Randy Wells Splooge-a-thon

[RV]

If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?

I'd like to think at least Eli is with me.  No?

Settle down, statsnob. Wells has clearly been better than Happ, but even using statfaggotry it's not completely ridiculous to have Happ in the discussion.

Wells
1.14 WHIP
2.83 K/BB
160 ERA+
3.73 FIP
2.0 WAR

Happ
1.16 WHIP
2.17 K/BB
144 ERA+
4.21 FIP
1.2 WAR

Okay, my statnaivete is well documented, but FIP and WAR are clearly made-up.

I'm sure Oleg the Statcromancer could explain it better, but the lower the FIP and the higher the WAR, the better. From the Hardball Times:

Fielding Independent Pitching, a measure of all those things for which a pitcher is specifically responsible. The formula is (HR*13+(BB+HBP-IBB)*3-K*2)/IP, plus a league-specific factor (usually around 3.2) to round out the number to an equivalent ERA number. FIP helps you understand how well a pitcher pitched, regardless of how well his fielders fielded.

Here's more than you'd ever want to know about WAR:

WAR is wins above replacement.  Replacement is defined very specifically for my purposes: it's the talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade.

[Kermit, B.]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Oh, man.  I suspect Sandoval will probably win it pretty easily, then.  It seems like offensive players have a slight advantage in the voters' minds than pitchers in the ROY voting.

And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob.  We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.

[Andy]

WAR is wins above replacement.  Replacement is defined very specifically for my purposes: it's the talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade.

BaseballStone calls bullshit on this.  Wells replaced Marquis who has 12 wins, so Wells WAR should be -4!

[PenFoe]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).  

So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.

[PenFoe]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Oh, man.  I suspect Sandoval will probably win it pretty easily, then.  It seems like offensive players have a slight advantage in the voters' minds than pitchers in the ROY voting.

And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob.  We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.

I JUST SAID HE WAS INELIGIBLE, IDITO.

[PenFoe]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).  

So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.

TPD.

Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.

Nice choice, Jim.

[Eli]

Okay, my statnaivete is well documented, but FIP and WAR are clearly made-up.

As RV pointed out, FIP isn't that hard to understand. 

It's most useful for when there's a great disparity between a pitcher's FIP and ERA.  For example, Matt Cain has baseball's biggest difference between his ERA (2.25) and his FIP (3.83).  He's been very good this year regardless, but FIP would indicate that he's been a little lucky.

On the other hand, someone like Cole Hamels goes the other way with his ERA at 4.68 and his FIP at 3.81. 

It's good to know for fantasy baseball purposes, if nothing else.

[Andre Dawson's Creek]

I think Wells is better simply based on his FWAP.

FWAP- The sound one's cock makes when it strikes the floor after dropping trou.

[Chuck to Chuck]

FWAP- The sound one's cock makes when it strikes the floor after dropping trou.

Tom Hanks: Nick the what?

Nick: The Dick.  [FWAP]

[Shooter]

And, Oleg, don't be a statsnob.  We're trying to predict what the VOTERS will do, so I think it's perfectly valid to consider wins and RBIs as factors in their voting, because they're a bunch of idiots.

Intrepid reader: Bill Conlin

I've been studying up on laptop science.

[Canadouche]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).  

So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.

TPD.

Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.

Nice choice, Jim.

Meh.  He only plays second base.  Why would the Cubs need another one of those?

[Weebs]

Who's even close to being in competition with Wells? Tommy Hanson?  Wells' numbers are better.  Ryan Hanigan?  Absolutely no power, even for a catcher.

I was trying to think of someone last night.  There's really nobody in the NL this year other than Hanson.  But as you pointed out, his numbers are worse, plus he's pitched 40 less innings.  I saw one website that said Sandoval qualified as a rookie, but I think his 154 PA last year doesn't make him eligible.  The only position players I can think of are McCutchen and Rasmus, both the former hasn't been up for too long and the latter has struggled quite a bit after his hot streak.

Fowler and Happ.

Fowler's not even as good as Hanigan, whom I already summarily dismissed with some twitches of my fingers.  Happ's a good call, though.  He'll get a lot of attention for (1) the nifty W-L record, (2) playing on the East Coast, and (3) playing for the defending World Champs.  Both he and Wells are 26.  EERIE, am I right, PA?

Arguing Fowler vs. Hanigan for ROY is completely useless, so I won't debate it, however I read that ROY qualifications include:

Currently a player is considered to be a rookie, and thus eligible for the award, if the player has accumulated in prior major league seasons:
   * Fewer than 130 at bats or
   * Fewer than 50 innings pitched
   * Fewer than 45 days on the active roster, excluding time on the disabled list, in military service, or time when the rosters are expanded (currently after September 1)

So I just wanted to point out that Sandoval is indeed, ineligible.

Also, it should be pointed out that non-Japanese (meaning guys that don't have prior professional experience) starting pitchers have only won the award 7 times since 1980 (includes both leagues, so 7/56=12.5%).  

So assuming either Wells or Happ wins it, they'll be in fairly elite company with perennial All-Stars like Dontrelle Willis, Jason Jennings and Steve Howe.

TPD.

Would be doing a real disservice to not point out one more guy who is eligible.

Nice choice, Jim.

Meh.  He only plays second base and third base.  Why would the Cubs need another one of those?

Man down'd.

[Kermit, B.]

I JUST SAID HE WAS INELIGIBLE, IDITO.

Ugh.  Sorry.  I was in the middle of fisking Kap's nonsense.  It must have rubbed off on me.

[Oleg]

If we're discussing wins and RBI as criteria for the award, can we just dismiss the award as a sham and move on?

I'd like to think at least Eli is with me. 

I'm with you, fresh off a discussion with a Sox fan who believes Mark Buehrle has had a better decade than Johan Santana because he has more wins.

I was having a discussion with a buddy last night.  He really likes Chris Getz.  I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good.  So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good.  I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."

I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp.  I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.

Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average.  At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.

[BH]

I was having a discussion with a buddy last night.  He really likes Chris Getz.  I mentioned to him that Getz makes an out roughly 67.5% of the time he comes to the plate, and that's not good.  So, my buddy kept insisting that his .270 BA is good.  I said, "Sure, but it still doesn't change the fact he makes outs at a rate that would make Juan Pierre proud."

I just don't understand why these concepts are so hard to grasp.  I even got him to agree that you can't score a run unless you get on base.

Finally, he asked me what I thought was an acceptable batting average.  At that point I just said .240, mentioned Adam Dunn, and walked away.

Back to the suburbs with your statfaggery.