Rays = what Jays should strive for

[Kurtz]

A reliever that only pitches 60+ IP a season is not very valuable to a team. Do you really need WAR to tell you what common sense should?

I'd love to take a debate in the direction of common sense.

Your argument would contend that a long relief guy who'll give you say 80 innings is more valuable than a closer who'll put in 60. You're ok with this stance?

[Kurtz]

Also, Schad I can accept that Hellickson and Morrow are outliers in the WAR formula.

But outliers should not be used to prove a case, so you bringing up WAR to make a point in reference to those two was done in bad faith.

[Weems]

WAR is context neutral. It's not intended to measure situations. Your expectations are broken.

[Kurtz]

WAR is context neutral. It's not intended to measure situations. Your expectations are broken.

Incorrect. If WAR is context neutral, you absolutely cannot apply it to a position like closer, which is 100% based on context.

Offcourse I've never trusted WAR to judge a closer, thus my expectations are affirmed.

Seems that you, however did...

[Schad]

It doesn't really require a study.

This is something that came out of a debate that myself and Schad had perhaps a month ago.

Closers are in a unique situation where it makes all the difference in the world if they give up 1 run in a 1-run save situation, or 1 run in a 3-run save situation. In the latter case that run is inconsequential, in the former, it means everything.

I asked Schad if the WAR stat could tell the difference, and he admitted that no, it could not.

Thus the WAR stat is broken for closers. Shad did bring up another stat that does a better job of capturing the difference, though.

Again though, WPA is descriptive; it only tells you how the pitcher has done in the situations in which they pitched, and little to nothing about how they would do if placed in those situations again. Thus, Jonathan Papelbon`s WPA fluctuated massively...he posted his best numbers in many respects in 2008, but as he gave up runs at the wrong time, his WPA was poor. Didn`t mean he suddenly became less of a steely-eyed closer, he just got caught out by natural variance in the numbers.

[Weems]

WAR is context neutral. It's not intended to measure situations. Your expectations are broken.

Incorrect. If WAR is context neutral, you absolutely cannot apply it to a position like closer, which is 100% based on context.

Offcourse I've never trusted WAR to judge a closer, thus my expectations are affirmed.

Seems that you, however did...

I don't have the illusion that closers have a great influence on the outcome of a particular game or season, which is where we're split. You can win or lose a game in any inning. There's context in every at-bat.

I don't just look at WAR and make assertions - I don't even look at WAR often and WPA just about never.

[Randle McMurphy]

And with that one start against the NYY, Brandon Morrow has a more impressive (or more masterful?) start than Jeremy Hellickson has ever had.

[Randle McMurphy]

Your argument would contend that a long relief guy who'll give you say 80 innings is more valuable than a closer who'll put in 60. You're ok with this stance?

Assuming equal effectiveness, yes, the 80 IP pitcher is more valuable.

[youreachiteach]

See Randle; this is what excellent pitching is in a meaningful game on the road against an A+ lineup--but I guess Brandon I get strikeouts Morrow is better. What a joke.

[Randle McMurphy]

See Randle; this is what excellent pitching is in a meaningful game on the road against an A+ lineup--but I guess Brandon I get strikeouts Morrow is better. What a joke.

Morrow was certainly better in his last start than Hellickson was tonight, yes.

[youreachiteach]

Against a C lineup? Really?

You're kidding yourself. Take the three best hitters out of any lineup in a game the Yankees thought was clearly irrelevant and you are crowing about 1 good start in 10?

By the way, Morrow even said himself the reason he improved even in that start was due to using a better selection of pitches; which is exactly what I have been arguing the whole season.

[Schad]

See Randle; this is what excellent pitching is in a meaningful game on the road against an A+ lineup--but I guess Brandon I get strikeouts Morrow is better. What a joke.

53 strikes on 96 pitches, four walks. Only one hit on nineteen balls in play. Totally unsustainable, but I'm sure that when he posts numbers more in line with his peripherals next year, you'll chalk it up to a failure to make adjustments or a sudden loss of killer instinct or something.

[PimpHandStrong]

I'm sure that when he posts numbers more in line with his peripherals next year, you'll chalk it up to a failure to make adjustments or a sudden loss of killer instinct or something.

Or a lower variance in WHIP...