OT: Starting pitchers per rotation spot

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

Anyone know of anything that shows pitchers stats per rotation slot?
Ex. Teams #1 pitchers averaged 192 innings, 12 wins, era 3.45, 144 so, 49 bb, etc, etc, Teams #2 pitchers averaged....

Same with hitters. Anyone know of that one say based on position and/or batting slot for teams?

chibears55 · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
Anyone know of anything that shows pitchers stats per rotation slot?
Ex. Teams #1 pitchers averaged 192 innings, 12 wins, era 3.45, 144 so, 49 bb, etc, etc, Teams #2 pitchers averaged....

Same with hitters. Anyone know of that one say based on position and/or batting slot for teams?

Wouldn't that be hard to do with pitchers as they for whatever reason miss starts and sometimes they readjust the rotation at some point during year, especially after break..

Makes it hard to determine what " slot " their actually in

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

chibears55 said:
Wouldn't that be hard to do with pitchers as they for whatever reason miss starts and sometimes they readjust the rotation at some point during year, especially after break..

Makes it hard to determine what " slot " their actually in

hard but doable.

See I believe that hitting is more rare than pitching is nothing but a myth. Given the fact that there are on average less than 3 starting pitchers per team that qualify for the era title for the past 15 years I was wondering what stats might show pitching still not being king when it comes to winning.

Parade_Rain · Sep 26, 2014

It shouldn't be that hard to compile. Take each teams starting roster and line them up by ERA or something and compare them on a spreadsheet across the line??

dabynsky · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
Anyone know of anything that shows pitchers stats per rotation slot?
Ex. Teams #1 pitchers averaged 192 innings, 12 wins, era 3.45, 144 so, 49 bb, etc, etc, Teams #2 pitchers averaged....

Same with hitters. Anyone know of that one say based on position and/or batting slot for teams?

B-Ref has the numbers of hitters based on position and spot in the batting order in their splits data. Problem with the position is that it adds all the numbers of guys that play any time at a given spot. So like Bonifacio for the Cubs this year has his numbers added to every position he played. So it does skew the numbers a bit from that perspective. The problem with the pitchers is that how do you define a number 1? I mean it would be easy if you just did it by innings pitched, but that might skew the ERA numbers if say a team's true number 1 is hurt for most of the year, etc.

I would be interested in seeing the numbers on this, but frankly the scarcity of pitching vs. hitting can be shown much simpler. Look at the number of runs being scored, batting averages, etc. We are reaching low levels of offensive production not seen since they lowered the pitching mound. That tells us what we need to know about pitching talent vs. hitting talent at the moment.

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
B-Ref has the numbers of hitters based on position and spot in the batting order in their splits data. Problem with the position is that it adds all the numbers of guys that play any time at a given spot. So like Bonifacio for the Cubs this year has his numbers added to every position he played. So it does skew the numbers a bit from that perspective. The problem with the pitchers is that how do you define a number 1? I mean it would be easy if you just did it by innings pitched, but that might skew the ERA numbers if say a team's true number 1 is hurt for most of the year, etc.

I would be interested in seeing the numbers on this, but frankly the scarcity of pitching vs. hitting can be shown much simpler. Look at the number of runs being scored, batting averages, etc. We are reaching low levels of offensive production not seen since they lowered the pitching mound. That tells us what we need to know about pitching talent vs. hitting talent at the moment.

I don't think it does. It says hitting may have been overinflated to me

dabynsky · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
I don't think it does. It says hitting may have been overinflated to me

The fact that we are reaching historic lows suggests that it was overinflated for five decades?

SilenceS · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
The fact that we are reaching historic lows suggests that it was overinflated for five decades?

Lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
The fact that we are reaching historic lows suggests that it was overinflated for five decades?

The lowering had an affect...smaller parks. .better training...rampant drugs...baseball cleans up and yes hitting comes back down

You may not buy that but its a reasonable explanation

dabynsky · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
The lowering had an affect...smaller parks. .better training...rampant drugs...baseball cleans up and yes hitting comes back down

You may not buy that but its a reasonable explanation

But parks are still largely small, there is better training for all, pitchers used drugs as well, and still hitting is declining to levels not seen since the mound was higher. I would like to see counter evidence because all that has been offered to counter the notion that hitting has become scarcer than pitching is suppositions like this.

chibears55 · Sep 26, 2014

I think they both have dropped the past few years..

Years past just about every team had a top starter or two and at least one or two star hitter..

Now not many teams have that top starter and or a star hitter..

They have good players but not that damn wish he was a cub or sox type player(s)

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
But parks are still largely small, there is better training for all, pitchers used drugs as well, and still hitting is declining to levels not seen since the mound was higher. I would like to see counter evidence because all that has been offered to counter the notion that hitting has become scarcer than pitching is suppositions like this.

And id like to see proof that shows hitting is scarcer than pitching

Btw I did provide that less than 3 SP qualify per team for the past 15

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
B-Ref has the numbers of hitters based on position and spot in the batting order in their splits data. Problem with the position is that it adds all the numbers of guys that play any time at a given spot. So like Bonifacio for the Cubs this year has his numbers added to every position he played. So it does skew the numbers a bit from that perspective. The problem with the pitchers is that how do you define a number 1? I mean it would be easy if you just did it by innings pitched, but that might skew the ERA numbers if say a team's true number 1 is hurt for most of the year, etc.

I would be interested in seeing the numbers on this, but frankly the scarcity of pitching vs. hitting can be shown much simpler. Look at the number of runs being scored, batting averages, etc. We are reaching low levels of offensive production not seen since they lowered the pitching mound. That tells us what we need to know about pitching talent vs. hitting talent at the moment.

R u sure?

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hiruns4.shtml#

SilenceS · Sep 26, 2014

They don't qualify cause teams don't throw there pitchers like they used to. Look at the qs stay. 6 innings and 3 earned runs is a qs. That is nonsense in my eyes. They are very stingy on pitch counts now. You throw a 100 pitches and you are yanked a lot of the time. The days of going 120 to 130 is gone unless you have a stud. It's a different game. Baseball is evolving and pitchers are throwing harder then ever. Hitting is so down especially power. Strikeouts are up. It shows pitching is dominating.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

SilenceS said:
They don't qualify cause teams don't throw there pitchers like they used to. Look at the qs stay. 6 innings and 3 earned runs is a qs. That is nonsense in my eyes. They are very stingy on pitch counts now. You throw a 100 pitches and you are yanked a lot of the time. The days of going 120 to 130 is gone unless you have a stud. It's a different game. Baseball is evolving and pitchers are throwing harder then ever. Hitting is so down especially power. Strikeouts are up. It shows pitching is dominating.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or things being balanced more

dabynsky · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
R u sure?

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hiruns4.shtml#

Total runs doesn't reflect the offensive ability since there are more teams and more games played throughout the sample, but yes I overstated the amount that runs has decreased. We are currently at levels that haven't been seen in two decades right now.

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
Total runs doesn't reflect the offensive ability since there are more teams and more games played throughout the sample, but yes I overstated the amount that runs has decreased. We are currently at levels that haven't been seen in two decades right now.

Good point on teams.
Up four teams since what...93?

It looks steroid explosion is the answer to me

dabynsky · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
Good point on teams.
Up four teams since what...93?

It looks steroid explosion is the answer to me

I still think that is terribly simplistic since we have evidence that steroids have been around well beyond the 90s. I mean Tom House admitted to taking steroids. Also implies that PEDs only benefited hitters.

brett05 · Sep 26, 2014

dabynsky said:
I still think that is terribly simplistic since we have evidence that steroids have been around well beyond the 90s. I mean Tom House admitted to taking steroids. Also implies that PEDs only benefited hitters.

Given what's come out it has benefitted the hitters by a wide margin....where's the list of great steroid pitchers???

I think hitting is just coming down some but isn't anywhere as rare as pitching. Now raise the mound and we got something

SilenceS · Sep 26, 2014

brett05 said:
Good point on teams.
Up four teams since what...93?

It looks steroid explosion is the answer to me

Did pitchers not take steroids? Also, why is more players are throwing mud 90s more then ever if steroids was the complete answer. Oh and juice still exist in a different form

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OT: Starting pitchers per rotation spot

867-5309

Well-known member

867-5309

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Fringe Average Mod

867-5309

Fringe Average Mod

Moderator

867-5309

Fringe Average Mod

Well-known member

867-5309

867-5309

Moderator

867-5309

Fringe Average Mod

867-5309

Fringe Average Mod

867-5309

Moderator