At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

He is on pace for the greatest ERA+ season (min 50 IP). Eck's 1990 ERA of 0.61 got him a rating of 606. Something like 0.30 from Paps could be in the thousands!

Baseball guys:

Is there any indication that hitters have simply "not seen him enough" or otherwise? Who's got bets this guy keeps up a 1 ER every 35+ IP pace?

Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

Well, the answer is, really, once he gets down to 0.00 (effectively) which happens once he pitches 1,801 innings on the season.

At what point can he pitch a full inning and not have his ERA drop (in the hundreths)? He's already at that point: your ERA with one run surrendered doesn't change from 37 innings to 38. (0.24 ERA) Or from 39 to 40. (0.23). Or 42 to 43. (0.22). Or 44 to 46. (0.21). The further you go, the more innings you have to pitch to continue to lower it, obviously. But you'll never get to the point where it won't ever stop going down until you're below 0.005.

Matthias wrote:At what point can he pitch a full inning and not have his ERA drop (in the hundreths)? He's already at that point: your ERA with one run surrendered doesn't change from 37 innings to 38. (0.24 ERA)

Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

Well, the answer is, really, once he gets down to 0.00 (effectively) which happens once he pitches 1,801 innings on the season.

Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

Well, the answer is, really, once he gets down to 0.00 [effectively] which happens once he pitches 1,801 innings on the season.

Overlooking the words and meaning in parenthesis exposes you as trying a bit to hard to look smart

Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

Well, the answer is, really, once he gets down to 0.00 [effectively] which happens once he pitches 1,801 innings on the season.

Overlooking the words and meaning in parenthesis exposes you as trying a bit to hard to look smart

It answered your question. At what point will his ERA no longer drop by the hundreths? When it's at 0.00. At what point will his ERA no longer drop as a result of one inning of work? That's a separate question (which I also answered). Dunno what you think you're being clever about.

At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

The answer was given by Tavish, in his nifty chart.

The other (wrong) answer by you, Matthias, did not take into account the statements "by the hundredths" and "assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point."

Join Pennant Wars today! A simulated fantasy baseball game where you are the General Manager.

Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:At what point will Jonathan Papelbon's ERA not drop (by the hundredths), assuming he pitches 1 IP of zero ER ball each game until such a point?

Well, the answer is, really, once he gets down to 0.00 [effectively] which happens once he pitches 1,801 innings on the season.

Overlooking the words and meaning in parenthesis exposes you as trying a bit to hard to look smart

It answered your question. At what point will his ERA no longer drop by the hundreths? When it's at 0.00. At what point will his ERA no longer drop as a result of one inning of work? That's a separate question (which I also answered). Dunno what you think you're being clever about.

Sorry, the point at which his ERA would not drop by the hundredths after 1 IP of zero ER ball is a number greater than zero.

Tavish wrote:Assuming Fenway stays at the park factor of 96

<pre>IP ER ERA ERA+ 35.6 1 0.2528 1880 ... 60.6 1 0.1485 3200 </pre>

ROFL...I love those ERA+ numbers. Eckersley v1990 had an ERA+ of 606 which someone mentioned earlier was the best season for a reliever that they'd ever seen. This season from Papelbon makes that look like a Tyler Walker production.