RealGM

Despite swollen ERAs, both have been pitching extremely well this season and have been relatively hit-unlucky so far.

David Bush
Bondage Man


Out of the two, who stands to see a bigger turnaround in the back-of-baseball-card stats (e.g. wins, ERA, K)? What do you predict for final numbers for each pitcher?

Bonderman is the better pitcher, but Bush will have the bigger turn around in "back-of-baseball-card stats."

Bonderman hasn't even been that unlucky(.317 BABIP), now a guy like Bedard has something to be mad at.

How is luck considered a quantifiable stat?

Educate me.

lpsevier wrote:How is luck considered a quantifiable stat?

Educate me.

BABIP = batting average on balls in play.

Normal BABIP is .290, anything lower than .290 and you are supposedly getting lucky, and anything higher than .290 and you are supposedly getting unlucky. For example, if you have a .350 BABIP, balls in play that are normally caught by fielders are finding holes at an abnormal, unlucky rate. Vice versa for the other side of the spectrum.

Luck = 3((black cats paths

If you takes W-L out of consideration, is it really even necessary to have two groups though?

I mean most defenses make the normal plays, so I guess I just don't understand the point of the statistic. Is a pitcher really "unlucky" when he gives up a bloop single?

I understand how the stat is calculated, I'm guess I'm really just questioning its validity.

Edit - valid was a bad word, obviously its valid, but you know what I mean.

Bondo

lpsevier wrote:If you takes W-L out of consideration, is it really even necessary to have two groups though?

I mean most defenses make the normal plays, so I guess I just don't understand the point of the statistic. Is a pitcher really "unlucky" when he gives up a bloop single?

I understand how the stat is calculated, I'm guess I'm really just questioning its validity.

Remember: there is no

Gotcha, gracias.