Roy Oswalt Gets the Loss: Why Wins and Losses Don't Properly Evaluate a Pitcher's Performance
Aside from some first inning bad luck and a second inning HR to Brian Schneider, Roy Oswalt was dominant. He looked like Roy Oswalt, not that chump we saw at the beginning of the season. However, he got the Roger Clemens treatment, which I guess we can write off to facing one of the best pitchers in baseball (who, ironically, has been the subject of a lot of criticism because of his meaningless W-L record, this must be God's will). The question is though: Did Roy Oswalt lose this game?
There are a number of tools we can employ to discern where the burden of the loss falls and while I'm sure most of you can easily jump to the conclusion "No, he didn't, please stop you're boring me," I'm going to proceed nonetheless for the simple fact that I have a soap box. Suckers. Although I guess you could just stop reading.
First, and possibly the most novel to me, is the Bill James Game Score. For those of you old enough to possible be my father, and even my father too (though this might not be up on Monday when he checks it, but "Hi, Dad."), might have actually read this in a Baseball Abstract, but I didn't stumble across this until this summer. I like it because it's simple, but very telling, and I think it accounts for a variety of different factors adequately. How it works is (and I'm lazy so I'm just going to quote this from another website -- hopefully it caught your attention and compelled to keep reading this drivel) is
Like I said, it's simple, but somewhat telling and useful. Roy's start last night scored an 68. If you're like me, you said, "not to shabby." I don't have my copy of Will Carrol's Saving the Pitcher on hand, but if I recall, that's a pretty good score although, it is a ways behind the best score ever tallied of 105. Don't worry though, it was by some guy named Kerry Wood -- apparently the dude struck out 20, gave up a single to some no namer, and then managed to hit a guy who was a magnet for HBP's (this was all against some team that was supposed to win the World Series, but broke their hometown's collective heart). My digressions aside, what Roy's score of 68 last night tells us, is that he pitched a good game.
One novel measure down, my favorite to go.
FanGraphs.com is easily one of the greatest sites out there on the net (just behind this site, HardBallTimes.com, and MLBTradeRumors.com). For each game, it tracks the probability of each team winning the game based on a comprehensive model of probability devised by Tom Tango (Tango Tiger). They look something like this:
Looking at this, we see that once Roy gave up the 2 run HR, things just got worse for the Astros. However, we can also tell, thanks to Fan Graphs, how each event in the game marginally contributed to the result of a win or a loss. The sum total of every event always works out to 1. This is convenient, because if you'll note, to start each game both teams are assigned a 50/50 shot a victory. The totals of each player's "event" can be seen here. For those of you still reading, but too lazy to click, I'll save you the click. Roy's impact on the game, as a pitcher, was -7.5% (i.e. his efforts as a pitcher "lost" 7.5% of our share 50% share of the win). Our offense, however, lost the winby (can anyone guess it?) 42.5%. That's correct, our lack of any clutch hitting resulted in a loss at 42.5% of our win. Given that as a team, the Astros, only possessed 50% of a win to start the game, they really contributed to an astounding 85% of a loss with Roy chipping in the other 15%.
A few remarks on WPA and I'll stop boring the crap out of you. LIke ERA or Wins and Losses, it does a poor job of separating the pitching from the defense. So it alone cannot be used to say that offense or pitching lost a single game. It can, however, suggest an answer which needs to be validated with evidence. I chose to throw out Bill James' Game Score. From that, or from watching the game, we can deduce that if Roy Oswalt threw a 4 Hit, 6K to no BB, 8IP game, then it's really hard to hang the loss on Oswalt's shoulders. The best we can do, is give him 15% of the credit and the focus our ire on the bats. For this reason, among a whole host of very rational and credible arguments, I think it's safe to say, assigning pitchers wins and losses is arbitrary and useless, because they have only a small stake in determining the outcome of a baseball game.
And with that, I'll shut up (you can add your "AMEN"s to the comments section, but feel free to simply click and let me know how you feel:
Read Related
Comments
More than anything
I hope people recognize that I posted this at 4:30 AM.
Insomnia, a gift and a curse.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Aug 23, 2008 4:39 AM CDT 0 recs
Wow
You were up earlier than I was. Great article. If you had a bubble for “Nice!” then that’s what I would have voted for. (I mean, I’m sure you’re an asset to humanity and all, but it is 6:30 in the morning, yo.)
by Danyah on Aug 23, 2008 6:28 AM CDT 0 recs
Humility is my favorite trait.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 11:19 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Win's aren't the best stat to gauge a pitcher by
but I still value the win/loss stat. I kind of use it as the quick and dirty way to eliminate the good from the bad…
Ultimately, getting a win is the ultimate goal for a pitcher… and a pitcher who constantly goes out and gets wins has to be doing something right…
I mean, look at the list below… this is the top 20 pitchers in baseball sorted by wins… This list doesn’t exactly have a bunch of scrubs on it…
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on Aug 23, 2008 7:49 AM CDT 0 recs
*note - Sabathia doesn't have enough wins in either league
but should be on the list at # 13 in the leagues combined.
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Aug 23, 2008 7:58 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I also put more value in wins
as a career stat than a year by year stat…
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Aug 23, 2008 9:33 AM CDT
up
0 recs
You could do another list, and I will later,
Of run support. You wanna guess who’d be at the top of that list?
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 11:20 AM CDT
up
0 recs
The Results:
Brandon Webb: 4.86 Runs/ game started (the Dbacks have never not scored while he was pitching)
Cliff Lee: 5.24 Runs/ game started
AJ Burnett: 4.69 (He has actually had a lot of low run support games, 6 of 3 or less runs)
Mussina: 5.45 (0 no run games and only 1 1 run game in his starts by the Yankees)
Cook: 5.23
Halladay: 4.25, the lowest so far. He’s definitely earned his wins.
Dice-BB: 5.65, that he’s been effective this year is a testament to the word, luck.
Roy Oswalt: 4.33, only Halladay has been worse off. Except, Roy has had the Astros put up a goose egg 4 times in his starts.
I’m stopping there, but I think I’ve made my point: wins are arbitrary. These guys have been good pitchers, some average, but the one thing they have in common, is they’ve been given a lot of run support to work with (except Halladay, kudos to him, he should probably be the AL Cy-Young). How is that the pitcher’s job?
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 12:02 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Oh Yeah
All the numbers are from baseballreferences.com’s individual Game Logs for each pitcher.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 12:03 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Wasn't really a point to make...
We all understand that value of run support… I mean… we watched Clemens in 2005 & 2006…
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Aug 23, 2008 2:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Then how can you still defend wins as a measure of pitcher's skill?
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 2:44 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You're a pretty smart guy
figure it out…
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Aug 23, 2008 5:48 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You'd think that after the 1987 season, Astros fans wouldn't focus on pitcher W-L.
Nolan Ryan had the best ERA (2.76) on the team, but went 8-16. Is anyone really going to say that Mike Scott was the better pitcher between them? Or that Bob Knepper was roughly Ryan’s equal that season?
Of course, we all remember 2005, too, when Roger Clemens posted a 1.87 ERA (the best of his career), but only went 13-8.
by Only_A_Lad on Aug 23, 2008 8:06 AM CDT 0 recs
But was that the exception or the rule?
“Game Score” has its flaws as well.
by ol Pete on
Aug 23, 2008 10:17 AM CDT
up
0 recs
So true.
They reward high K, low BB performances. But that’s also an effective way to isolate the performance of a pitcher that’s his responsibility.
Neither of the two measures I presented are perfect, but the combination, I think, make a strong case for the fact that assigning Roy Oswalt a loss is arbitrary, and somewhat counterintuitive/productive.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Aug 23, 2008 11:48 AM CDT
up
0 recs


















