PDA

View Full Version : Quality Starts


Thunderstruck30
04-11-2004, 12:40 AM
As of now, the Sox starters have 5 quality starts through 5 games. Last year they led the league in the stat. Does anyone else think the quality starts are underrated? I mean think about the 1-0 losses Loaiza had last year. They were quality starts and yet he still got a loss. Maybe quality starts should be looked at along with wins and losses. Any thoughts?

batmanZoSo
04-11-2004, 12:53 AM
Originally posted by Thunderstruck30
As of now, the Sox starters have 5 quality starts through 5 games. Last year they led the league in the stat. Does anyone else think the quality starts are underrated? I mean think about the 1-0 losses Loaiza had last year. They were quality starts and yet he still got a loss. Maybe quality starts should be looked at along with wins and losses. Any thoughts?

They're definitely underrated as a stat. But they don't matter too much as far as winning goes if we led the league.

kermittheefrog
04-11-2004, 01:41 AM
I'd look at quality starts as being a lot more meaningful than wins for a starting pitcher but there are still better numbers to look at. Like the stuff Michael Wolverton does for Baseball Prospectus.

MRKARNO
04-11-2004, 11:11 AM
I'm a big fan of the quality start stat. It's an indicator of how many times the pitcher has kept you in the game because sometimes, a pitcher could have a bunch of good games and then a few really bad games which overly inflate the ERA.

Railsplitter
04-11-2004, 12:59 PM
To me, a quality start is a complete game victory.

Lip Man 1
04-11-2004, 01:01 PM
You could see a lot of 'quality starts' this year if for no other reason then I'd be afraid to go to the Sox bullpen as currently constructed under any circumstances.

When you don't have much of a choice leave the starter in the game even if he's getting nicked around a bit.

You do have to tip your cap to the starters this first week, it's really a shame that the team's record isn't better then 3-2. When you get good starts you simply can not afford to not win the game.

Lip

gosox41
04-12-2004, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
You could see a lot of 'quality starts' this year if for no other reason then I'd be afraid to go to the Sox bullpen as currently constructed under any circumstances.

When you don't have much of a choice leave the starter in the game even if he's getting nicked around a bit.

You do have to tip your cap to the starters this first week, it's really a shame that the team's record isn't better then 3-2. When you get good starts you simply can not afford to not win the game.

Lip

By definition, a quality start is when a pitcher pitched at least 7 innings and gives up less then 3 runs. If my starting pitchers are doing that I don't want to go to my bullpen period.

On the flips side, one can make the argument that Wright didn't ptich that much worse then Garland. Definitely worse, but not that big of a gap.


Bob

ondafarm
04-12-2004, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
By definition, a quality start is when a pitcher pitched at least 7 innings and gives up less then 3 runs. If my starting pitchers are doing that I don't want to go to my bullpen period.




It's actually 3 runs or less in seven innings. The thought being that getting a quality start should produce a win. Getting thru seven innings giving up only three runs was all you can ask for from a starter.

NB Detroit had a lot of QS last year. Their climb into first place shouldn't be hideously surprised, adding to the offense and keeping the same pitching staff.

MRKARNO
04-12-2004, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by ondafarm
It's actually 3 runs or less in seven innings. The thought being that getting a quality start should produce a win. Getting thru seven innings giving up only three runs was all you can ask for from a starter.


You're both incorrect, it's 6 IP or more, 3 ER or less.

SSN721
04-12-2004, 08:58 AM
I would take more stock in the quality start stat if it was through 7 innings. I dont think it is unreasonable to expect a pitcher, who is decent anyway, to give up more than 3 runs over seven innings. If it was through 7 I would almost be willing to give it as much credence as a win because it is more reflective on the quality of pitcher than a win can be.

Dadawg_77
04-12-2004, 10:48 AM
I would like to be 7 innings, and 3 run no matter if they are earned or not. Like Kermit said they are better numbers out there to evaluate pitchers.

Jerko
04-12-2004, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
You're both incorrect, it's 6 IP or more, 3 ER or less.

How is Wright's outing a quality start then? 4.2 innings, 4 earned runs. I say we're 4 of 5 in quality starts.

SEALgep
04-12-2004, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Jerko
How is Wright's outing a quality start then? 4.2 innings, 4 earned runs. I say we're 4 of 5 in quality starts. We played six games.

Jerko
04-12-2004, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
We played six games.

I was reading the first post of the thread and it said 5 for 5, so now it's 5 for 6. I'll take 5 of 6 every time.