RealGM

This is a tough one for me. Webb gives up a few more runs than peavy. Both of there K's are sick.

I think I would have to go with Peavy in a coin flip

Webb, and really it's not that close to me.

bigboy1234 wrote:Webb, and really it's not that close to me.

Jake Peavy 24GS 157.2IP 124H 43R 39ER 44BB 164K 13W 5L 2.23ERA

Brandon Webb 25GS 175.2IP 157H 66R 54ER 56BB 155K 12W 8L 2.77ERA

How is it not that close to you if it wasn't for Webbs current streak I think Peavy would be blowing him out of the water IMO.

bigboy1234 wrote:Webb, and really it's not that close to me.

Uh, what?

BTW...the correct answer is Peavy.

Basketball Jesus wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Uh, what?

Webb has lead the NL in xFIP the past 3 years and Peavy plays in quite a more friendly pitchers park.

BTW...the correct answer is Peavy.

It's so cute when you're wrong.

Peavy

Peavy

Gee, xFIP heavily favoring an extreme groundball pitcher. There's a shocker.

But since you're an expert on xFIP, maybe you can tell us what that is, bigboy.

I love it when you call me bigboy. And I know it goes with a groundball pitcher, and I'd much rather have a groundball pitcher, to me they are more consistant. Also like I said before the parks they play in are quite different.

Just curious but what's your argument for Peavy being better, because he Ks more?

A quick-and-dirty comparison of the two using my favorite quick-and-dirty metric, BP's stuff (STF):

Peavy

2004: 31
2005: 36
2006: 34
2007: 41


Webb

2004: 10
2005: 18
2006: 25
2007: 31


STF isn't a tell-all stat by any means but it is a rather decent comparative tool. Add to it that Peavy's two years younger and has a better arsenal of pitches...

Webb FTW.

bigboy1234 wrote:Just curious but what's your argument for Peavy being better, because he Ks more?

K's more, walks less, better FIP, less reliant on his defense, and he gets into tussles with cops.

Also, way to sidestep the explanation, brah.

VORP the last three years.

Webb:

2005: 46.2
2006: 68.9
2007: 48.1

Peavy:

2005: 53.1
2006: 39.2
2007: 56.3

Durability for the win.

Basketball Jesus wrote:Also, way to sidestep the explanation, brah.

The explanation, you want me to copy and paste something for ya Jesus?

Or do you want a simple thing like xFIP calculates only things a pitcher can actually control,. That extra little x is there to normalize the hr ball, ie using the flyball data. There ya go brah.

Bleeding Green wrote:VORP the last three years.

Webb:

2005: 46.2
2006: 68.9
2007: 48.1

Peavy:

2005: 53.1
2006: 39.2
2007: 56.3

Durability for the win.

???

Peavy has had a higher VORP for two of the three seasons. Oh, and he's also two years younger.

bigboy1234 wrote:
Or do you want a simple thing like xFIP calculates only things a pitcher can actually control,. That extra little x is there to normalize the hr ball, ie using the flyball data. There ya go brah.

KTHX, but I already know what xFIP stands for.


Now why does it favor GB pitchers?

Basketball Jesus wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



???

Peavy has had a higher VORP for two of the three seasons. Oh, and he's also two years younger.

Marginally higher and Webb blew him out of the water last year.

Durability FTW.

xFIP favors GB pitchers more because GB pitchers allow fewer flyballs and xFIP normalizes all flyball so that 10% (or whatever the percentage is) are homers. Or something along that line.

Wow, one season. Such a wonderful sample size.