Wins most overrated stat? No way!
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 12:32 PM
You have one game to win and one starter to choose. Do you go with Nolan Ryan or Greg Maddux?
This was the culmination of a conversation spurred by a statement I read last week that left me speechless. A respected baseball writer, someone I know and admire, wrote that Tim Lincecum’s NL Cy Young Award proved that voters have “entered the 21st century and realize that wins are the most overrated statistic.”
The first jolt was the surface absurdity of such a thought. Winning is overrated? Why waste the time awarding a win to a pitcher if it so meaningless?
I was blessed to be taught baseball by a trio of successful managers: Tony La Russa, Tom Kelly and Dusty Baker. La Russa and Kelly taught the same rule about starters: winning is what matters. If a starting pitcher’s team scores one run, then he needs to pitch a shutout. If his team scores eight runs, then he can give up no more than seven runs. What matters is winning the game. La Russa saw that quality in a forgotten pitcher, Dave Stewart, and Stewart won 20 games four years in a row. Kelly won a World Series when he acceded to the demands of Jack Morris when the pitcher, who had no idea what a pitch count was, refused to leave Game 7 of the 1991 Fall Classic, going 10 innings (149 pitches) for a 1-0 win over the Braves.
Kelly corrected me once when I questioned him about why the Twins didn’t show an interest in a talented young pitcher who seemed to be on the trading block. What Kelly told me was that the pitcher would work consecutive games with these scores: 2-1, 8-7, 1-0 and 5-4. Then he asked me if I knew what the games would have in common? He quickly added the answer -- the pitcher would lose all those games. His point was that the pitcher was available because he was not a winner.
Fast forward to 2008 when I am told that wins are overrated? Has the statistical analysis revolution caused us to lose our minds? Yes, wins are not the ultimate barometer in judging a pitcher. Yes, win totals can sometimes deceive. Yes, it is good that other numbers (most notably WHIP) have been introduced to help compare pitchers. But here’s what I know: people in uniform only care about one thing – and that’s wins.
Quick quiz: How many pitchers are in the Hall of Fame with a .500 record and low WHIP?
Answer: Zero.
So I asked my colleague, Rob Tracy of Elias Sports Bureau, during a pause on a college football Saturday about this incredible concept. I pleaded with Rob to explain to me how someone so smart could declare that wins are overrated. Rob is smart and recognized my agitation. He talked about strikeouts as the best predictor of a young pitcher’s chance for success. Fair point. Then he talked about run support and how Bert Blyleven had extremely poor run support in his long career. Fair point in favor of a pitcher hoping to reach the Hall of Fame after 287 career wins.
I responded with Tom Seaver (a former colleague of mine who loved the Kelly story from above and fully endorsed the conclusion) and his 10 years with the Mets. In those years the Mets NEVER finished higher than 7th (of 12 NL teams) in runs scored. I will not take the time to painstakingly research his individual run support but it’s safe to assume the Mets didn’t score a ton on Seaver’s days to pitch.
Seaver’s record for those 10 years with poor-hitting Met teams: 182-107 (.629 winning percentage).
Then there is Nolan Ryan. Please be clear on this: I offer no attack on Ryan’s career or his Hall of Fame status. I simply look at the numbers. And Ryan’s career winning percentage was .526. The strikeouts and no-hitters made his legend. With those achievements, Ryan barely won more than he lost (32 games over .500 in 27 seasons).
In 1987, Ryan had one of the most baffling seasons for a pitcher as he led the NL in ERA (2.76), strikeouts (270) and OBA (.199) yet posted a record of 8-16. He finished fifth in the NL Cy Young Award voting. On the same team, Mike Scott went 16-13 and Jim Deshaies won 11 games.
Ryan did everything in 1987 -- except win. Was not winning more games his fault? Obviously not in whole but at some point the legacy of the greats revolves around wins.
And now I hope you see the reason I asked the question that started this tome. Ryan represents the most dominant single game pitcher of this era. Maddux represents the pitcher who simply wins, a .610 career winning percentage (Rob correctly reminded me that Maddux did have one 200 strikeout season (1998) and three other seasons where though he didn’t get 200 strikeouts, he came real close with 199, 198 and 197. And Maddux had the greatest pitching season I have witnessed in 1995 when he was 19-2 and his ERA was 1.63 while the average NL ERA was 4.18.
You are the manager for one winner-take-all game. Your choice is between Ryan and Maddux, both 300-game winners. Maddux is the greatest winner of his generation and Ryan the pitcher of that same era most capable of throwing a no-hitter or punching out 15. Who do you hand the ball to?
Rob and I finally found common ground: We both favored Maddux over Ryan in such a situation.
FIVE MORE SWINGS:
1. NOLAN RYAN THE TEAM PRESIDENT…of the Rangers has gone to the Instructional League to personally tutor the best pitching prospects in the organization. Ryan knows his team must emulate Colorado and develop a staff that can pitch well enough in a hitters’ park for the Rangers to become playoff and World Series contenders.
2. GIANTS MANAGER BRUCE BOCHY…“didn’t feel like we risked anything to win” the Cy Young for Tim Lincecum, whose pitches piled up this season as he went about boosting his credentials to win the award.
“It was time to let the leash out,” said Bochy of Lincecum’s workload. Lincecum threw more pitches (3,688) than anyone in the majors last season and had the first game of 138 pitches since Livan Hernandez in 2005. The Giants will market Lincecum’s award heavily and then pray “The Freak” stays healthy in 2009.
3. THE CY YOUNG BALLOT…specifies the award is for “the best” pitcher not the most valuable (a distinction I was unaware of last week). Interesting then that Francisco Rodriguez received NO first place votes and was not on 10 of the 28 AL Cy Young ballots. I wonder how teams will value closers in free agency this winter? The writers who voted on the Cy Young spoke clearly about how little they value them.
4. IN OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC CLIMATE…Scott Boras announced Friday he would begin entertaining “serious financial offers” for Manny Ramirez. The Dodgers $60 million offer to Ramirez is apparently not a “serious” offer in Boras’ mind. Gall knows no bounds when it comes to Boras.
5. THE MOOD OVER THE WEEKEND BY SOME TEAMS…seemed to be “can we keep our man?” After Angels owner Arte Moreno challenged Mark Teixeira to negotiate by publicly praising Manny Ramirez and then said the “door seems closed” on the team keeping free agent Francisco Rodriguez, K-Rod’s agent followed by saying his client would love to stay an Angel. Atlanta pulled out of the Jake Peavy sweepstakes so the Cubs want to know if they can keep Ryan Dempster before deciding on whether to pursue a Peavy deal with the Padres. The Phillies have seen a thin free-agent market for outfielders and are now exploring the chances of their re-signing free agent Pat Burrell.
