Wins: a stat worth predicting?

[KolbSaves]

Overall I think we can guess within 2 or 3 wins either way for each pitcher based on quality of pitcher, quality of team, and division. The problem is that a range of 4-6 wins has a HUGE impact on the value of a pitcher. Should we be devaluing wins in our valuation methods as compared to the other 3 catagories for starting pitchers?

I am interested to hear what the cafe has to say.

(The same argument could be made with closers but since one save is far less of a % of their total saves, the impact on save fluctuation isn't as large on overall rankings.)

[GotowarMissAgnes]

In order of emphasis in selecting starting pitchers, I focus on K, WHIP, ERA, and wins. Ks are the thing most clearly under the pitcher's control and more predictive of future success. Pitcher's also have significant control over BB, but WHIP mixes in those hits that are so dependent on defense. So, really, here I look at BB/9, then try to factor in things that impact hits, like park, defense, etc. For ERA, I really focus on the DIPS ERA, rather than the straight ERA. DIPS ERA is more predictive of future performance than the straight ERA. Last I focus on wins. Too much team and even within team, run support, effect, to consider it a reliable stat to predict.

[asumikey222]

If a guy's on a good team, I rank him higher than he should otherwise be ranked because he will probably get more wins. To give you an even more egregious example, I have an H2H league where W and L are cats, there it would be just moronic to throw up my hands because I can't predict either category with complete accuracy, same for wins. The fact that it depends on more things outside of a pitcher's control doesn't mean it's not reasonably quantifiable. The issue of how much weight to give to wins varies from person to person, but obviously you have to adjust values according to a reasonable estimation of wins and I think this is what most decent players do.

[GotowarMissAgnes]

If a guy's on a good team, I rank him higher than he should otherwise be ranked because he will probably get more wins. To give you an even more egregious example, I have an H2H league where W and L are cats, there it would be just moronic to throw up my hands because I can't predict either category with complete accuracy, same for wins. The fact that it depends on more things outside of a pitcher's control doesn't mean it's not reasonably quantifiable. The issue of how much weight to give to wins varies from person to person, but obviously you have to adjust values according to a reasonable estimation of wins and I think this is what most decent players do.

It's not that's it is quantifiable, but the fact that it is more under the pitcher's control means it's less likely to vary. And, less variance means more value.

[Amazinz]

I count Wins equally but I try to err on the side of caution. I use weighted three-years to determine Win projections and then I fudge them (team, park, other peoples opionion, published cheat sheets, etc.). When I'm done tweaking I round them down so that I end up with 4 tiers: 0, 5, 10, and 15 Win pitchers and base my draft value on that.

[CubsFan7724]

Its just way too difficult to accurately predict them, so it should be one of the last things you use to judge a pitcher by, only as a tiebreaker.

[asumikey222]

If a guy's on a good team, I rank him higher than he should otherwise be ranked because he will probably get more wins. To give you an even more egregious example, I have an H2H league where W and L are cats, there it would be just moronic to throw up my hands because I can't predict either category with complete accuracy, same for wins. The fact that it depends on more things outside of a pitcher's control doesn't mean it's not reasonably quantifiable. The issue of how much weight to give to wins varies from person to person, but obviously you have to adjust values according to a reasonable estimation of wins and I think this is what most decent players do.

It's not that's it is quantifiable, but the fact that it is more under the pitcher's control means it's less likely to vary. And, less variance means more value.

I was mostly addressing the poster's title- "Wins: a stat worth predicting?" To which my answer is yes, for obvious reasons.

[KolbSaves]

I count Wins equally but I try to err on the side of caution. I use weighted three-years to determine Win projections and then I fudge them (team, park, other peoples opionion, published cheat sheets, etc.). When I'm done tweaking I round them down so that I end up with 4 tiers: 0, 5, 10, and 15 Win pitchers and base my draft value on that.

If two guys are between 10 and 15 in your mind (say both at 12 or 13) and you put one on 10 and one on 15, the 15 guy is going to kill the guy in projected value 95% of the time. I know you have to draw the line somewhere, but that's a huge jump for two guys who would otherwise be close. I can see how this would be easier to assign players though.

[KolbSaves]

If a guy's on a good team, I rank him higher than he should otherwise be ranked because he will probably get more wins. To give you an even more egregious example, I have an H2H league where W and L are cats, there it would be just moronic to throw up my hands because I can't predict either category with complete accuracy, same for wins. The fact that it depends on more things outside of a pitcher's control doesn't mean it's not reasonably quantifiable. The issue of how much weight to give to wins varies from person to person, but obviously you have to adjust values according to a reasonable estimation of wins and I think this is what most decent players do.

It's not that's it is quantifiable, but the fact that it is more under the pitcher's control means it's less likely to vary. And, less variance means more value.

I was mostly addressing the poster's title- "Wins: a stat worth predicting?" To which my answer is yes, for obvious reasons.

Yeah I should have made it more about how much it should be counted on or how big of a factor it should be in total value for a pitcher.

[Nerfherders]

I completely discount wins when I'm evaluating pitchers. I look mostly at K rates and whips. However, if its a close call between two pitchers, the tiebreak would be what kind of offense is behind him. For example I would take John Thomson over Doug Davis because Thomson has a legit shot at 15 wins. Davis maybe 12.