blame you if this escaped your attention.
When you put it like that, he sounds a lot like Dontrelle Willis….
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
Nice Rant
20-8 vs. 19-9
BFD
Thats no advantage at all when you take into consideration the difference in the quality of the teams and the difference in run scoring. It’s one game difference, (despite your repeated attempts to make it look larger by presenting it in the context of “games over .500”…..LOL)
The teams W-L records during these pitchers starts are one game off and every single qualitative measure of run prevention ability favors Lincecum by a substantial margin this season. (So far).
Didn’t mean to push your buttons and make you pop off this badly. I know my posting style, and tendency to emphasis certain words with capitals drives you nuts. Sorry, but you need to get over that. It’s not healty for you. ;)
Nice try
I know my posting style, and tendency to emphasis certain words with capitals drives you nuts.
It’s not the capitals. It’s your casual inaccuracies, your misplaced self confidence in understanding the game, your politics, your deluge of cut and paste stats tangential or irrelevant to many points of discussion, your handle, your self promoting air, your name dropping and your hair. The capitals are fine.
every single qualitative measure of run prevention ability favors Lincecum by a substantial margin
I’m not familiar with qualitative measures. Do you subscribe to a guru who sanctifies good runs from bad? The quantitative measures, as I touched on above (DIPS, ERC) are decidedly inconclusive. You apparently missed the lesson of last week’s ERA+ rollercoaster, which is just how volatile and insignificant the current gap really is.
20-8 vs. 19-9 BFD
It may not be to you, but I guarantee it’s a BFD to the teams. And it is to the respective pitchers. Also, your attempt to characterize it as one game is misleading in the sense it requires two independent events to equalize the gap (ie a Webb loss and a Lincecum win).
I imagine assessing starter value via something as archaic as “Wins” makes your face scrunch up like the time Aunt Velma boiled the Sunday cabbage, but try to look at it this way. We saw Webb’s ERA+ drop a dozen points with one start. Tim’s rose, what, eight or nine points? So, there’s something like a 20 pt swing in just one pitching rotation (ie 3% of a 33-35 start year) . Now let’s talk Wins. You know what four Wins represents to a Cy Young caliber pitcher. It’s a month, OK? It’s a month and a half for some CY Young winners (more like 16-25% of a season). The total may not jibe with underlying data, and it’s never all attributable to the starter, but it’s a ridiculous chasm nonetheless, larger than your “purer” neutralized measures by a magnitude of 5 to 8 times.
That’s a pretty muddled picture in my book. If you like the guy who most often gave his team some hypothetical chance to win, be my guest. I’ll go with the guy who most often won. As long as he’s not named Vukovich, Hoyt or Stoney. And trust me, my guy isnt :- )
by Diamondhacks on Aug 29, 2008 4:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Personal Invective
In the end, thats all you are really interested in, not the debate points itself. At least you’re consistent. You didn’t engage in this debate because you feel strongly about the Cy Young race or the points raised. You simply see it as a vehicle to start yet another flame war of personal attacks.
I’d continue to debate you on the matter, but whats the point really ? This is not a cut and run. You refuse to actually address the central point raised, (the context of team support and how that affects wins), because that would compromise your efforts to intertwine every point with some kind of personal attack.
Pathetic
You didn’t engage in this debate…
Oh please. I started it, forwarded it at every opportunity and judging from your latest non substantitive whine, ended it.
You refuse to actually address the central point raised, (the context of team support and how that affects wins),
Refused to address? You cant be serious. Let’s see. There’s:
Reasons for [Webb’s win superiority] are both within and beyond the respective pitchers’ control.
There’s:
who helps his team win the most – and there’s a variety of ways to look at that ( ie assessing the importance of Wins is not a mere numerical calculation).
There’s:
the most satisfying answer to me is some hybrid of both approaches.
There’s:
The [win] total may not jibe with underlying data, and it’s never all attributable to the starter…
Heck, I gladly volunteered that some of your data is “purer” than mere Wins, and actually insist on incorporating the essence of your measures into my analysis – which is a greater intellectual courtesy than you’ve extended to me. I simply reject that your trusty measures, often carried out to three decimal places, exhaust our knowledge on the subject.
So, this rather dismissive accusation that I’ve dodged the debate or havent acknowledged your central point or whatever is, despite preemptive protestations, pure cut and run deflection. I dont agree with you. I’ve challenged your claims, invective free at first, which apparently unnerved you sufficiently to get all pissy with me:
Yours was just another attempt to affix all value to a pitcher based on how many "Wins" he is credited with. But as can be seen above, even that didn’t hold up under just a little bit more scrutiny.
This really wasn’t one of your better efforts DH
And you say I cant read and decry my debate tactics? Talk about pa-the-tic. So yeah, it deteriorated from there, aided by the fact you dodged probably half a dozen of my points to bludgeon us with the breaking news Lincecum is really really good. The comparative magnitude of Win vs ERA+ gaps. The legitimate role of “luck” in postseason awards. The distinction between Webb and past big winners like Vukovich/Hoyt/Stone. My brief but elegant rebuttal to your BFD dismissal on the Giants and Dbacks W/L records. The distinction between inning efficiency (or runs and outs if you prefer) vs the unit measure of a game. There’s plenty to chew on for anyone debating in good faith.
Even your most compelling claims, for example that Lincecum a) has only had one game all year where he didn’t give his team a chance to win, and b) when Webb loses, he gets crushed – are at best subjective constructs (similar to my introduction of so called Quality Starts), and at worst, collapse under really elementary scrutiny.
On June 22, Tim gave up five earned in just 5IP and his team lost to the Royals. (He avoided the loss, btw, thx to some fortuitous support). Was that one of those “chances” you’re talking about? Or was it July 8, when he yielded 9 hits, 4 walks & four earned in just six against the Mets – and lost 7-0? Or July 20th, when he gave up five earned in six and lost to the Brewers 7-4? Or August 12, when he pitched well but couldnt go five after a comebacker and his team lost 12-4? Or June 16th, when he yielded a couple more homers to the Tigers at cavernous Pac Bell, and four earned over seven, but the Giants won the game 8-6?
None of this is intended to disparage Lincecum, of course – it’s to reveal to others how misleading your assertion is. As far as Webb getting crushed, I count six such subpar starts (compared to Lincecum’s five) and agree some of Webb’s losses were more catastrophic, but would also point out that three of those were in baseball’s best hitter’s park (per ESPN Park factor). How big a deal is it? I dont know, but going from memory, it seems Randy Johnson (who was better than either of these guys) had several seasons where five starts or so out of his 35 (v the Cardinals, Braves and Mets, IIRC) were pretty hopeless. IOW, a win is a win and a loss is a loss and at season’s end you try to synthesize everything . Wins. Losses. ERA. Run Support. Park factor, whatever. As I’m sure you know, Tim and Brandon are each credited with one tough loss and zero cheap wins – whatever that means.
It is…ahem….fairly obvious…at least to me, that these guys are neck and neck.
Have a great day.
— DH
P.S. In terms of invective, I was joking about the hair.
by Diamondhacks on Aug 29, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
And with that
I think I ’ll declare this thread officially closed.
At least until after Webb’s next start. :-)
by Jim McLennan on Aug 29, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree
I think Webb is the overwhelming favorite. I really think the difference in ERA is negligible. I mean, it isn’t like Webb is that far behind him. I always thought the ballparks were an equalizer. Nice to see the stats agree.
Whenever I hear people make the case for Lincecum they say he has more strikeouts and is more “dominating”. Well, Webb isn’t even a strikeout pitcher and still ranks in the top 10 in the NL. How can you compare him in terms of strikeouts against someone like Lincecum? As to the other factor “dominating”…. Well, Lincecum’s WHIP is 1.19. Webb’s is 1.10. Don’t really see how Lincecum is so much better than Webb there.
As for Sabathia, people talk about his record since coming to the Brewers. But, is he really doing that much better than Webb over the same time period?
Sabathia post All-Star break: 6-0, 1.41 ERA, WHIP 1.00
Webb (not including tonight): 6-0, 1.53 ERA, WHIP 0.94
Again, don’t see much difference. Webb’s season long consistency, combined with leading the league in wins should win him the award easily. Especially if gets up over 21-22 wins. Playing in front of the DBacks offense.
Not to mention
the fact that Webb hasn’t had as much help from his defense. He’s allowed 9 unearned runs, compared to 4 for Lincecum.
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
Webb's CYA is not a lock, but
he remains the solid frontrunner by virtue of the 19-5 record, and the fact he’s very roughly indistinguishable from Lincecum, Volquez, Dempster & Sabathia in terms of runs allowed in context. That’s true, even after tonight.
What’s considerably less clear is who’s the best pitcher in the National League. Based on ERA+, IP and the fact the SF pen has squandered more of his outings, the case for Lincecum to date is equally as good as Webb’s. Maybe a little better.
Giants fan!!
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
by DbacksSkins on Aug 27, 2008 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Well done.
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
I think I love you. Thank you!
It's like living with a six-year old.
by 4 Corners Fan on Aug 27, 2008 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Uh oh....
he’s married??
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
Factors into W/L record
To be sure. Not much difference: Webb gets 4.76, Lincecum 4.60, without any park adjustment. Webb has had 11 starts in which he had 3 or less runs support, Lincecum 12.
by Jim McLennan on Aug 27, 2008 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions
D'oh!
Too many similar-looking windows open. Thx!
by Jim McLennan on Aug 27, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions
And
Isn’t that exactly why win-loss record is over-rated as a way to evaluate pitchers?
"Only one thing is gonna walk you through this, Mal. Belief."
Yes, but voters do factor in win-loss.
2004- Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens
The best rotation lies in the desert.
And another question who has had more blown wins( Lincecum had one against us, July 26th).
and who has had more games in which the team came back and won, despite said pitchers poor outing( July 3, The Comback against Milwaukee).
The best rotation lies in the desert.
Traitor!!
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
You love Lincecum!
Not Webby!!
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
It was an example, since I don't know any games in which Lincecum has had a blown win.
The best rotation lies in the desert.
?
??
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
??
?!?
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
!!
!?!
Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers: Filling the dubious shoes left open by Barry Bonds and the Giants.
Please
Don’t make me lock this thread down…
by Jim McLennan on Aug 28, 2008 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Question for Jim
After posting on this thread, my comment disappeared for maybe 20 mins, then reappeared. This occurred on two separate posts, hours apart. Any idea why?
thanks in advance
by Diamondhacks on Aug 29, 2008 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Josh Hamilton on public relapse: ‘It was just wrong. That’s all it comes down to.’
- Photo: The Marlins’ ridiculous-looking home run sculpture is almost complete
- Yankees GM Brian Cashman lures alleged stalker into police dragnet
- Report: Josh Hamilton had a relapse with alcohol
- Happy Birthday Boy! Wes Ferrell, the best-hitting pitcher of all-time, would be 104
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
