ERA vs. WHIP

[Dawgpound 1613]

Well, ERA and WHIP are related, and R, HR, and RBI are related. If the guy doesn't like it, find a league that doesn't use the stat he doesn't like. You can set up leagues, nowadays, using many different stats. That he's last in both only makes it sound like a whine.

If you want no relation, play 2x2 with HR/SB on offense and W/SV on pitching - can't get both on any AB for the former or both in any game for the latter.

[CPHFighter1]

Look at Andy Pettitte. He's always given up a lot of hits, but has managed to keep a pretty good ERA with a bad WHIP.

Doesn't that just mean he pitches well out of the stretch?

As far as ERA still being used as a household stat, runs are still what determines who wins and loses games (as much as the fantasy baseball world would like to argue). An even worse stat of pitcher performance is wins; it's heavily dependant upon the hitting behind you (obviously, but I don't think it was mentioned yet). A 300 game winner will always be a shoo-in Hall of Famer because the game is about wins.

[SaintsOfTheDiamond]

Look at Andy Pettitte. He's always given up a lot of hits, but has managed to keep a pretty good ERA with a bad WHIP.

Doesn't that just mean he pitches well out of the stretch?

That pickoff move may have something to do with it.

As far as ERA still being used as a household stat, runs are still what determines who wins and loses games (as much as the fantasy baseball world would like to argue). An even worse stat of pitcher performance is wins; it's heavily dependant upon the hitting behind you (obviously, but I don't think it was mentioned yet). A 300 game winner will always be a shoo-in Hall of Famer because the game is about wins.

You're completely right on both, it's just that ERA isn't always the best indicator of pitcher performance, that's what I'm arguing.

[CubsFan7724]

Cookman, I was just giving an example of how R/RBI's aren't as strongly correlated to HR like ERA seems to be linked to WHIP.



I agree with most the posts that say WHIP is a better measure of a pitchers success rather than ERA, although I'm surprised no one has brought up the 'runners left of base scenario' when a starting pitcher is yanked and how that will effect his ERA (i.e a pitcher's ERA can be dicated by his successor's effectiveness).

Maybe a better question is if ERA is so "luck" based, why is it such a staple in fantasy leagues?

Because it's a remnant of a bygone era. Just like batting average, and RBIs and Runs.

The stats you post are so boring though. No one would want to play a league where one of the catergories like HR/9 will see 0s a lot. It may be a better judge, but it'd be not nearly as fun to watch.

[beltrans_boy]

Cookman, I was just giving an example of how R/RBI's aren't as strongly correlated to HR like ERA seems to be linked to WHIP.



I agree with most the posts that say WHIP is a better measure of a pitchers success rather than ERA, although I'm surprised no one has brought up the 'runners left of base scenario' when a starting pitcher is yanked and how that will effect his ERA (i.e a pitcher's ERA can be dicated by his successor's effectiveness).

Maybe a better question is if ERA is so "luck" based, why is it such a staple in fantasy leagues?

Because it's a remnant of a bygone era. Just like batting average, and RBIs and Runs.

The stats you post are so boring though. No one would want to play a league where one of the catergories like HR/9 will see 0s a lot. It may be a better judge, but it'd be not nearly as fun to watch.

You're right. And that's why there aren't leagues based around those stat categories. Believe me, I still play 5x5, but if we're talking about a true measure of a players talent, those are the categories that I'd use.

[swyck]

While there are good arguments for and against any cat, the fact is that whip and era are pretty standard cats in fantasy bball. Its not like you pulled out hbp/in or something else off the wall.

[josebach]

ERA is without a doubt the best statistic for judging a pitcher's performance.

According to WHIP, a home run is better than two infield singles. How on Earth can this be a better statistic to judge a pitcher?

Look at this game.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=250507108

Did Pedro's .57 WHIP help his team more than 6.43 ERA hurt them? Of course not. It's all about runs... period. How many hits or walks a pitcher gives up are irrelevent. How many of those baserunners actually cross the plate is all that matters. Think about it, how can WHIP be the best indicator of a pitcher's ability when pitchers purposely walk batters?

Having a low WHIP doesn't win games. Having a low ERA does. Usually, they are not mutually exclusive, but given a choice... I'll take ERA every time.

Excluding wins, who was a better pitcher last year, Carlos Zambrano or Bronson Arroyo? They had the same WHIP, so are does that mean they're the same?

[GotowarMissAgnes]

I would say RA is better than ERA.

Further, given that runs also depend on defense, I'd say something like FIPs or DIPS RA would be even better.

[mamorris]

I think they're pretty similar stats, but that's a good thing. Think of it as ERA being worth double if that's a real problem for you.

As far as ERA being a pitching category, why not? Those sabermetric tools are useful to find out who is undervalued and overvalued going forward, but I think ERA should stay because fantasy baseball, like real baseball, should have an element of luck to it.

[josebach]

...but I think ERA should stay because fantasy baseball, like real baseball, should have an element of luck to it.

ERA is luck stat and WHIP isn't?

So you're saying infield hits are an indication that the pitcher somehow failed?