PDA

View Full Version : Question?


Rudy Law
12-18-2004, 11:13 PM
Does anybody know minus the 5th spot, what the team ERa was last season?...Just wondering

MisterB
12-19-2004, 04:07 AM
Does anybody know minus the 5th spot, what the team ERa was last season?...Just wondering Assuming the top 4 pitchers were:

1. Buehrle
2. Garcia/Loaiza
3. Garland
4. Schoeneweis/Contreras

Then the starts of Rauch, Grilli, Diaz, Munoz, Cotts, Stewart and Wright accumulated to 117 er in 116 innings (9.08 ERA and a 5-14 record). Removing those from the team totals lowers the team ERA to 4.55 from 4.91. A 4.55 ERA would have placed the Sox 6th in the AL instead of 11th.

Ol' No. 2
12-19-2004, 10:31 AM
Assuming the top 4 pitchers were:

1. Buehrle
2. Garcia/Loaiza
3. Garland
4. Schoeneweis/Contreras

Then the starts of Rauch, Grilli, Diaz, Munoz, Cotts, Stewart and Wright accumulated to 117 er in 116 innings (9.08 ERA and a 5-14 record). Removing those from the team totals lowers the team ERA to 4.55 from 4.91. A 4.55 ERA would have placed the Sox 6th in the AL instead of 11th.Sooo...I guess that 5th starter wasn't that important after all.

santo=dorf
12-19-2004, 11:39 AM
I took Buehrle's, Garcia's (w/Sox,) Loaiza's (w/Sox,) Schoeneweis', Garland's, and Contreras' (w/Sox) road stats from last season and they had an overall ERA of 4.07. This includes the horrendous outings from Scott in KC and Contreras in Texas and Anaheim.

PaleHoseGeorge
12-19-2004, 11:42 AM
I took Buehrle's, Garcia's (w/Sox,) Loaiza's (w/Sox,) Schoeneweis', Garland's, and Contreras' (w/Sox) road stats from last season and they had an overall ERA of 4.07. This includes the horrendous outings from Scott in KC and Contreras in Texas and Anaheim.
Yeah, that's the funny thing about some here pooh-poohing the importance of getting a #5 starter. When you do the analysis you can't help but conclude the Sox needed a #4 starter last season, too!
:cool:

Ah, some people are endlessly confused...

:bandance:

idseer
12-19-2004, 11:52 AM
Assuming the top 4 pitchers were:

1. Buehrle
2. Garcia/Loaiza
3. Garland
4. Schoeneweis/Contreras

Then the starts of Rauch, Grilli, Diaz, Munoz, Cotts, Stewart and Wright accumulated to 117 er in 116 innings (9.08 ERA and a 5-14 record). Removing those from the team totals lowers the team ERA to 4.55 from 4.91. A 4.55 ERA would have placed the Sox 6th in the AL instead of 11th.
right.
do the figures again eliminating everyone's 5th starter THEN tell me where the sox would have finished.

Ol' No. 2
12-19-2004, 11:55 AM
Yeah, that's the funny thing about some here pooh-poohing the importance of getting a #5 starter. When you do the analysis you can't help but conclude the Sox needed a #4 starter last season, too!
:cool:

Ah, some people are endlessly confused...

:bandance:Which gets back to what most knowledgable people have been saying all along. The Sox don't need a 5th starter. They already have one.